# Public Service Message



## Ron Schuna (Jan 22, 2004)

OK...You're a responsible sportsman and gun owner...show it. I challenge each and every one of our RTF members to get right with responsible gun ownership. If you have one firearm in your residence...purchase a combination gun safe. I know there are many of you fellow sportsman out there that own one, two, three or more guns and they are in a closet or under a bed or in a gun rack in the family room....Do the right thing, society has changed, what kids watch on tv has changed, our duty as responsible firearm owners has not changed...I ask this of each and every one of you.. 

This message may have been posted by another member in some shape or form but I felt compelled to challenge any of you that do not have a combination gun safe....Accept the Challenge! 

Thanks,....Merry Chrismas and Happy New Year, 

-Ron


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

They still steal the whole gun safes. Got my Brother in Law's safe and his Snap-On tool cabinet (heavy diesel sized stuff) in broad daylight. Broke into the house, popped the garage door and started loading goodies.


----------



## M&K's Retrievers (May 31, 2009)

I don't think he is talking about theft.


----------



## Duck Blind (Dec 11, 2010)

The guiding principles by which I raise my kids have not changed. My kids don't play video games, and they don't watch crap TV. They hunt and they understand (and have demonstrated that they understand) the dangers associated with guns. If they go crazy and want to hurt someone, a safe will not keep them from it. My opinion, ONLY. I have, however, taken steps to prevent accidents etc.


----------



## Tom Watson (Nov 29, 2005)

Hard to defend my home and family if I have to turn on the light and unlock the safe after I am aware of an intruder in the house.


----------



## HPL (Jan 27, 2011)

This is perhaps an idea worth discussing but, currently I am not financially in a position to purchase a safe, the only "kids" I have ever had all had four legs (and although I have heard of at least one person who's dog accidentally shot him, I'm not worried about my current knucklehead) so children getting hold of my guns is unlikely, all are stored separately from the ammo, and I am pretty comfortable with my current situation. There is no question that the shooting in Newtown was terrible, I am a long way from believing that it means that we need to change anything. Even though we seem to be hearing about these tragedies more frequently, they are still really rare. There could be one a week and it still wouldn't approach the number of children killed on the nation's roads. Would like to see it compared to the number of children killed by neglectful parents, medical mistakes, bee-stings, etc. I think that to a great extent this is a discussion about solutions (which won't work) for a problem that doesn't actually exist.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Tom Watson said:


> Hard to defend my home and family if I have to turn on the light and unlock the safe after I am aware of an intruder in the house.


BINGO! That's called gun tontrol and and the last time I looked at the constitution, it is ellegal to require such nonesense.
Pass an amendment to the constitution if you want to change the way it is.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

But if you have numerous weapons, you can only use one effectively at a given time....so some of them should be locked away safely in my opinion.


----------



## Hairy Dawg (Mar 8, 2009)

This



Duck Blind said:


> The guiding principles by which I raise my kids have not changed. My kids don't play video games, and they don't watch crap TV. They hunt and they understand (and have demonstrated that they understand) the dangers associated with guns. If they go crazy and want to hurt someone, a safe will not keep them from it. My opinion, ONLY. I have, however, taken steps to prevent accidents etc.


And This


Tom Watson said:


> Hard to defend my home and family if I have to turn on the light and unlock the safe after I am aware of an intruder in the house.


I have taught my kids how to hunt & handle guns. They get to fire more shots than most adults will ever shoot in their lifetime. My theory is to take the curiosity out of the guns, & teach them that they're tools, how to take care of them, & handle them. If we need a gun, there's one available in almost every room.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Hairy Dawg said:


> This
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree. This is very good advice that works.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

FOM said:


> But if you have numerous weapons, you can only use one effectively at a given time....so some of them should be locked away safely in my opinion.


Why do you think that?

If I'm sitting on the pot and my primary carry gun is somewhere else, and an intruder breaks in my house, you are telling me I have to go to the gun safe, unlock it, and get a gun out to defend myself and my family? Surely not.

I can't see how anyone can argue the second ammendent doesn't mean exactly what is clearly says.
It gives me the RIGHT to leagally have a gun...as many as I want to have.....anywhere I want to have them.

Anything that is contrary to this is gun control and has no basis in constitutional law.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Dman said:


> Why do you think that?


Effectively for most people require two hands....you might be able to use two but I personally like one weapon with two hands and the ability to flip out clips with ease....don't getme wrong, I agree some need to be out and at the ready but if you are like me with _multiple_ weapons then some should be secured....if I have to go through all mine to defend myself then I'm already hosed!


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

FOM said:


> Effectively for most people require two hands....you might be able to use two but I personally like one weapon with two hands and the ability to flip out clips with ease....don't getme wrong, I agree some need to be out and at the ready but if you are like me with _multiple_ weapons then some should be secured....if I have to go through all mine to defend myself then I'm already hosed!


I am much more effective with one gun at a time, however, I have a realativly large house and I like to have the gun or guns that I might happen own, located in several different areas and easily accesible if needed.

The Austrailians were forced last year to give up many of their guns. The ones the weren't given up, were required to be locked away, seperate from the ammo. Check out their crime rate and see what this has done to them. 

A gun that is not avaliable when needed is worthless.


