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

[Old Dog]

That is misleading on your part. Nobody is talking about holding parents responsible for the crimes of their children in the general sense.

Say what?

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.

 

[johnandersonoutdoors]

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.

I am not sure what you are responding to except emotion, but certainly nothing that I wrote.

What you describe is exactly how I expect most American homes would continue to operate, and there is no need for that to change. You were raised well and your parents trusted you to the utmost, and you trust your kids just as much. That works out great most of the time. Clearly your family is not part of the problem.

However, if your gut is wrong and one of your children uses a gun that you gave them acces to, in the a crime, then you should be responsible.

 

[danez71]

Based on the shooting last week, it would seem that such laws do not prevent children from accessing firearms.

I'm not really disagreeing with what you said. And I'm not directing this at you.


Laws (in this type of context) don't prevent things from happening.

Laws against running red lights don't prevent them from happening.

The laws discourage behavior that tends to lead to bad things happening.

In a practical sense, these types of laws punish people whos lack of responsible behavior lead to bad things happening and serve as notice to others that such behavior has consequences.


All 50 states have some sort of parental liability laws. If anyone doest like it, don't be a parent or move out of the US, or both.


Those trying to rationalize why they shouldn't be responsible just show that they're not in the 1st place.

Parents have responsibility to their kids, for their kids, and for some of the actions of their kids - period.

Quit trying to pass the buck and take no responsibility..... that mentality is a part of how we got to the point we are now.



Having said that, I think there is quite enough laws on the books as things to stand now. We don't need more.


I don't know enough about the kid or the father in this case to pass judgement.

 

[.308 Norma]

Otherwise, we're just adding more unenforceable laws.

Well maybe not "unenforceable," but certainly unenforced.

 

[johnandersonoutdoors]

The main point, to all those making ridiculous analogies, is simple.

If you have an all american family and the kids have unsupervised access to guns and they don't use them to harm others, then we are all good. That is how I grew up too!

But guns are dangerous enough that the judgement call by the parent needs to come with consequences. There are a few % of household out there where the parent/guardian cannot trust their kid 100% and they know it (broken curfew, drugs, signs of instability, whatever) and they continue to leave guns out. If their poor judgement leads to the kid taking and using the gun in a crime, then those parents need to go to prison and we need to splash that on the news.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

Parents have responsibility to their kids, for their kids, and for some of the actions of their kids - period.

Quit trying to pass the buck and take no responsibility..... that mentality is a part of how we got to the point we are now.

I actually agree with you on this, but playing devil's advocate, one could say that charging the parents is passing the buck.

Did we do everything our parents commanded in our teens?

There needs to be balance. I've also read and heard comments from more "progressive" minded friends that if your gun is stolen, then you should be charged with accessory to whatever crime occurs with it

So where do we draw the line?

 

[George P]

However, if your gut is wrong and one of your children uses a gun that you gave them acces to, in the a crime, then you should be responsible.

Because the child can't be held responsible for his actions?

 

[johnandersonoutdoors]

Because the child can't be held responsible for his actions?

Lol. Please either reread thread or stop being patently disingenuous. The kid is responsible for the crime they committed, and in the scenario i described, the parent would be responsible for allowing the kid unsupervised access in which the kid committed their crime.

 

[Jeff B.]

In most things, I'm of the opinion that we don't need more laws. In many cases it would be an improvement if we started enforcing the laws which are currently in place. Those things said, I've got two safes, where all but our carry guns reside. I do that to try to keep my guns safer, i.e., more difficult for a thief or burglar to get to AND to prevent access by anyone while I'm not around. I'd hate to see "safety" legislated, because it won't accomplish what's intended and will impose on the Citizens of the nation.

There is something wrong with our culture that's resulting in these atrocities, but its a great deal more complicated than banning this gun or that gun and removing the rights from Citizens. IMO, the same Progressives who would take our guns and rights are the same people that in many ways are responsible for the weakening of our societal structures and the decline of the traditional family.

Jeff B.

 

[bnolsen]

"but" means you want gun storage laws. immediate don't care on the whole topic. Personal responsibility is just that, personal until it fails then it might become a legal issue depending.

