Just another day in New Orleans (1 Viewer)

[CapitalCitySaint]

If a thief breaks into someone’s house and steals guns that are just laying around- no responsiblity?

None. because it’s my house where the thief shouldn’t be. Why can’t I leave my guns laying around (provided I don’t have children in the house)?

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

None. because it’s my house where the thief shouldn’t be. Why can’t I leave my guns laying around (provided I don’t have children in the house)?

Because criminals break into homes and steal guns and use them to harm other people and commit more crime

 

[Sailorsaint]

Because criminals break into homes and steal guns and use them to harm other people and commit more crime

If someone steals a car, commits a hit and run with it, is the owner liable?

 

[DaveXA]

If someone steals a car, commits a hit and run with it, is the owner liable?

No...but they're not the same. I'd argue that homeowners should be responsible enough to keep their guns in a safe in their home. I don't want anyone other than me to have access to my guns.

 

[Sailorsaint]

No...but they're not the same. I'd argue that homeowners should be responsible enough to keep their guns in a safe in their home. I don't want anyone other than me to have access to my guns.

And I would argue that they are the same. Someone illegally accessed someone else's property, that should end liability right there. It's like the old story about the cat burglar cutting his hand on the broken glass when breaking into a home and suing the homeowner.

 

[CapitalCitySaint]

Because criminals break into homes and steal guns and use them to harm other people and commit more crime

This is delusional. I can keep whatever legal things I want in my house and keep my house locked.

What’s next? “Those criminals wouldn’t be breaking into homes if evil law abiding citizens didn’t encourage them”.

 

[CapitalCitySaint]

No...but they're not the same. I'd argue that homeowners should be responsible enough to keep their guns in a safe in their home. I don't want anyone other than me to have access to my guns.

I disagree. Apart from when kids live in the home, I’m keeping my gun in or on the nightstand. It’s for protection. I shouldn’t have to move it to a safe every time I leave the house. I lock my house and nobody else is supposed to be in there.

 

[DaveXA]

I disagree. Apart from when kids live in the home, I’m keeping my gun in or on the nightstand. It’s for protection. I shouldn’t have to move it to a safe every time I leave the house. I lock my house and nobody else is supposed to be in there.

That's not an unreasonable take. I don't think people should be held liable if a weapon is stolen from their home or car and used in a crime, but I do think it's a good practice to have weapons stored in a safe when I'm not home. I think that's a personal choice though.

 

[Dago]

"They shouldn't have had it in their car."

"She shouldn't have dressed that way."

The 'reasoning' behind them are remarkably similar

 

[CapitalCitySaint]

That's not an unreasonable take. I don't think people should be held liable if a weapon is stolen from their home or car and used in a crime, but I do think it's a good practice to have weapons stored in a safe when I'm not home. I think that's a personal choice though.

I think if you have a bunch of hunting rifles or guns used for something not protection related, it’s not unreasonable to keep them in a safe. But if you’ve purchased a gun for home protection and there aren’t any children or unstable adults in the house, then the whole purpose of that gun is lost if it’s locked in a safe.

If a serial killer rapist is breaking into my home, I can’t be like “hold on sir. Give me a minute to go to my closet and unlock the safe so I can get my gun and protect myself from you”. I’d already be dead.

 

[Poison]

I think if you have a bunch of hunting rifles or guns used for something not protection related, it’s not unreasonable to keep them in a safe. But if you’ve purchased a gun for home protection and there aren’t any children or unstable adults in the house, then the whole purpose of that gun is lost if it’s locked in a safe.

If a serial killer rapist is breaking into my home, I can’t be like “hold on sir. Give me a minute to go to my closet and unlock the safe so I can get my gun and protect myself from you”. I’d already be dead.

While this is an intuitively appealing argument, there is no evidentiary basis for the proposition that having ready access to a firearm in the home is effective as a form of self-defence (when compared to not having such access), but ample evidence to suggest that unsafe gun storage materially increases the risk of unintentional/accidental injuries or death:

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

Accidents

1. Across states, more guns = more unintentional firearm deaths We analyzed data for 50 states over 19 years to investigate the relationship between gun prevalence and accidental gun deaths across …

www.hsph.harvard.edu

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

Regardless of “fault” it’s a bad idea to leave valuables, including guns, in your car in New Orleans. Just basic common sense and protection of property. It won’t necessarily stop a break in but reduces your loss if there is a break in.

And in the case of stolen guns, there is the obvious knockon effect of increased violence - different than if they steal an iPhone or cash. If someone steals your wallet in New Orleans, you have a problem. If someone steals your gun, we all have a problem.

Think of it as a friendly request from your fellow law abiding citizens rather than blaming anyone. You’re free to ignore it but please think it over.

 

[porculator]

"They shouldn't have had it in their car."

"She shouldn't have dressed that way."

The 'reasoning' behind them are remarkably similar

Of course it's as much your right to flaunt your body as much as it is to leave a gun in your new truck with an NRA sticker.

And yet, having the right to do something doesn't automatically make it a good decision.

If I let a woman I was with walk alone to her car at 3am in Nola and something happened to her, I would not be legally liable, after all criminals be criminals. But I would feel horrible about it.

I don't understand where the concept came from where we feel we should all be able to wash our hands of any consequences as long as we don't personally break the law.

 

[CapitalCitySaint]

While this is an intuitively appealing argument, there is no evidentiary basis for the proposition that having ready access to a firearm in the home is effective as a form of self-defence (when compared to not having such access), but ample evidence to suggest that unsafe gun storage materially increases the risk of unintentional/accidental injuries or death:

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

Accidents

1. Across states, more guns = more unintentional firearm deaths We analyzed data for 50 states over 19 years to investigate the relationship between gun prevalence and accidental gun deaths across …

www.hsph.harvard.edu

The example you used is from a randomized digit-dialed phone survey where people on the phone can say anything and another study from 2000.

While I won’t say that there is no validity, the argument made here is that in most cases gun use at home is used to intimidate an intimate.



I am female and live alone so none of that applies to me. When I say my gun is for protection, that’s precisely what I mean and I’m not keeping it in a safe every time I leave the house because a criminal might break in. Perhaps if I go out of town, sure but not on a daily basis.

I am more of a target for break in and whatever else being a single woman than any man ever will be. Particularly for those who are looking for someone to rape and kill.

 

[Dago]

Of course it's as much your right to flaunt your body as much as it is to leave a gun in your new truck with an NRA sticker.

And yet, having the right to do something doesn't automatically make it a good decision.

If I let a woman I was with walk alone to her car at 3am in Nola and something happened to her, I would not be legally liable, after all criminals be criminals. But I would feel horrible about it.

I don't understand where the concept came from where we feel we should all be able to wash our hands of any consequences as long as we don't personally break the law.

So if a woman dresses provocatively and gets raped, are you going to tell her she shouldn't have dressed that way and that it was just a consequence of her showing off her body?

Because you tried to change the thrust of it in your example by making it about walking her to her car which is irrelevant to this