----------



## ndk3819 (Mar 12, 2012)

My dads guns sat in his closet my whole, still there now, from the time I can remember I was tought how to handle them, respect them and knew what they were capable of. Never once thought it would be a good idea to go play with it. My parents knew what I watched on tv and tought me the value of life. I'm raising my kids the same way. A locked safe with a curious kid can always be unlocked. Knowledge and respect don't go away


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

If I had children this may be a different story.
The gun safe is full of guns, it took 2 men and a boy to get it in here and THEN it got anchored to the cement floor.
The rest of the house is full of Guns and knives, and 1 bayonet from my Grandfathers WWII Japanese Rifle.
All the Weapons not in the "safe" are considered "safe" in my opinion. Why ? Because I know where they are hidden and the intruders do not ! 
They are WELL hidden and pretty much in EVERY room.

Just remember folks................JUST CAUSE YOU AIN'T PARANOID, DON'T MEAN THEY AIN'T OUT TO GET YA.


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

I like the original post and I think it is good advice. We have a tall, heavy combination gun safe. Would take 4 or more men to put it into a truck to steal -- that's if it was empty. We have a Truck Vault for our truck with lockable drawers. Always a shotgun in one of the lockable drawers.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

I raised both of my kids with long guns in racks on the wall. I kept the ammo separate in a locked footlocker and the pistols locked up. I taught my kids about guns safety and being responsible with guns. Never once did they take the guns off the wall except under supervision.

Being a responsible parent is hard work. I no longer have any kids at home as they are grown and gone raising their own families. Seldom do I have a loaded gun in the house.


----------



## labster (Mar 26, 2008)

This last shooting Was a terrible tragedy and god bless the familys that have to deal with there losses. Make no mistake the anti gun people are going to run with this like its the olympic flame. Even though we all know making something illegal is not the answer I fear our right to buy certain guns are over. Drugs are illegal and we all know nobody does them are has acess to them right?

As far as the guns go education is the key. I learned at a young age what they were for and how to handle one. There was never any couriosity from me because If I wanted to shoot all that needed to be done is I asked.parents used shooting sessons to teach me the right way.

I dont think this shooting was about a kid getting into a gun safe. Your are never going to stop a Psycho from getting a gun and using it on innocents if they want to. He are she will get a gun one way are another.


----------



## Duck Blind (Dec 11, 2010)

Wayne Nutt said:


> Being a responsible parent is hard work. I no longer have any kids at home as they are grown and gone raising their own families. Seldom do I have a loaded gun in the house.


You nailed it, Mr. Nutt! Being a parent is hard and many a parent use video games and TV as a baby sitter. I am only 40 years old, but it was as I a child that I remember seeing guns in the windows of trucks, on the walls of my home, and many friends homes......What's changed? Society has changed. So because society has changed, I now have to change or otherwise limit my personal freedoms (a little off the topic, I know)....It's just plain sickening.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Own all the guns of any type that you want and tend to them as you will, but.......The owner of the gun should be responsible for its care and custody.

So I say to those who have decided to shirk this responsibility. If a crime is committed with a gun that belongs to you, you should be able to be criminally and civilly held responsible along with the person who committed the crime .

And NO I don't think that this would be an infringement on your right to keep and bear arms.

john


----------



## Duck Blind (Dec 11, 2010)

john fallon said:


> So I say to those who have decided to shirk this responsibility. If a crime is committed with a gun that belongs to you, you should be able to be criminally and civilly held responsible along with the person who committed the crime .
> 
> John


Should I also be charged if a family mbr steals some legal narcotics from my medicine cabinet and is later caught selling them on the street? Should I also be charged if my uncle who borrows my car,decides to drink and drive and gets caught? Where does it end?


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

ndk3819 said:


> My dads guns sat in his closet my whole, still there now, from the time I can remember I was tought how to handle them, respect them and knew what they were capable of. Never once thought it would be a good idea to go play with it. My parents knew what I watched on tv and tought me the value of life. I'm raising my kids the same way. A locked safe with a curious kid can always be unlocked. Knowledge and respect don't go away


I retired after 31 years in law enforcement. My duty firearms were always loaded and kept in our bedroom closet.
We had three children all grown along with now grandchildren and great grandchildren. All were taught at a early age by their respective parents to respect firearms. At present only a daughter has any serious interest in guns and hunting.. However all without exception still support firearms safety including a grandson who is on a fast track to a law enforcement career. 

I never allowed a toy firearm in our house! We monitored what our children watched on TV. I never allowed play gun fights with even makeshift toy guns. My father wasn't a hunter, but, had three firearms in our house. My brothers never thought of playing with those firearms. Had a grandfather who introduced me to hunting and gun safety. My wife grew up with hunting and guns. She said she or her siblings never thought of playing with firearms.

Now from a personal standpoint. I am not a fan of public owning of. Military like firearms, but, having said that if they are legal so be it. The bad guys have them so don't have a answer. I don't know if the framers of the Constitution
With their flintlock arms could look that far into the future to see the technology of weapons. I do know the responsibility lies not with laws, lawbreakers will always break laws, but, with the institution of family! 

Just one mans opinion.

My post should of went to Potus.


----------



## Lonnie Spann (May 14, 2012)

My wife and I have raised three children, two still live at home with us and we have have a 2 y.o. grandson in the house several days per week.

We own several guns. We have guns in gun cabinets, closets, drawers, under beds, etc. It has been this way since we married. My children were raised up shooting guns, taught gun safety, and taught to respect all weapons. My children were never curious about guns, guns were something that was, and still is, part of their everyday lives.

