[7.62Kolectr]

Sno Cty prosecutor is already pursuing charges against a Monroe corrections officer who put her pistol in a kitchen drawer, where it was retrieved by her twelve year old son, who committed suicide with the pistol.

Cases like this I am always conflicted on. Irresponsible? Yes.
Worthy of charging them? I’m not sure. Isn’t the loss of one’s own child and a life of dealing with that fact punishment enough?

 

[Shark1007]

Cases like this I am always conflicted on. Irresponsible? Yes.
Worthy of charging them? I’m not sure. Isn’t the loss of one’s own child and a life of dealing with that fact punishment enough?

Agree completely, in my case the Sheriff my guy worked for asked me to help. The suicide was in another jurisdiction and a brother deputy tried to charge my guy for failure to secure the pistol. I finally screwed around long enough and reminded them they had no jurisdiction over the failure to secure case because it didn’t happen in their county and we walked out. I told my guy to go home and relax, no way the Sheriff that called me would charge him.

In hindsight, we are 20 years down the road now and the stress of that event has basically ruined his life. He has severe cardiac issues and can barely function.

 

[Retired AF CE]

I actually want to see this go to Court. It will be interesting to watch and see how the State builds their case!

 

[FDM1]

Do people even believe in our voting system anymore? There are plenty of reasons not to. We had 3 proposals on our recent ballot that not a single person I know or any people I talked to voted for, yet they all passed, Not to mention the candidates which are absolute garbage were voted back into office again.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

That gun owner is nuts if he talks to he police without an attorney present, no matter how much it costs him.

 

[Sausha]

Does the WA state define reasonable standards of gun storage?

Common sense does...

 

[ronbwolf]

Reading through the posts, it seems that some are just realizing the true nature of this, and all, "gun control," and "gun safety" measures. It has never been about the GUN, it is about the CONTROL! Safe storage laws, and reporting timely laws, are INTENDED to increase the legal means of attacking the evil gun owners. The anti-gunners know that if they make it difficult enough, they will reduce the number of people who are willing to jump through the hoops. Even some, here on this, a "gun" forum, are hedging, "Well 'if' he did...." NO! As an American Citizen he has, A, a Constitutional RIGHT, to own firearms, PERIOD! And B, he is presumed innocent, until proven guilty! Furthermore, C, he has a right to be "secure in (his) their persons, houses, papers, and effects," which means the Washington State government should butt out! Will this law stand up to legal scrutiny, probably not, but it will take decades for it to work it's way through the courts. The framers of the Constitution, and those who fought to create this country, would never stand for a legislative body to have passed this crap.

Sorry, rant over.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

 

[YVK]

Common sense does...

Common sense would suggest that we wait for a discovery of how this gun was lost before we apply further common sense judgments..

 

[Tactical Rico]

Listen to yourselves...........How was it stored, how long before he reported it, was it lost or stolen......
IT SHOULD NOT MATTER !! As ronbwolf stated, if it was in his house it is "secured".........If he lost track of it so what !!
If he didn't give it to the person who misused it then it was misappropriated somehow and NOT his responsibility.
Come on people......Get Real ! No wonder this Country is going to hell...........STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS !
TR

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I honestly think most 'safe storage' nonsense is about anti-gun mentality,

Clearly, as evidenced by the lack of laws mandating safe storage of prescription and otc drugs; power tools; knifes and household cleaning products like bleach, drain cleaner, and oven cleaner.

 

[kitchencounsel]

I suppose this is another one of those laws that get passed so politicians can say "see, I did something about" whatever.

I've never understood how it's justified to hold the owner of property liable for what a thief does after stealing that property.

If you leave your keys in the truck, some kid steals it and kills someone while driving around are you guilty of murder?

For that matter, I think a strong analogy could be made to attractive nuisance, where for example the owner of a pool is liable if someone trespasses for a swim without the owner's permission and drowns. Some states still have these laws but the trend seems to be against them.

 

[lonerider1013]

I think a strong analogy could be made to attractive nuisance, where for example the owner of a pool is liable if someone trespasses for a swim without the owner's permission and drowns. Some states still have these laws but the trend seems to be against them.

Yes this is why most pools have fences around them. Your gun has a fence plus a roof - the walls of your house. That should be sufficient to remove the attractiveness of the nuisance. Obviously if someone had to break down a door to get in the gun was secured.

 

[kitchencounsel]

Yes this is why most pools have fences around them. Your gun has a fence plus a roof - the walls of your house. That should be sufficient to remove the attractiveness of the nuisance. Obviously if someone had to break down a door to get in the gun was secured.

