First thoughts: don't want guns storage laws, but...

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

johnandersonoutdoors

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
260
I don't want to see some strict gun storage laws or new restrictions on the types of guns that we can legally own in this country.

With that in mind, I think the time has come that we punish parents/guardians when their MINOR child commits a crime with a gun that the parent/guardian allowed them to access. I would not propose a storage requirement, but each parent/guardian will need to decide for themselves how they raise their children and handle their household. If you are raising well balanced children, leave your guns easily accessible around the house and nothing bad ever happens, then great. If you are raising a kid who has no respect for the lives of others, and you allow unsupervised access to your guns which the child takes advantage of and commits a crime, then the parent/guardian needs some sort of jail/prison sentence.

Again, I am just beginning to think about this and I don't have kids of my own and may never. This is no different than a straw purchase situation. You can be held criminally responsible if you straw purchase for a known criminal. If a parent/guardian allows unfettered access of guns to a MINOR child, then they need to see the inside of a prison when that child commits murder with parent/guardians' gun.

Parents raising good kids might choose unlocked guns or very flimsy storage cabinets. Gun owning parents who notice their child is a piece of crap might want to step it up to something more secure like a true safe. I believe the adult (though he was unrelated to them) who supplied Columbine shooters, Eric and Dylan, got in trouble. This should be no different for parents/guardians who allow unfettered access and then their child commits a serious crime with the gun.

I know this can be a slippery slope and I am spitballing here, but come on parents, these children are your responsibility. You may not be able to stop them from being a crappy kid, violent, mentally unstable, but if you have one of these "types of kids" that lives in your house then you better secure you guns. Remember, you made the choice to have this kid.
 
What is the law if you let your minor drive and the purposefully injure or kill someone with a car ? I would imagine there are several levels of negligence involved with respect to the type of incident (road rage, drunk driving, prank gone wrong) as well. I don't see why gun laws should be any different.
 
It's common sense, really. I don't have kids either, but know enough people who do to understand the dilemna. How I see it, even if your child is smart and safe around them, you can't totally control their friends and associates, especially in the teen years. To me, the answer is simple, until they're old enough to legally possess them themselves, they should be solidly locked up in ways their clever minds and hands can't get to them.

If you must have one available for SD, then take appropriate measures they can't gain access to them, even if it means taking them into the bathroom with you (something I've seen done in real life, btw).
And I'm with badkarmaib on the fact there are already tons of laws on the books regarding safe storage that aren't enforced. Add to that some folks mindset about how what they feel is a proper level of availability makes this a tricky subject to settle.
 
I don't see how throwing a negligence charge on parents is going to fix anything after someone has been murdered. These laws can't be enforced proactively without violating rights and will do little too cull premeditated killings, at least in my estimation.

Unless you throw a murder charge on someone who didn't commit murder. I don't want to live in a society where you can be punished for the actions of others.

And I've heard people mention "robbing a bank and someone having a heart attack" as a parallel to "having a gun and someone steals it to commit murder". I think that's disingenuous.

I dunno, I guess it comes down to proactive vs reactive enforcement. Proactive can violate rights and turn into Big Brother. Reactive is too little, too late, and doesn't go after the root issue.

I'd rather focus efforts elsewhere.
 
I have 4 kids and they have all been taught about gun safety and I have taken all of them shooting. They all know that the firearms are not toys and respect them. That said I have them locked in a safe and I have the only key. Common sense is what is needed and I agree the parents should be punished if they don't secure their firearms properly.
 
With regards the parents of the El Paso shooter I would like to know if the parents secured their weapons, how they did so --- if they did --- and whether or not it would be reasonable to believe a 17 year old kid could defeat those measures before I decided the parents were culpable in any way.
I don't know if the shotgun and revolver were secured or not.
I have no problem with safe storage laws in general, but some specific laws I might take exception to, depending on how onerous they might be, or unreasonable punishment might be.
 
My dad didn't have a safe until after I was in college. His rifles were stashed in his closet and his 1911 was always loaded. Nothing bad ever happened because they were not locked up. Why? He taught my brother an I to respect firearms and to not talk about what he had or where he had them with our friends. He took away the mystery by letting us handle them anytime we wanted, after asking him for permission first. He took us shooting and taught us the four rules, maybe not word for word but we knew how to properly handle firearms.
 