My two year-old grandson points to every gun in the house and says "Pop's gun". Like my children he will grow up around guns, he will be taught gun safety, he will shoot guns, he will own guns, etc. but most importantly he will be taught to value life and respect others.

Lonster


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

One hesitates to be too prescriptive; it's your country not mine. 

However there appears to be at least some common threads in incidents such as those we saw last week. The first obviously is the matter of security of guns, and the second is guns getting into the hands of those with 'personality disorders". There is surely some mileage in at least examining what can be done to improve the first and mitigate the second. 

I don't go all the way with John Fallons' opinions as to criminal proceedings being taken against people who have guns stolen from them, but I think his general tone is right; as responsible gun owners we should demonstrate that status in practical terms, and that IMO includes safe and proper storage. I don't hold up the laws relating to guns in UK as a shining example, God knows I've campaigned against them for long enough, but within them are some bits that to me at least make common sense. I am required by law to ensure safe storage at home and whilst travelling. It doesn't feel like a burden. I know of a case where folks parked up outside a pub leaving gun cases on display in their vehicles. The guns were pinched, and in consequence the owners were barred from gun ownership for (I think but can't be dead sure) two years. 

Eug


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

john fallon said:


> Own all the guns of any type that you want and tend to them as you will, but.......The owner of the gun should be responsible for its care and custody.
> 
> So I say to those who have decided to shirk this responsibility. If a crime is committed with a gun that belongs to you, you should be able to be criminally and civilly held responsible along with the person who committed the crime .
> 
> ...


I completely disagree with this ,this type of mentality is part of the problem,everyone is always looking for a scapegoat instead of being responsible for their own actions." Its not the criminals fault he stole your guns it was the voices in his head" ...so now I'm responsible for some nut job. Society is week and are unwilling to take actions against these type of people. Then they would want to press charges on me if I shot the wack job in the back while in my home trying to get away with my personnel property.

If you are found mentally unstable by a jury of your piers you are sent to the mental ward instead of prison..I never understood this. If you are a danger to society you should be put to sleep,end of story no second chances to rape another child ,shoot another Innocent person while robbing them etc..then you'll start to see who really does have control of their actions.


I agree with Wayne Nutt ..there is no substitute for being a good parent.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Hairy Dawg said:


> This
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And the kids friends that come over who have not had this instruction? Sorry, they are still kids and no gun should be in easy grasp of one. If someone is trying to enter my house, I have more than enouhg time to secure my HDW if need be. Leaving guns unsecured is irresposnble and a a wonderful way to add to the AG mentality.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

When I was little, I desperately wanted a silver plastic, pearl handled Lone Ranger cap gun. Remember the old cap guns, with little rolls of paper caps/blanks? There were guns in our house, kept in my Dad's closet and we were not allowed to touch them unless we were with Dad...and we obeyed. So...finally, I got my wish....that beautiful silver cap gun and plastic holster was mine, along with strict orders that it never, ever be pointed at anyone. I could shoot at all the pretend bad guys I wanted to, as long as I never aimed at a living thing. I think it took about a week before I pointed...not fired, just pointed...in the direction of one of my sisters, and POOF! that beautiful, pearl handled cap gun disappeared, never to be seen again. Along with that, I lost my "plinking with Dad" privileges for awhile, which hurt even more than losing my cap gun. 
Funny how that respect for firearms lesson has stuck with me for the last forty five years or so. Unfortunately, most kids today have no exposure to firearms other than TV and video games, and they don't do things with their parents like we did back when. So many of life's lessons come from kids and parents actually participating in hobbies....and too many kids miss out on that today. Absentee parenting is part of the problem. 

If someone breaks into my house and steals or breaks open my gun safe, I should be responsible if they kill someone using one of those guns? I don't think so. If they also steal my truck and run it into a building and kill some people, that is my fault? I don't think so.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Shawn White said:


> I completely disagree with this ,this type of mentality is part of the problem,everyone is always looking for a scapegoat instead of being responsible for their own actions." Its not the criminals fault he stole your guns it was the voices in his head" *...so now I'm responsible for some nut job. *Society is week and are unwilling to take actions against these type of people. Then they would want to press charges on me if I shot the wack job in the back while in my home trying to get away with my personnel property.
> 
> If you are found mentally unstable by a jury of your piers you are sent to the mental ward instead of prison..I never understood this. If you are a danger to society you should be put to sleep,end of story no second chances to rape another child ,shoot another Innocent person while robbing them etc..then you'll start to see who really does have control of their actions.
> 
> ...


Not withstanding the fact that I abhor the problems within the system with regard to the swift prosecution , convection and punnishment of the perpetrators of these gun related crimes..... If some "nut job" perpetuates a crime against me or one of mine using YOUR gun , you can realistically expect to have to defend against a law suite brought by Me against YOU . You can also expect me to be camped out at the District Attorneys office, lobbying for a criminal negligence investigation.......

john


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Duck Blind said:


> Should I also be charged if a family mbr steals some legal narcotics from my medicine cabinet and is later caught selling them on the street?


