you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 42 points 2 years ago (49 children)

As a 2A Advocate / Gun Guy all I can say is GOOD. Parents who do this deserve to held legally responsible.

  • source
  • hideshow 49 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (48 children)

    Does that include all the children who kill themselves with their father's gun?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 48 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (42 children)

    If a minor gets a gun and does something illegal, including killing themselves, the parents should 100% be charged. There is no scenario where it would be ok for a minor to get access to a gun without supervision and approval by their parents.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 42 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Works for me. Now you'll have to get the pro-gun crowd to accept mandatory safe storage laws.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Mandatory safe storage laws do nothing. you're assuming that because it's a law people will follow it. Safe storage laws are tack on penalties that are simply feel good laws for the anti gun crowd.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (3 children)

    Not sure how I feel about that one. 1. I believe suicide/assisted suicide shouldnt be 100% illegal. 2. I would have to say that a kid who slits their wrists or overdoses would have to see the same charges there. Someone wanting to kill themselves always has the means. Run at a cop with a knife, happened earlier today. Step in front of a truck, off a bridge, down all the pills in the medicine cabinet. If I had done any of those when I was a teen, I don't think my parents should be charged with it. I think due to it having an effect on another person's life is where it comes in.

    Not knowing exactly what your child is going through and how much it is effecting them I would say all parents are guilty of. It is near impossible. Negligence might be a charge in some way, but charging them with manslaughter is a lot

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I believe suicide/assisted suicide shouldnt be 100% illegal.

    Not what assisted suicide is. People seeking assisted suicide have terminal illnesses and want to die with as much dignity and as little trauma as possible.

    "They can just blow their brains out in the bedroom with a cool gun" isn't a solution, it's the pro-gun crowd trying to pretend they're actually deeply compassionate people for advocating dogshit gun laws.

    I would have to say that a kid who slits their wrists or overdoses would have to see the same charges there. Someone wanting to kill themselves always has the means.

    Not how suicide works. Means reduction has been repeatedly shown to be an effective method of suicide prevention.

    But it doesn't stop there. Only 1 in 10 people who survive a suicide attempt will go on to die by suicide but functionally nobody survives an attempt with a gun.

    And of course, what's currently the suicide method of choice for radicalized teenagers? Grabbing a poorly secured gun and killing as many people with it as you can before the police shoot you in the head or you get bored and blow your brains out.

    But I guess if we didn't supply them with semi-automatic weapons, they'd just go out and do a mass hanging or mass wrist slitting instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (34 children)

    If a minor gets a gun and does something illegal, including killing themselves, the parents should 100% be charged.

    Sounds good on paper but that's going to a lead to a LOT of parents in prison when their minor child gets involved with gang activity. I understand your sentiment but the idea doesn't have enough nuance to be practical.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (33 children)

    That is a good point, but it should still be on the parents to secure the guns. If you own a gun, it’s on you to also buy whatever you need to keep that gun locked up and safe.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    So I'm curious, what are you charging the parents with in this case or this one or this one.

    You gonna send that second kids mom to jail because her Son stole a gun and killed his father? Do you envision her prison sentence happening during or after she heals up from her own gunshot wounds?

    I'm not trying to be jerk here, I'm trying to expose the need for nuance in these kinds of discussion. Not everything is as simple as "Lock 'em Up!".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • I looked through each of your examples and, unless I missed something, none of those cases involved a minor getting the parents insecure gun. First one was a theft from a gun store, the second doesn’t state any details on where the gun came from, and the last one was a gun stolen from police.

    My comments re: parents being responsible is for cases that the parents’ gun is taken by the minor and used in a crime, not any gun crime committed by a minor.

    Again, if I missed something, please let me know.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (30 children)

    I don't have kids. No kids ever visit my house. I don't flaunt my gun ownership, nor do I leave them laying about. Why do I need a safe?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (5 children)

    You always supposed to have a safe. You're supposed to keep it in a safe, even if you don't think you need to.

    When people talk about irresponsible gun ownership, you're the type of person they're talking about. It's people like you who just don't care. You're not being responsible with your weapon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    What would a safe change in this specific case?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)

    No you're supposed to have a safe. It's got nothing to do with this case it's just about gun safety in general.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    explain to me why? my guns are secure. I have no children. I don't have kids in my life what so ever. they aren't laying around on tables or nightstands. explain why.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Why are you arguing with me I don't make up the law.