I agree with JeeperCreeper as well. We need to figure out why these kids are blowing their gaskets and doing these things. Is it social media, bullying, entertainment or what, that's saying to them that this is something to do.

I'm not that old, yet I remember being able to bring my own rifle to school to shoot on the JROTC range in the basement, and seeing pickup trucks in the parking lot with deer rifles in the rack. We had fights and long standing beefs, but no one decided to go on a rampage.
 
sharpdog and enine,

If you let a minor drive before they get a license and they cause harm, then the parent should be responsible for that too. If it occurs after they have obtained a license, then I would not treat that the same way. But we aren't talking about cars here on this thread, I am talking about guns. We are talking about parents, whose minor child cannot own a gun on their own, who are giving access to the guns.


JeeperCreeper,

The charge to the parent after the commission of the crime by the child will hopefully serve as a wake up call to other deadbeat parents who let their kid access their guns and commit crimes. We aren't talking about holding people accountable for the random actions of strangers, that I cannot agree with either. But if someone has a kid, then they are darn well responsible for certain things and this should be one of them.
 
So where does this end? Kitchen knives, hammers? What if your 15 year old siphons gas from your lawnmover and sets a fire that kills 20 people?

If you can justify in principle, philosophically, that a parent is criminally liable for the acts of their minor child with a firearm, it becomes open ended. Because the same principle can be applied to anything capable of being used as a weapon, or to cause death or injury.
 
No. I hope that most of us here understand that no amount of legislation can force people to use common sense or assume personal responsibility. It's already there, or it is not.

We cannot on the one hand say that guns are simply tools, and that we should assign wholly the accountability for a criminal act on the perpetrator, not the tool the perpetrator used to commit the crime, but then hold responsible for the crime someone else.

I'm not talking about a six-year-old who takes his father's unsecured, loaded pistol off a nightstand and shoots his two-year-old sister; I'm about someone old enough to know right from wrong, capable of reasoned thought, who knowingly and willfully steals lethal weapons and commits heinous crimes.

In regards to children who commit crimes, we cannot also automatically assign blame to parents, saying that they should have known something was wrong with their child. Especially when talking about teenagers. As another member said in another thread, teenagers are very, very good at hiding things from their parents. I have known some incredibly attentive, responsible and loving parents who didn't find out until it was too late that their children were addicted to drugs, alcohol or going through serious problems that are unfortunately not uncommon among teens these days (pregnancies, physical or sexual abuse, bullying, etc.).
 
RPZ said:
So where does this end? Kitchen knives, hammers? What if your 15 year old siphons gas from your lawnmover and sets a fire that kills 20 people?

If you can justify in principle, philosophically, that a parent is criminally liable for the acts of their minor child with a firearm, it becomes open ended. Because the same principle can be applied to anything capable of being used as a weapon, or to cause death or injury.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, now let's add into it how many of these school shootings could have been avoided if both the school administrations in law enforcement had done their job to begin with. The case in Florida where the shooter had been involved in several instances that should've had legal intervention but because of the so-called "school to prison" pipeline was simply let go. Then there was a shooting in a school in Illinois last week were school resource officer put the would be shooter down before he could use his weapon against the students.

Keep in mind, the first story had a week of constant exposure with body counts, video of sobbing students and emotional appeals. The latter had a casual mention of two or three paragraphs on MSN that you could barely read for all the advertisements.

I have a patient who spent most of his working career as a cattle buyer for Stark Wetzel. For those of you not familiar with that particular flavor, cattle buyers with a few notable exceptions make used car salesmen and carnies look like Sister Theresa. This… Gentlemen once mentioned in passing that if you can get people to ask the questions you want them to,the answers don't really matter. I'm beginning to believe that we are being hoodwinked on the school shooter question much in the same direction. Perhaps, it would be better to stop asking how we can prevent these things and start asking what we did wrong that they happened in the first place.
 
Most if not all states have Child Abuse Laws that state something to the effect that it is illegal for parents or legal guardians to place or allow their child to be in a situation that would endanger themselves or others. Child Abuse is a felony and has been used in my state to charge parents who fail to properly supervise their children. The parents of the Santa Fe shooter should be charged, their actions or in-actions allowed their son to harm others.
 
Officers'Wife said:
My thoughts exactly, now let's add into it how many of these school shootings could have been avoided if both the school administrations in law enforcement had done their job to begin with. The case in Florida where the shooter had been involved in several instances that should've had legal intervention but because of the so-called "school to prison" pipeline was simply let go. Then there was a shooting in a school in Illinois last week were school resource officer put the would be shooter down before he could use his weapon against the students.