If it was not the first time, YES


> Should I also be charged if my uncle who borrows my car,decides to drink and drive and gets caught? Where does it end?


 same answer as above


john


----------



## AmiableLabs (Jan 14, 2003)

My grandparents lived alone in the country. They kept a loaded handgun hidden in every room and a loaded .22 by the front door (to shoot gophers on sight). Six grandchildren came and visited regularly. We were all taught how to use guns, and told never to touch any of these, well, except for the .22 if we saw a gopher. My grandparents hated gophers. Not once did any accidents happen. Not once did any of the guns suddenly jump up all by themselves and begin shooting people. Just lucky I guess.

I live in the suburbs. Raised my kids the way I was raised -- to hunt and use and respect firearms. But I still keep all my guns in locked safes. My kids I trust. The neighbor kids not at all.


----------



## HPL (Jan 27, 2011)

john fallon said:


> Not withstanding the fact that I abhor the problems within the system with regard to the swift prosecution , convection and punnishment of the perpetrators of these gun related crimes..... If some "nut job" perpetuates a crime against me or one of mine using YOUR gun , you can realistically expect to have to defend against a law suite brought by Me against YOU . You can also expect me to be camped out at the District Attorneys office, lobbying for a criminal negligence investigation.......
> 
> 
> john



Well, my guess is that you won't want many of us on the jury. You'd never win if I was a juror.


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

john fallon said:


> Not withstanding the fact that I abhor the problems within the system with regard to the swift prosecution , convection and punnishment of the perpetrators of these gun related crimes..... If some "nut job" perpetuates a crime against me or one of mine using YOUR gun , you can realistically expect to have to defend against a law suite brought by Me against YOU . You can also expect me to be camped out at the District Attorneys office, lobbying for a criminal negligence investigation.......
> 
> john


And what would you realistically gain by suing me? If someone enters my house and steals my guns how am I at fault for their crime? It seems to me there would be several victims, your party and mine and one criminal. So do I then sue the manufacturer that made my breakable windows? You make no sense with this reasoning. If this was the case every gun manufacturer would be sued for shooting's. Of course there are some people who think that if someone so much as hurts their feelings they should sue them,you seem to be falling into this category John. 

Realize who the true criminal would be in this situation.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

john fallon said:


> If some "nut job" perpetuates a crime against me or one of mine using YOUR gun , you can realistically expect to have to defend against a law suite brought by Me against YOU . You can also expect me to be camped out at the District Attorneys office, lobbying for a criminal negligence investigation.......
> 
> john



This is a prime example of folks in society resposibilty to listen to the menatally Ill crying out for help!!

John,,, seriously,,, I know you like to rock the boat here and start stirrin the pot,,but PLEASE tell me you arnt serious!!!!
If you are,,, Remember the saying,,

People In glass houses shouldnt throw stones!!

There would be MANY instances I could prolly apply your logig to many of your personal situations...

get real!!

You do realise that stupid Gooser had to point this out to you dont you?



Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

How many "Locks" on my guns do criminals have to break befor I am not convicted of your neglagence charge???

The front door to my home is always locked when I am gone...
We have a sercurity company.. 
Front door locked Locked the majority of the time when I am at home...

I have a man eating 13 month old labrador Bitch with an attitude...

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII am neglegent????

You need to double dose your medication.

Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

OHHH!!

and then there's Diane!!!

Good luck buddy!!

Gooser


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> How many "Locks" on my guns do criminals have to break before I am not convicted of your negligence charge???
> 
> *The front door to my home is always locked when I am gone...
> We have a security company..
> ...


Given the highlighted section of your post ,You may be OK. But as the OP indicated,and others posting on this thread have confirmed there are those among us who's' "responsible care and custody" falls far short of an acceptable standard.

john


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

I keep two guns loaded and out where I can get to them at all times. The rest are in my gun cabinet. The guns I use for protection are worthless if they are not loaded. I just had a pickup truck with two shady charachters come down my long semi-rural driveway today in broad daylight driving very fast (I have a long driveway)... when they realized someone was home they backed out so fast they nearly went in the ditch on the other side of the road. I couldn't get out there fast enough to get a tag number... but they didn't really do anything anyway except scram. This has happened several times here. If someone makes the mistake of breaking in while I'm here they get their choice... 20 gauge with buckshot or my 38 special...


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Nothing wrong at all with a 20 ga. for home protection. It's a great choice if you have kids or others sleeping in other rooms.


----------



## kjrice (May 19, 2003)

Take this crap to POTUS


----------



## luvmylabs23139 (Jun 4, 2005)

john fallon said:


> Own all the guns of any type that you want and tend to them as you will, but.......The owner of the gun should be responsible for its care and custody.
> 
> So I say to those who have decided to shirk this responsibility. If a crime is committed with a gun that belongs to you, you should be able to be criminally and civilly held responsible along with the person who committed the crime .
> 
> ...


Let me get this straight. As far as you are concerned if someone breaks into my house (a crime) steals a gun ( a crime) I should be responsible rather than the criminal????
NOT!!!!


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

luvmylabs23139 said:


> Let me get this straight. As far as you are concerned if someone breaks into my house (a crime) steals a gun ( a crime) I should be responsible rather than the criminal????
> NOT!!!!



How about we try this one on for size. 