    You are supposed to have a gun safe, you're supposed to secure your weapons. It's your choice if you don't do it whatever your justification is is irrelevant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)

    Because it’s a deadly weapon and it’s your responsibility that it is secured (not necessarily a safe). Part of responsible gun ownership.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    (not necessarily a safe).

    Um. wasn't that kinda my question? I didn't say they were not 'secure'.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    My apologies for the confusion then, though my use of the word “safe” was secure. Keeping a gun hidden in a sock drawer != safe, though there are other ways to secure something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (19 children)

    Why do we need bet our lives on you not lying? Why do we have to tolerate people who leave handguns in cars and secure rifles with threats of domestic violence all so you, a special special snowflake who pinkie promises they're responsible, don't have to buy a safe?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (18 children)

    What would a safe change in this specific case?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (14 children)

    What a plot twist, a pro-gun poster who can't look beyond themselves and what they want and see the wider problems of gun ownership.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    Please explain to me how the situation i described would be any different if my guns were in a safe, rather than a locked closet?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (12 children)

    And surprise surprise, he's slow too.

    "I will never drive drunk so what good are DUI laws?"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    you still haven't answered any questions. just thrown insults.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (10 children)

    "No but you don't understand, I'm not driving drunk so how would DUI laws change anything".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    you're still throwing out strawman arguments.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Have you tried shooting them with your poorly secured firearms?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    wow. great. much burn. so raw. Still can't answer the question.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Oh honey, it's been repeatedly answered for you, you've just been too slow to pick up on it.

    I hope you're intentionally trying to make me waste my time cause otherwise holy fuck, you sure are unarmed on the internet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Oh then be a dear and point out EXACTLY where it's been answered. Cause all I see is snark and avoidance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    Nah. It's time for you to learn how to think for yourself rather than having people spoonfeed you information and opinions.

    Besides, having you unable to see things right in front of your face makes gun owners look much worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You haven't said a single thing here. you've literally just made fun of me all the while avoiding the question. I don't NEED your "opinion". I know the law and I know where I stand with it. I want you, someone who said I'm wrong, to tell me exactly how I'm wrong, without calling names, or making strawman arguments. You literally have not answered a single question. You're playing everything by the "i know jack shit" playbook. You simply can't tell me the answer to my question. You say I'm wrong but refuse to tell me why. Leads me to believe YOU'RE the one that's been spoon-fed information and you're too dim witted to parse it into something you can put into words yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    What would a safe change in this specific case?

    Theft. Any time you aren't home your house turns into an unattended armory for thieves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    Why did you gender that?

    In answer to your question I'll say "It would depend on the circumstances." A weapon retrieved from a nightstand, or a mothers purse, and used by a small child to kill themselves is a very different situation than a teen who accesses a gun safe without permission.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Honestly pepper spray and bear spray are 100x more effective than a gun in most situations. The intent is usually to disable not to kill, and pepper spray eliminates a need to have any serious hesitation. That 0.5 second hesitation about whether to take a life with a gun could mean life or death in a defense scenario.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Why did you gender that?

    Why did it upset you?

    A weapon retrieved from a nightstand, or a mothers purse, and used by a small child to kill themselves is a very different situation than a teen who accesses a gun safe without permission.

    Both are a failure to prevent a child from accessing a firearm.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Why did it upset you?

    Because it's unnecessary.

    This and this are both failures; gendering the failing parent simply isn't required.

    Both are a failure to prevent a child from accessing a firearm.

    Yes but they are only similar in the broadest sense; a child grabbing a loaded gun out of Mom's Purse or Dad's Nightstand are very different scenarios from a teen who destructively opens a gun safe or steals the key to it.

    Safe storage for firearms is desirable but requiring the prosecution of those who made a good faith effort and failed is not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago

    Because it's unnecessary.

    Damn well wait until you find out how many gun deaths are unnecessary.

    Safe storage for firearms is desirable but requiring the prosecution of those who made a good faith effort and failed is not.

    Then that prosecution can determine if a good faith effort was made or if the parents were negligent with the storage of their firearms, rather than the usual pro-gun stance of "every solution must be 100% effective (except ours) while never even mildly inconveniencing us and if you try and make it actually happen we'll kill you".

  • source
  • parent