Keep in mind, the first story had a week of constant exposure with body counts, video of sobbing students and emotional appeals. The latter had a casual mention of two or three paragraphs on MSN that you could barely read for all the advertisements.

I have a patient who spent most of his working career as a cattle buyer for Stark Wetzel. For those of you not familiar with that particular flavor, cattle buyers with a few notable exceptions make used car salesmen and carnies look like Sister Theresa. This… Gentlemen once mentioned in passing that if you can get people to ask the questions you want them to,the answers don't really matter. I'm beginning to believe that we are being hoodwinked on the school shooter question much in the same direction. Perhaps, it would be better to stop asking how we can prevent these things and start asking what we did wrong that they happened in the first place.
Click to expand...
Yep. ALL these school shooters exhibit some common denominators. Many, most, which were absent prior to the 1960s when school shootings were unheard of, and guns at school were common in many places.

So it is indicated that it is within these common denominators the problems really originate.
 
I had full access to all family firearms starting at roughly 12. By 15 or so, I was the family armorer, and kept the key to the safe on my keychain next to by band locker key. I kept loaded (or immediately loadable) weapons in room starting at 16. My friends had full access to their family guns too. This was not 60 years ago in Norman Rockwell America, but in the late 80's and early 90's in and near Boulder, CO.

The thought process that those under 18 are categorically irresponsible enough to access weapons unsupervised is patronizing and highly disturbing, especially on a forum of this type.

When appropriate (and that will be very soon for my oldest son), my children will have the access they need to ensure their personal safety in our home, on our property, and other lawful activities.
 
There are already laws on the books in Wisconsin, at least for pistols.

Can't see how more laws criminals ignore will help.
 
johnandersonoutdoors said:
sharpdog and enine,

If you let a minor drive before they get a license and they cause harm, then the parent should be responsible for that too. If it occurs after they have obtained a license, then I would not treat that the same way. But we aren't talking about cars here on this thread, I am talking about guns. We are talking about parents, whose minor child cannot own a gun on their own, who are giving access to the guns.


JeeperCreeper,

The charge to the parent after the commission of the crime by the child will hopefully serve as a wake up call to other deadbeat parents who let their kid access their guns and commit crimes. We aren't talking about holding people accountable for the random actions of strangers, that I cannot agree with either. But if someone has a kid, then they are darn well responsible for certain things and this should be one of them.
Click to expand...

Do you mean because guns are more dangerous than cars ? Not to mention that RKBA is a right and driving is not. AFAIK you do not NEED a license to exercise a right.. In either case we're talking about a minor that obtains the use of a gun or a car and injures or kills another person. I really don't see any difference in how one type object should be treated vs. the other type of object. And the real problem is the people involved. Primarily the parents and children involved but also whatever has contributed to the lack of respect, morals and values in our larger society.
 
Last edited:
The latest shooting happened in TX. TX has a safe storage law which makes it a Class C misdemeanor (ticket offense) to negligently store a firearm so that a child can access it. If the child discharges the gun, causing serious bodily injury or death to anyone (including the child) this can be enhanced to a Class A misdemeanor (up to a year in a county jail and up to a $4,000 fine).

Based on the shooting last week, it would seem that such laws do not prevent children from accessing firearms. It remains to be seen if the parent(s) of the child in question will be found to have stored the firearms negligently.

Here's the applicable law:

Texas Penal Code 46.13

(a) In this section:

(1) “Child” means a person younger than 17 years of age.

(2) “Readily dischargeable firearm” means a firearm that is loaded with ammunition, whether or not a round is in the chamber.

(3) “Secure” means to take steps that a reasonable person would take to prevent the access to a readily dischargeable firearm by a child, including but not limited to placing a firearm in a locked container or temporarily rendering the firearm inoperable by a trigger lock or other means.

(b) A person commits an offense if a child gains access to a readily dischargeable firearm and the person with criminal negligence:

(1) failed to secure the firearm;  or

(2) left the firearm in a place to which the person knew or should have known the child would gain access.

(c) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the child's access to the firearm:

(1) was supervised by a person older than 18 years of age and was for hunting, sporting, or other lawful purposes;

(2) consisted of lawful defense by the child of people or property;

(3) was gained by entering property in violation of this code;  or

(4) occurred during a time when the actor was engaged in an agricultural enterprise.