Someone walks through an unlocked door at your houseand takes a gun that was standing in plain sight in a gun rack and within the hour takes that gun and commits a crime, fatally wounding someone in the process. 
Do you think that you have exercised due diligence for the care and custody of a lethal weapon ?

john


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

john fallon said:


> How about we try this one on for size.
> 
> Someone walks through an unlocked door at your houseand takes a gun that was standing in plain sight in a gun rack and within the hour takes that gun and commits a crime, fatally wounding someone in the process.
> Do you think that you have exercised due diligence for the care and custody of a lethal weapon ?
> ...


YES ,because it was in MY house on private property and he did not have permission to enter so he has committed a crime and unlawfully stolen my property. Once again he has committed a crime by stealing my gun which was in my house on my property.

There is no law that I'm aware of that states how or what manner I have to keep my gun in my home. Your beating a dead horse ,no one in their right mind would convict the original gun owner if their gun was stolen from their home and used in a crime.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Shawn White said:


> YES ,because it was in MY house on private property and he did not have permission to enter so he has committed a crime and unlawfully stolen my property. Once again he has committed a crime by stealing my gun which was in my house on my property.
> 
> There is no law that I'm aware of that states how or what manner I have to keep my gun in my home. Your beating a dead horse ,no one in their right mind would convict the original gun owner if their gun was stolen from their home and used in a crime.


So, I guess you can not site an instance where by comparison you feel the gun owner loses "care and custody" of his gun and has not exercised said "due diligence" ?

john


----------



## luvmylabs23139 (Jun 4, 2005)

john fallon said:


> How about we try this one on for size.
> 
> Someone walks through an unlocked door at your houseand takes a gun that was standing in plain sight in a gun rack and within the hour takes that gun and commits a crime, fatally wounding someone in the process.
> Do you think that you have exercised due diligence for the care and custody of a lethal weapon ?
> ...


Since I'm legally posted " no trespassing" the second one inch of their body was on my property before being anywhere near the house they have in fact committed a crime.


----------



## luvmylabs23139 (Jun 4, 2005)

john fallon said:


> So, I guess you can not site an instance where by comparison you feel the gun owner loses "care and custody" of his gun and has not exercised said "due diligence" ?
> 
> john


I can think a a few but none apply in my house.


----------



## mlp (Feb 20, 2009)

When I was a young lad there were guns easily accessible to anyone in my house and my grandparents house. I grew up knowing if I touched one of those guns without permission I would get my eyes beat shut. So guess what..... I didn't touch those suckers.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

john fallon said:


> How about we try this one on for size.
> 
> Someone walks through an unlocked door at your houseand takes a gun that was standing in plain sight in a gun rack and within the hour takes that gun and commits a crime, fatally wounding someone in the process.
> Do you think that you have exercised due diligence for the care and custody of a lethal weapon ?
> ...



Let's rephrase slightly:


Someone walks through an unlocked door in your garage (or steals it while parked in your driveway, where you left it as you're unloading groceries or dog food or something)and takes your truck and within the hour takes that truck and runs it full speed through a fence at a school, killing and injuring several children.
Do you think that you have exercised due diligence for the care and custody of a lethal weapon ?


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Sharon Potter said:


> Let's rephrase slightly:
> 
> 
> Someone walks through an unlocked door in your garage (or steals it while parked in your driveway, where you left it as you're unloading groceries or dog food or something)and takes your truck and within the hour takes that truck and runs it full speed through a fence at a school, killing and injuring several children.
> Do you think that you have exercised due diligence for the care and custody of a lethal weapon ?


An assault auto?


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

huntinman said:


> An assault auto?


Was it a standard or automatic ?


----------



## Doug Moore (Nov 8, 2006)

john fallon said:


> Own all the guns of any type that you want and tend to them as you will, but.......The owner of the gun should be responsible for its care and custody.
> 
> So I say to those who have decided to shirk this responsibility. If a crime is committed with a gun that belongs to you, you should be able to be criminally and civilly held responsible along with the person who committed the crime .
> 
> ...


Just curious if you hunt or own any guns John. I'm "assuming" you do so I'll run with it. You've been out hunting, shooting flyers, skeet etc... and on the way home you stop to eat. Your shotgun is LOCKED in YOUR vehicle and someone steals the vehicle while eating. The next day they rob a bank and kill someone with YOUR shotgun. So YOU and the thief should be cellmates on death row?


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Sharon Potter said:


> Let's rephrase slightly:
> 
> 
> Someone walks through an unlocked door in your garage (or steals it while parked in your driveway, where you left it as you're unloading groceries or dog food or something)and takes your truck and within the hour takes that truck and runs it full speed through a fence at a school, killing and injuring several children.
> Do you think that you have exercised due diligence for the care and custody of a lethal weapon ?


Even though a car and a gun do not normally fall in the same category. .............If I were you and a car owned by you were used in such a manner Sharon, I would be more worried about what your insurance co would do in your defence than what I think. See you in court ;-)

john.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

John,

What do you not understand about "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, *the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed*"
Shall not be infringed? You tell me what that means. Twist it however you want, the words are very simple and easy to understand.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Dman said:


> John,
> 
> What do you not understand about "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, *the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed*"
> Shall not be infringed? You tell me what that means. Twist it however you want, the words are very simple and easy to understand.



I guess what I don't understand is how the words "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed "
can be taken out of the context of being used ia a sentence with "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state" , and be given stand alone meanings to suit ones need in an argument .