Well putting a fence around a pool is perhaps just good common sense, but the lack of a fence doesn't justify trespass nor should it blame a landowner for the consequences of someone else's poor judgment.

That's the problem with blaming someone for things done with their property used or taken without permission.
Where do you draw the line?
So how much fence is required? How tall must it be? Should it be electrified or be made of barbed wire with concertina at the top?

Is just "roof and walls" sufficient? Or must you keep your firearms unloaded in a locked safe? Ammo in a separate safe? Firearms disassembled and the pieces stored separately?
I believe all those things are the law in various states and countries. Do you think those things are reasonable, much less effective? What if someone steals your combination(s) and uses your firearm to commit a crime? Are you still liable for the illegal acts of others?

 

[lonerider1013]

Are you still liable for the illegal acts of others?

not messing with other people's property is something most people should have learned as small children, so the answer is,
In a sane world, no.

But these days, I sometimes wonder.

 

[M1A1A]

Do people even believe in our voting system anymore? There are plenty of reasons not to. We had 3 proposals on our recent ballot that not a single person I know or any people I talked to voted for, yet they all passed, Not to mention the candidates which are absolute garbage were voted back into office again.

The Govt has used trillions of US tax payers dollars to ensure they win the elections that matter. They are emboldened even more now that they have stolen how many past elections ? They have over 20 years at this.
As the visibility of the “glitches” found in Dominion Voting Systems continues to spread across multiple states, and the longstanding issues surrounding Election Systems & Software start to re-surface, one critical question has yet to be asked, “How did they manage to corner the U.S. election voter market in the first place?”
On September 14, 2009, Hart Interactive, Inc. filed a lawsuit against Diebold Incorporated and Election Systems & Software, Inc. (ES&S) alleging antitrust claims after the September 2, 2009 purchase of Diebold’s outstanding stock of Premier Election Solutions and the assets of Premier Canada. This transaction gave Election Systems & Software a 68% share of the U.S. voting machine market.
Not only did that transaction grant ES&S a monopolistic stranglehold on the election market, Hart alleged and provided evidence of anticompetitive conduct by both Diebold and ES&S. In the lawsuit, Hart states, Diebold and ES&S systemically:

1. Wins bids by billing low then gouging locked-in customers for more aftermarket service and equipment.
2. Misrepresents by exaggerating the features, capabilities, or certification status of the systems, or by falsely disparaging the features, capabilities, or certification status of rival systems.
3. Engages in strategies that raise their rivals codes.
4. Imposes unreasonable restrictions on access to software and other intellectual properties – in other words, customers could not have visibility to the source code prior to the election to ensure it had not been tampered with.
5. Exerts improper and undue influence on government officials to achieve favorable competitive bidding outcomes.
6. Initiates litigation upon losing competitive bidding contests to establish a litigious reputation among customers adding a risk premium to the cost of choosing a rival system.

How Canada-Based Dominion Voting Systems and U.S.-Based ES&S Cornered the U.S. Voting Machine Market

FacebookTweetEmailLinkedInPrint As the visibility of the “glitches” found in Dominion Voting Systems continues to spread across multiple states, and the longstanding issues surrounding Election Systems & Software start to re-surface, one critical question has yet to be asked, “How did they...

opslens.com

 

[M1A1A]

Common sense does...

And exactly what is that ? I see that common sense everyday I am driving. lol

 

[Autonomous]

The Govt has used trillions of US tax payers dollars to ensure they win the elections that matter. They are emboldened even more now that they have stolen how many past elections ?

The domestic enemies are succeeding.

 

[Mozark]

Sounds like the good guys are the bad guys……

 

[magazineman]

First, As a rule I reject outright the impossible claims that people make concerning the intentions of 3rd parties.

For example, when someone says: "My boss makes me work weekends because he hates me" or "Liberal politicians just want to make guns look evil" the speaker is claiming that they themselves KNOW the unspoken inner motivations of other people. Of course this magical, psychic superpower does not exist. So statements of this kind are absurd and just reveals the irrationality of the speaker's position. Keeping one's arguments in the realm of supportable, verifiable fact adds credibility.

Second, The term "reasonable" is a legal term in use for many, many decades. Yes, it is endlessly fought over as that is the process of law.

There ya go.

 

[SC shooter]

Frankly, the idea that they want to hold the VICTIM of a crime, (theft of their firearm), criminally liable for the misuse of that stolen property is really just nuts!

By their way of thinking it seems to me if I had a set of golf clubs and someone broke in and stole them then went on and used those clubs to win the Masters Golf Tournament, I should get a green jacket too.