 

[johnandersonoutdoors]

"but" means you want gun storage laws. immediate don't care on the whole topic. Personal responsibility is just that, personal until it fails then it might become a legal issue depending.

If you read anything in here, you should have been able to add a more constructive post, or at least one where you aren't COMPLETLY wrong about what I want.

We can enforce the negligence laws people have mentioned. Parents/guardians should be getting 5 to 10 years prison when their kid murders someone with a gun, to which they gave the kid unsupervised access. Maybe then these idiot parents will decide to fix up their disfunctional households.

 

[RPZ]

If you read anything in here, you should have been able to add a more constructive post, or at least one where you aren't COMPLETLY wrong about what I want.

We can enforce the negligence laws people have mentioned. Parents/guardians should be getting 5 to 10 years prison when their kid murders someone with a gun, to which they gave the kid unsupervised access. Maybe then these idiot parents will decide to fix up their disfunctional households.

So what if their kid murders a half a dozen with a kitchen knife? Or uses something other implement or means of causing the death of other people.

Disfunctional household can be a single parent family, destructive culture and "entertainment", emotional disfunction of parent and child, and some mind altering prescription drugs.

 

[enine]

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.

Well in my case the kids only had learner's permits and the parents insurance got out of paying because "they didn't have the parents permission". I believe statistics say we are much more likely to be in a car accident than a shooting. So before laws are passed requiring safe firearm storage I believe there should be laws requiring safe storage of car keys.

 

[hso]

each parent/guardian will need to decide for themselves how they raise their children and handle their household

Isn't that what parents do anyway? They decide how to raise their kids around guns.

What may be a better idea is how to make parents aware of the options and opportunities with respect to firearms in the home. Programs like Eddie Eagle and others address these questions where parents who weren't raised in households with guns can look for guidance.

 

[rb288]

If you have under aged children, under 18 at a minimum, or a "troubled" child who has been in trouble at school or with the law, you had better be locking your firearms up in a safe.
You are just asking for trouble if you don't.
I have 4 children who are all grown now, and I have always had my firearms locked in my safe, except when I was carrying one on my person. And I am the only one who knows the combination to the safe.
At no time, were/are any of my weapons "available" to anyone else without my direct permission, or supervision.
I firmly believe that if you are reckless in the storage of your firearms, and a person gets a hold of, and uses, your weapon in a crime, that you should be charged, and prosecuted, as an accomplice to the crime.
In this atmosphere of anti gun activism, there is no excuse for not locking up your weapons and taking at least that simple step to avoid a bad situation.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

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.

We already do this.

 

[Wisco]

Infrequent traumatic events are not cause for me to rethink my already sound system of personal and property security.

Plus there’s already negligence laws on he books everywhere. It’s not a stretch to charge anyone with something criminal in almost every jurisdiction. Say I forget to lock my safe and my son goes crazy and kills someone - I’ll be easily found guilty in Wisconsin of a crime.

If you could’ve stopped your kid from shooting up a school and failed, you’ll pay for your lack of prevention and you probably won’t come here bragging about your good kids and your unlocked guns.

Anyway...

What are my son’s odds of being killed by a school shooter? His school being attacked? Any school of any type in the county, state or nation? The odds of my kid being the shooter? Using my gun?

What are the odds of a fatal car crash? Obesity and heart disease? Cancer? Alcohol related death? Struck by lightning? Etc?

If we can just save one life...if it fits our agenda.

I don’t have these conversations with people in real life because it’s nonsensical and not at all pragmatic. “We need more gun laws,” say many. Because it’s so unsafe? Because you’re scared of something the news sensationalized? But you’re not as scared of drunk driving, texting and driving, or your own morbid obesity and poor fitness?

Get some facts and then some more facts relative to the conversation at hand before you start brainstorming public policy.

Emotion has always ruled the mob, which is why a republic is such a great idea and why many of us still so easily own guns comparative to the rest of the world.

Fact-based dialogue and initiatives and legislation please.

If you don’t have the facts on your side and a good message, you’ve lost. We have the facts, we don’t need to adopt any anti-gun or anti-responsibility messaging.