Now before we go any farther with this, enlighten me on how this can logically be done. At a minimun include in your explaination the definition of and the role of this militia in the security of free states in 2012/13, take all the band width you need........... 

john


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Well maybe YOU should take some time for research on the second ammendment and its meaning,, then you would have such a squewed interpretation of it..

There are many places to go for information.. Duke University did a wonderful study on your very question. Its easily searched on the net.

Hillsdale college offers a great course on the constitution. Its Free.. Very good also.


But to answere you question in simple Gooser terms. You said 
Quote:

*I guess what I don't understand is how the words "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed "
can be taken out of the context of being used ia a sentence with "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state" , and be given stand alone meanings to suit ones need in an argument .


*The Bill of rights consider the states have individual rights. One of those rights is to have a well regulated militia. This militia consists of ordinary citizens to protect that FREE state from standing armies, or invasions. It most definatly didnt mean Police,, or Federal armies,, It meant STATE Militia, consisting of ordinary citizens.

The constitution GUARANTEES the right for Ordinary citizens to keep and bear arms, so as the state to have the ability to have that armed militia of ordinary citizenry for protection.... against standing armies,, and oppresive invasion.

The congress (government) has no authority to infringe upon that right .. (to keep and bear arms)
It is a very good form of preparedness..
Thats kinda it in a nutshell..

If you dont undersand it,, Educate yourself... Dont spew personal agenda interpretation to it.. 
If you dont like it,,, Follow law,, and write an ammendment to it... Or vote for people who try and circumvent it.....

As I have said earler in the thread,, many of these state gun controll laws have gone befor the supreme court,, and have been deemd unconstitutional..

The Chicago case was one of them Those people lived under oppresive gun legislation that severly inhibited that states right to form its OWN militia in case of emergency,,,, per the constitution.. It also inhibited the popluaces right to defend its own personal life and property..

I think Californias Gun laws are much the same..

Gooser


----------



## luvmylabs23139 (Jun 4, 2005)

john fallon said:


> I guess what I don't understand is how the words "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed "
> can be taken out of the context of being used ia a sentence with "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state" , and be given stand alone meanings to suit ones need in an argument .
> 
> Now before we go any farther with this, enlighten me on how this can logically be done. At a minimun include in your explaination the definition of and the role of this militia in the security of free states in 2012/13, take all the band width you need...........
> ...


Throughout all of this you have been attempting to classify a break in to a household member gaining access to items in the house. That is just stupid. If a person lives in the house they can spend many hours trying to get a combination to access something while the general thief never has that time.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Thanks Gooser.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Anybody but me concerned at all about how many folks are posting on a public forum what kind and how many guns they have? Not only that, but they are telling where they keep them and about their security arrangements???? I think its great to discuss the laws and rights and to comment on what effect changes in them will have on us and our sports, but too much info here!


----------



## 43x (Mar 29, 2009)

mlp said:


> When I was a young lad there were guns easily accessible to anyone in my house and my grandparents house. I grew up knowing if I touched one of those guns without permission I would get my eyes beat shut. So guess what..... I didn't touch those suckers.


That's the way it was at are house too. There where 6 kids in are family and we all grew up around guns and shooting. My dad let us know at a early age he would break your fingers if ya messed with the guns without him being there. He also told us you are allowed NO mistakes with a gun, I think this all went with family values


----------



## GBUSMCR (Oct 5, 2004)

I think I have heard John's argument before as an effective way to get rid of all guns. 

Oh yeah, I have also heard this same argument on negligent responsibility before as justification for holding family members financially responsible for actions of children (any age), siblings, parents, etc. I am not surprised by this argument given society today.


----------



## charly_t (Feb 11, 2009)

2tall said:


> Anybody but me concerned at all about how many folks are posting on a public forum what kind and how many guns they have? Not only that, but they are telling where they keep them and about their security arrangements???? I think its great to discuss the laws and rights and to comment on what effect changes in them will have on us and our sports, but too much info here!


Yes ! I been kinda surprised by this. I'm not giving anyone a list to work by.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> Well maybe YOU should take some time for research on the second ammendment and its meaning,, then you would have such a squewed interpretation of it..
> 
> There are many places to go for information.. Duke University did a wonderful study on your very question. Its easily searched on the net.
> 
> ...


When I said "What I don't understand" I was being factitious, I know the 2ND as well as most

The constitution does not do any such thing as guarantee us the unfettered right to bear arms, _according to the Supreme Court, and the lower courts as well, the amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear arms—but did not give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon_.
It was not until the ...."_District of Columbia v. Heller, decided in 2008, that the Supreme Court embraced the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment.........
Justice Antonin Scalia, was the author of the opinion, but it required him to craft a thoroughly political compromise. 

In the eighteenth century, militias were proto-military operations, and their members had to obtain the best military hardware of the day. But Scalia could not create, in the twenty-first century, an individual right to contemporary military weapons—like tanks and Stinger missiles. In light of this, Scalia conjured a rule that said D.C. could not ban handguns because “handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid.” 

So the government cannot ban handguns, but it can ban other weapons—like, say, an assault rifle—or so it appears. The full meaning of the court’s Heller opinion is still up for grabs".........._.http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html

Until lately I thought that bumpkin persona of yours was just an act

john


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

john fallon said:


> Until lately I thought that bumpkin persona of yours was just an act
> 
> john


It is NOT!!! And I am Proud of it...

