Well, I HATE

[ecocks]

that they call it a gun control bill but I have to confess that I have no problem with the three provisions. Maybe the actual definition of a "gun crime" will be an issue though.

http://www.ketv.com/politics/15137678/detail.html

[The Gunny]

I wonder would they use the same criteria in the case of a stolen vehicle?

If say a crime was commited using your car,one in which the car was used to kill someone, which had been stolen but not reported by you would they then go after you because you failed to report it's theft to the police? If the answer is no then I am going to say I am against it. The gun is an inanimate object it can be used for good or evil it is the manner in which it is used that makes all the difference. Now as to the storage of the firearms yes I think it is a good idea to store them locked except perhaps for the one you might keep next to your bed for self defence. However it is the very fact that the firearm was STOLEN that gets me. It was stolen i.e. a crime was commited in order to take the firearm. That is the first event in this sad chain of events. If the object used had been a car would we even be talking about this? I think not.

[Red Hat]

No more laws! No matter how good they seem on the face the law will eventually cause a law abiding citizen trouble. Two of the three things he asked for are already law. Federal law requires a lock to be sold with all new weapons and most states have a mandatory sentence for crimes with a weapon. Maybe a law requiring all law abiding citizens must be armed would a better law. At least if he had been armed maybe he could have stopped the BG before he was shot.

[HK4U]

So once when it becomes unlawful to own a fire arm in this country like England and most other countries if we don't turn them all in it will be an automatic 5 years? Chip away a little here and a little there.

[echo_5]

I can can see both sides very clearly. It makes sense to report a stolen firearm. Why wouldn't you? Concealing the theft of a firearm alludes to 'straw-purchasing'.
Scenario: A stolen weapon has been used in a crime. The recovered casing was compared to the one sent to the state that came with your gun.
Detective: why did you shoot him/her ?
You: I didn't. gun was stolen.
Detective: Why didn't you report it? Don't you care who has your gun?
Did you buy it for a criminal?

On the other hand I see how this is the "inch" that leads to the mile. As long as someone isn't charged with negligent storage for a gun being in thier house then it makes sense. Judging from past experience, I bet the legislators will screw it up and therefore, I must side with the neccessarily cautious and hesitant 2A base.

[ecocks]

of "gun crime" remains my concern. If "crimes" such as negligent discharge or carry into a posted/restricted area are included in the definition that would be an issue with me. While I suspect the original intent is going to be to define them as crimes involving a felony committed with a gun, the devil is in the details.

And yes, there is the chip, chip, chip point which is well-taken but as the post above points out, it is irresponsible to not report the theft and it would increase significantly the problem of enforcing illegal purchases. We all agree that our guns should be secured (by ourselves), this just focuses the responsibility and defines the accountability a bit more.