Show me how telling the anti-gunners I want to lock up my guns will make them like me more and get me some brownie points...please, do tell. While you’re at it, tell me how I can make conservative gun owners like me more. Either is impossible due to deeply held core beliefs.

 

[FL-NC]

NC and Fl both have laws regarding minors being able to access firearms. I imagine most other states do as well. Since no minors live in my home, the normal precautions I take (locking my doors and windows) more than satisfy the requirements for firearm storage as it applies to access by minors. Even if a juvenile delinquent breaks in and discovers a firearm in my house.

 

[George P]

Lol. Please either reread thread or stop being patently disingenuous. The kid is responsible for the crime they committed, and in the scenario i described, the parent would be responsible for allowing the kid unsupervised access in which the kid committed their crime.

Disingenuous? I don't think so. Blaming others for something someone else did is a tactic of the leftists

 

[George P]

Isn't that what parents do anyway? They decide how to raise their kids around guns.

What may be a better idea is how to make parents aware of the options and opportunities with respect to firearms in the home. Programs like Eddie Eagle and others address these questions where parents who weren't raised in households with guns can look for guidance.

Except it isn't happening. As someone who taught elementary school for a while, I can tell you that the Left's attempt to take over raising the kids with their dogma is very successful, especially in poor and minority areas. These parents don't decide anything about their kids, let alone raising them around guns and gun safety.

Just say NO to more "laws"; we don't need them of most already on the books

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

If a 16 year old kid gets a speeding ticket should his parents get one as well?

 

[BigBore44]

Oh give me a break. Here we go again. “The guns are so dangerous”. You know what’s dangerous? Having 1,400 kids with raging hormones and anti-depressants and ADHD meds on board, in a school, and expecting them to all get along like perfect little angels. You put 1,400 THR members in a school and it’s only going to be a matter of time before there’s a fight. Probably even a brawl.

There’s just so much wrong with all of this. You got young kids, 2-12 years old, I absolutely understand having guns locked in a safe. But 17 years old and you expect them not to be able to access a firearm? Holy crap I’m glad I’m not your child.

And as far as the trench coat thing goes, we had probably 15-20 kids in high school who wore those things. Had black eyeliner, black fingernails, chains, spiked hair, etc. Looked scary as hell. Honest to goodness, probably the nicest, most genuine kids in school. So maybe we’re doing what we hate most...painting with that damn broad brush again.

 

[FROGO207]

Each generation going forward gets its life instructions from learning in schools and the parents from the generation before. More so the schools lately as both parents if they are present are working just to try keeping their heads above water financially. The teachers teach with a socialist style and teach the students that a lackadaisical attitude and politically correct groupthink are the way for society to grow stronger. My father is a retired teacher and even he thinks that a majority of the present teachers are radicals. Additionally many of the parents of troubled youth are in complete denial that their child MIGHT POSSIBLY be a problem or even part of a problem and this is a recipe for disaster when things snap and the blame game begins in ernest after a problem. This last shooting has been toned down by the media as it was commonly used firearms that a lot of hunters use and the antis do not want to alienate those same hunters out there for political reasons.YMMV

 

[CoalTrain49]

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.

That's why insurance rates are so high for drivers under 25. Insurance companies know that people in that age group do stupid and irresponsible things with automobiles. Plus they don't have a lot of experience as drivers.

You are correct in your assessment that gun laws should be no different. If a person wants to foot the insurance bill for an under 25 driver then go for it. If you also want to keep your firearms accessible to your children, go for it. Personally I wouldn't do either but if I did I would just accept that if they did something really stupid like shoot up a school I was going to have a very big problem. You can buy insurance for your 18 year old driver but you can't for your 17 year old school shooter that used your firearm.

I was an adolescent once. I did some pretty stupid stuff. I never was arrested but that was because of the times. That's why I wouldn't trust an adolescent now, not with my firearms unless I was present. If they want their own firearms they can move out of my house like an adult and buy their own.

Somehow I can never get past the parent that says my kid would never do something like that. He just isn't that kind of kid. BS.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

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.

Exactly.

Odds are, if the kids turned out to be little psychos, the parents are either absent or worthless themselves. Can't legislate stupid.