(d) Except as provided by Subsection (e), an offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.

(e) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor if the child discharges the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury to himself or another person.​
 
I agree it's good to secure firearms, but holding the parents responsible for their child's crimes is not even remotely the answer. What do you propose we do to the parents of these school shooters? Execute them?

Don't tell me that a parent "should have known" that their kid might do this. There is not a single parent on this earth who can objectively evaluate their child's propensity to commit mass murder.

In many states children as young as 13 or 14 can be tried as adults for violent crimes - meaning that they are assumed to have acted with full knowledge that what they were doing was illegal and wrong, and can be held fully responsible for their actions. How do you justify saying that the actor is completely capable of knowing right from wrong, and individually chose to break the law and thus bears full responsibility... but we're also gonna charge the parents too?

Was it also not a crime for the shooter to have stolen the firearms in the first place? Technically the parents will be the victims of theft. But yeah, prosecute the victim anyway (assuming they're still alive and weren't the first victims of the shooter). They should have known that owning a firearm would cause their child to go on a shooting rampage :scrutiny:

We'll skip the argument that a 17 year old person is completely capable of sourcing firearms on their own. Just like drugs, it's not that hard if you know where to look.

And are we going to talk about the IED left by the shooter as well? I fully expect the OP to get on his soap box and tell us how parents should be charged for their kid's misuse of drain cleaner...


Every time an atrocity like this happens, the pro gun side makes a statement that is generally summarized by "the shooter is a criminal who acted as an individual - you should not punish a group of people (gun owners) for the acts of one deranged individual". How is that argument going to look when we are ok with punishing OTHER groups of people, as long as it's not us? Oh wait, those parents ARE gun owners like us!

Where do you draw the line? Your 16 year old boy receives a sext from his girlfriend. Now he's a child pornographer and has to register as a sex offender. I think we can all agree that while this is a pretty stupid thing to charge a teen with, it is a serious charge AND it has been successfully prosecuted in the past. Should the child's parents bear responsibility for their sex offender child? How about forcing his father and mother to register as sex offenders too? That seems like a sure fire way to prevent this in the future :thumbdown:

A law like this is not going to prevent these type of shootings. All it will do is give the government someone tangentially related to (but not responsible for) the event that can be thrown in handcuffs and paraded around in front of news crews to serve as a target for the rage felt by others. As if being the parent of a school shooter wasn't bad enough already...
 
Old Dog said:
In regards to children who commit crimes, we cannot also automatically assign blame to parents, saying that they should have known something was wrong with their child. Especially when talking about teenagers. As another member said in another thread, teenagers are very, very good at hiding things from their parents. I have known some incredibly attentive, responsible and loving parents who didn't find out until it was too late that their children were addicted to drugs, alcohol or going through serious problems that are unfortunately not uncommon among teens these days (pregnancies, physical or sexual abuse, bullying, etc.).
Click to expand...

That is misleading on your part. Nobody is talking about holding parents responsible for the crimes of their children in the general sense.
 
When I was a kid, I knew all the firearms were in my parents bedroom closet. I also knew 2 other things,
1) entry to my parents bedroom was invite only
2) entry into my parents closet was always off limits
I also knew the consequences far outweighed the “reward”
But, that was a different time, when children were disciplined rather severely but you never had kids shooting up schools. Isn’t it interesting that the left has basically eliminated the ability of parents to utilize corporal punishment And perhaps we are seeing some of the results of the lack of fear these kids now have.
One other aspect to my upbringing was my dad and granddad took us kids shooting and hunting. We were allowed to clean the family guns on a regular basis. As we aged, we were allowed to progress up the chain of firearms the family owned.
Last, the family unit is falling apart, with single parent families, and when parents are together, both usually work and kids are raising themselves. I wish I had the answer, but it’s sho nuff a mess
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
mo senator to introduce this bill
Replies
21
Views
1K
Pismopal
P
R
  • Locked
Report ownership to schools in MO?
Replies
4
Views
532
hq
hq
A
  • Locked
Safe Gun storage laws to protect children - not so fast!
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
old lady new shooter
O
G
  • Locked
KidsHealth.org: Gun Safety
Replies
12
Views
1K
zahc
Z
D
  • Locked
Parents naive about children's access to guns in the house
Replies
19
Views
874
Shootcraps
S
Back
Top