Gooser


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

luvmylabs23139 said:


> Throughout all of this you have been attempting to classify a break in to a household member gaining access to items in the house. That is just stupid. If a person lives in the house they can spend many hours trying to get a combination to access something while the general thief never has that time.


On the contrary, throughout all of this I have advocated the responsible gun ownership asked for by the OP in the first post of this thread. My comments on the 2ND and what it guarantees in the way of gun ownership was just to dispel some of the more prevalent myths.


john


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> It is NOT!!! And I am Proud of it...
> 
> Gooser


Well try to work through it if you attempt to rebut the facts in post #61.

john


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

john fallon said:


> Well try to work through it if you attempt to rebut the facts in post #61.
> 
> john



Fallon..

You have been a memeber of this board for quite sometime,, and your M.O. is to degrade and argue everthing..

You are dried up old hash..

I for one wish you would just go away...

I look forward to the day that I can shake the hands of many here.. You sir,, are not one of them..

I guess you will just have to agree to dis agree with this Country Bumpkin..... No sweat off my balls..

Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

john fallon said:


> Well try to work through it if you attempt to rebut the facts in post #61.
> 
> john


http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html


Lefty Bias,, Just search past articles... No different than listening to Fox news Huh??

Gooser


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html
> 
> 
> Lefty Bias,, Just search past articles... No different than listening to Fox news Huh??
> ...


That's your idea of a rebuttal ?

john


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

luvmylabs23139 said:


> Since I'm legally posted " no trespassing" *the second one inch of their body was on my property before being anywhere near the house they have in fact committed a crime*.


Might want to double check that. Until asked to leave, it is not trespass in our state, posted or not. Until asked to leave and they do not comply. Otherwise a UPS man could be considered trespassing.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

http://www.independent.org/publications/books/summary.asp?id=72&s=ga

Im Out!


Gooser


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Golddogs said:


> Might want to double check that. Until asked to leave, it is not trespass in our state, posted or not. Until asked to leave and they do not comply. Otherwise a UPS man could be considered trespassing.


In my state, it depends on where they are and if it's daylight or at night. They come into my house uninvited day or night, I can do whatever I want to them. Might be sued, but that's another discussion.

At night, they don't even have to come into my house if I can prove certain things.


----------



## Billie (Sep 19, 2004)

MooseGooser said:


> Fallon..
> 
> You have been a memeber of this board for quite sometime,, and your M.O. is to degrade and argue everthing..
> 
> ...


Gooser- You Rock...........


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

Goose ,very good post ,but I do like the fact that the "others" post their side so we can keep an eye on what they are really thinking. "Law suit to any man that has a dime to take."

Thanks for the heads up John, from your previous post on this thread I can clearly see you are one of the one's that have aided in putting this country on its knee's as a sue happy crowd that thinks any high dollar lawyer is far above the "common sense " of many and will find a bullsh*t law to sue a common man for their mis-fortune.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Another good post. Thanks Shawn!
Lawyers wil put an end to this country as we know it.


----------



## GBUSMCR (Oct 5, 2004)

Ditto on Gooser rocks and great post by Shawn!


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Shawn White said:


> Goose ,very good post ,but I do like the fact that the "others" post their side so we can keep an eye on what they are really thinking. "Law suit to any man that has a dime to take."
> 
> *Thanks for the heads up *John, from your previous post on this thread I can clearly see you are one of the one's that have aided in putting this country on its knee's as a sue happy crowd that thinks any high dollar lawyer is far above the "common sense " of many and will find a bullsh*t law to sue a common man for their mis-fortune.


You don't know the half of it . I have taken a case all the way to the Pa Supreme Court *to prevail *. See Coatesville Contractors and Engineers v Borough of Ridley Park http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=19861062509Pa553_2942.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006

So I repeat; I want US to be allowed to have any and all of the guns of Our choosing that WE want, *but if YOU do not act responsibly their care and coustody,*and one of them is used against me or mine EVEN by someone other than yourself, expect to have to defend your inactions in a civil action brought aginst YOU by ME.

As for Goosers handshake post, Im crushed.......

john


----------



## 1morex (Aug 10, 2010)

So this question begs too be asked. If your underage son or daughter steals your gun,car, what have you and commits a crime should you also be held accountable for his or her actions?


----------



## luvmylabs23139 (Jun 4, 2005)

Golddogs said:


> Might want to double check that. Until asked to leave, it is not trespass in our state, posted or not. Until asked to leave and they do not comply. Otherwise a UPS man could be considered trespassing.


Not mine nor the last state I lived in. The UPS guy does not count if he is delivering a package I ordered. BY ordering a package to be delivered by UPS (or whatever) I have allowed the deliver to my property.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

FinnLandR said:


> For a minute I thought you were claiming you were the attorney who won the case. After reading the opinion, I see you were merely the engineer who failed to do a thorough evaluation of the jobsite, under-bid, then made the argument that it was the other guy's fault for letting the "meadow" fill with water.
> 
> Let's be clear, the attorney prevailed, you were along for the ride.


The "other guy" had the "care and custody" of the water and so stated in the advertisement for bids...... the court upheld my argument that it was his fault. BTW it was a huge lake.

