- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Michigan high school shooter's parents are on the run (now arrested and in custody)
Posted on 12/4/21 at 10:56 am to stout
Posted on 12/4/21 at 10:56 am to stout
quote:
See the issue with your stupid idea of a law is it leads to a national gun registry. Uncle Sam doesnt need to audit my gun inventory.
I'm confused. The part of my post you quoted about firearm traces already is in effect. We have a National Tracing Center with the ATF.
If you bought a gun from an FFL dealer then we have a record of it. 4473s are kept for 20 years. This includes Cabela's, Academy, Bass Pro, or even smaller shops like Jim's, or Herbert's.
1
Posted on 12/4/21 at 10:56 am to stout
quote:
In Louisiana it is Negligent homicide and the law isn't as broad as in MI so yes forgive me if I think it is extreme. No way they would be charged here in LA.
Why are you in here arguing your state's laws against Michigan's then?
Posted on 12/4/21 at 11:01 am to ThoseGuys
quote:
If you bought a gun from an FFL dealer then we have a record of it. 4473s are kept for 20 years. This includes Cabela's, Academy, Bass Pro, or even smaller shops like Jim's, or Herbert's.
Yea no shite. Do you know how many guns I inherited from family members that have passed? I am not about to start letting the Government audit those and you shouldn't be advocating for it.
Also, a bill of sale is all I need as private citizen if I want to transfer ownership to someone else and that is mostly to protect myself. What are you asking for will now involve the Government in my private transactions. No thanks
Your whole suggestion is stupid and possibly unconstitutional
To your other stupid point:
quote:
or b: had the firearm secured properly;
Who determines what is properly secured? How would you prove this once the firearm is stolen and used in a crime?
How secure is secure enough to the point that it's not a hindrance to me as a home owner if I need quick access to it to defend myself and my family?
This post was edited on 12/4/21 at 11:15 am
Posted on 12/4/21 at 11:01 am to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
Why are you in here arguing your state's laws against Michigan's then?
Is that really what you got from that post or are you being purposely obtuse?
Posted on 12/4/21 at 11:54 am to stout
Wow you seem to be really worked up about this. Please reference the original post where I state private sales would be hard to manage. I never said they absolutely should be. I also listed examples of safe gun ownership. Do you have a lock box to secure the gun? Do you have a safe? Do you have a cable lock or trigger lock? These are basics for gun owners.
That's one of my problem with some gun owners. They think once they buy a gun they no longer need to be responsible. They cry about the government. Its a gun, not a toy. If you can't respect that then you shouldn't have a gun.
I agree the government doesn't need to come take our guns, but I also recognize that we as gun owners need to act accordingly. A parent wants their 15 year old to have a gun? Fine. But stay on top of that situation. Because this is what happens when you don't. That isn't an opinion, its a fact.
That's one of my problem with some gun owners. They think once they buy a gun they no longer need to be responsible. They cry about the government. Its a gun, not a toy. If you can't respect that then you shouldn't have a gun.
I agree the government doesn't need to come take our guns, but I also recognize that we as gun owners need to act accordingly. A parent wants their 15 year old to have a gun? Fine. But stay on top of that situation. Because this is what happens when you don't. That isn't an opinion, its a fact.
Posted on 12/4/21 at 12:07 pm to TigerInGrayton
quote:
If you can go to prison for that then there’s millions of Americans testing their luck
Yeah I'm sure they are fine. That's why the U.S. Marshals are going to arrest them on manslaughter charges...
Posted on 12/4/21 at 12:11 pm to stout
quote:
Is that really what you got from that post or are you being purposely obtuse?
Only an obtuse person would run from this board to create the same topic on the Politics board when your opinions on here weren't being supported.
Posted on 12/4/21 at 12:13 pm to stout
quote:
I think IM is extreme. Imagine facing life in prison over something your child did and you are basically guilty of ignoring some drawings and a high school counselor. There are no CAP laws concerning firearms in Michigan nor are there Federal CAP laws.
Just because there are no CAP laws in the jurisdiction does not mean a parents actions vis a vis gun access can't be negligent, reckless, or even willful and wanton.
I am on the fence about the charges and would like more information about the situation that is likely unknowable.
The thing that really sits wrong with me is the mother teaching the life lesson that not getting caught is more important than just doing right to begin with. While it does give a window into the world view they were teaching their son it has little to do with the charging choices.
Posted on 12/4/21 at 12:15 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
Just because there are no CAP laws in the jurisdiction does not mean a parents actions vis a vis gun access can't be negligent, reckless, or even willful and wanton.
The lack of CAP laws makes it harder to prove negligence with regards to the gun, correct?
Posted on 12/4/21 at 12:39 pm to stout
quote:
The lack of CAP laws makes it harder to prove negligence with regards to the gun, correct?
Sure, and the DA is aware of that.
Posted on 12/4/21 at 12:48 pm to stout
quote:
The lack of CAP laws makes it harder to prove negligence with regards to the gun, correct?
This gets into the area of trial craft and jury theory but I personally generally prefer not to have codified law outlining the exact parameters of some level of negligence. I prefer working with a general jury instruction about negligence, gross negligence, or what other standard needs to be met. In the case of a CAP law if there is clear evidence that the parents met the minimum legal standard for limiting gun access it makes it potentially harder to prove negligence etc with a fact pattern beyond the CAP requirements. As an example, someone has met the lock requirement but then has been negligent with the keys or code access. Juries like to have "outs" and in that example may avoid the more amorphous argument about what is negligent and just make the easy choice to say no negligence since they met the letter of the law.
The above may not make much sense as I am tired and running on almost no sleep. But my point is that CAP laws or any statute can make aguing a certain level of negligence actually harder in a lot of cases. I personally prefer to be able to argue based on a simple jury instruction of the common law* definition of whatever negligence is required for a verdict favorable to my client.
*clearly I am not a LA attorney.
Page 11 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News