Lets be clear I do not want to take another ride, but I will, if you or any one else shirks the responsibility of gun ownership and their errant gun is used by another against me or mine.

john


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

john fallon said:


> The "other guy" had the "care and custody" of the water and so stated in the advertisement for bids...... the court upheld my argument that it was his fault. BTW it was a huge lake.
> 
> Lets be clear I do not want to take another ride, but I will, if you or any one else shirks the responsibility of gun ownership and their errant gun is used by another against me or mine.
> 
> john


Having John take a contrary, controversial position, and articulately argue it relentlessly doesn't surprise me. My only issue with John after reading this thread is that I believe his definition of what's rsponsible and what isn't is pretty liberal. I have no idea about what would be considered a reasonable standard for care and custody of a firearm in PA, who know's, John position could well prevail in a PA court, I have no idea. I know he wouldn't stand a chance in a Montana court, our gun culture here is very prevalent and just a part of being a Montanan. 

I remember going to a dinner with four of my wife's fellow workers and their spouces shortly after we moved here. Now I grew up with guns and hunting even though we lived in suburban LA. When I married and moved to Montana I had a .22 rifle, two shotguns, a .270 and .308 bolt action rifles. Cheryl thought that me owning five guns was a bit excessive, and wondered why I "had to have" another "elk" rifle. So I brought the subject up as a part of of dinner conversation. I expressed my desire for an elk rifle and asked the table how many guns they each had. To my wife's surprise the person with the fewest firearms was a kind of liberal, grown up hippy guy, he only had fifteen. When President Nixon dedicated Libby dam back in the seventies, the secret service came out prior to the dedication to map out risks and such, they were flabergasted and frustrated to find 90% of the pick ups had a rifle or two clearly visible in a gun rack in the back window. It was only a few years ago that many pick-ups parked in the high school parking lot had a deer rifle visible in the back window. Now there are rules against taking a gun to school, but those kids still hunt before or after school and our schools close for a week during deer season so the family can get together and hunt.

So John or anybody can sue anyone for anything but I'm pretty confident any lawyer worth his or her salt were recognize such a suit would be a loosing cause in Montana and decline John's wishes to pursue it, unless of course they were just looking for attention and publicity.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Having John take a contrary, controversial position, and articulately argue it relentlessly doesn't surprise me. My only issue with John after reading this thread is that I believe his definition of what's rsponsible and what isn't is pretty liberal. I have no idea about what would be considered a reasonable standard for care and custody of a firearm in PA, who know's, John position could well prevail in a PA court, I have no idea. I know he wouldn't stand a chance in a Montana court, our gun culture here is very prevalent and just a part of being a Montanan.
> 
> I remember going to a dinner with four of my wife's fellow workers and their spouces shortly after we moved here. Now I grew up with guns and hunting even though we lived in suburban LA. When I married and moved to Montana I had a .22 rifle, two shotguns, a .270 and .308 bolt action rifles. Cheryl thought that me owning five guns was a bit excessive, and wondered why I "had to have" another "elk" rifle. So I brought the subject up as a part of of dinner conversation. I expressed my desire for an elk rifle and asked the table how many guns they each had. To my wife's surprise the person with the fewest firearms was a kind of liberal, grown up hippy guy, he only had fifteen. When President Nixon dedicated Libby dam back in the seventies, the secret service came out prior to the dedication to map out risks and such, they were flabergasted and frustrated to find 90% of the pick ups had a rifle or two clearly visible in a gun rack in the back window. It was only a few years ago that many pick-ups parked in the high school parking lot had a deer rifle visible in the back window. Now there are rules against taking a gun to school, but those kids still hunt before or after school and our schools close for a week during deer season so the family can get together and hunt.
> 
> So John or anybody can sue anyone for anything but I'm pretty confident any lawyer worth his or her salt were recognize such a suit would be a loosing cause in Montana and decline John's wishes to pursue it, unless of course they were just looking for attention and publicity.


John, I find judging the "salt" of a lawyer by their reluctance to defend a politically unpopular position disturbing ........I am sure you did not mean to say that , but at first blush that is how your writing will be perceived

Additionally Your perception of the public sentiment of a yet to be determined percentage of the voters in the state of Montana not withstanding. Federal law preempts state law as does state law preempt local law, so like it or not, if certain state's gun laws fall too far outside the Federal mainstream, it will be the Federal government that will step in, as they have done in the past, and ultimately call the shots on guns.

Finally the reason I posted "my" law suit example was to show that public sentiment rarely comes into play after the case goes above the court of common pleas, and that a tenacious adversary will not stop until _all _avenues are exhausted .

john


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Hi John,

I realize we are arguing hypotheticals here as it is extremely unlikely that you personally will be harmed by some RTFers stolen gun. The point I was trying to make is that our Country's gun culture and attitudes toward hunting, self protection, individual rights and responsibilities vary greatly by region, what works well and is appropriate for NY City or Washington DC would be terrible in rural Montana, Wyoming or Alaska and visa versa. So, as you say Federal law trumps all, I am generally opposed to greater federal laws that infringe on local customs. I realize we can argue this ad nauseum, I'm not talking about univeral issues such as slavery, and where you draw the line on what is a universal truth probably varies with where you are on a liberal-conservative political scale.

As for whether our State's gun laws are within or without the Federal mainstream, we can only go by actual Federal law, and to this point I am unaware of any Federal law that prescribes a standard for care and custody of a firearm. You can of course argue your case in civil court, like I said you would probably prevail among a jury of peers in NY or PA, probably not in Montana or Wyoming.

John


----------

