First Prev
of 2
Next Last
You Damn Fool

Holly Grove, AR

#1 Jan 31, 2013
Another even more powerful approach is to recognize that the problem isn't guns per se, but gun violence. Thus, instead of taxing guns, we should tax gun violence. Basically, this is the same as saying that we should make gun owners liable for any damage their guns do. Not only would this discourage some people from buying guns, it would lead those who do keep guns to be more careful with how they're stored. Indeed, greater care would surely have kept Adam Lanza out of his mother's cache. The problem though, is that Nancy Lanza is neither with us to pay the damages her gun caused, nor could she afford to pay for the enormous damage her gun wrought in Newtown. And so the only way this solution works is if guns required mandatory liability insurance, much as we force car owners to buy insurance for the damage their machines wreak.
You Damn Dumbass

Ballwin, MO

#2 Feb 1, 2013
How many people are killed in Chicago with a gun everyday? Is it a mentally deranged Adam Lanza that is doing the shooting or just another Urban rat with no respect for life? Do you think these rats will give a damn if they have liability insurance when they go to bust a cap in someone's ass. There are a lot more urban rats killing a lot more people in this country than there are Adam Lanzas and Dylan Klebolds. You've said a lot of stupid things on this board, but that just might be the supidest.
You Damn Fool

Holly Grove, AR

#3 Feb 4, 2013
You Damn Dumbass wrote:
How many people are killed in Chicago with a gun everyday? Is it a mentally deranged Adam Lanza that is doing the shooting or just another Urban rat with no respect for life? Do you think these rats will give a damn if they have liability insurance when they go to bust a cap in someone's ass. There are a lot more urban rats killing a lot more people in this country than there are Adam Lanzas and Dylan Klebolds. You've said a lot of stupid things on this board, but that just might be the supidest.
No, its not. Somebody has to be libel and whoever bought that gun new would be if it was stolen from them, if not the last LEGAL purchaser would be libel. How many guns in Chicago used in violence were legaly purchased? Its the same thinking as being a responsible parent, you bring it into the world, you keep it in a responsible manner. Purchasing a gun with a mentally deranged adult in the house is how responsible? It was totally legal but how smart was it?
You Damn Dumbass

Ballwin, MO

#4 Feb 4, 2013
So someone legally purchases a gun, the gun is stolen from them by a criminal who then shoots someone with the stolen gun. Your solution is to sue the person who's gun was stolen? What a dumbass! Don't you have something better to do?
maybe

Little Rock, AR

#5 Feb 4, 2013
The Law needs to put people in jail that uses a gun in a crime no if ands or butts.Don't let the bad guys pay their way out of trouble.
You Damn Fool

Holly Grove, AR

#6 Feb 5, 2013
You Damn Dumbass wrote:
So someone legally purchases a gun, the gun is stolen from them by a criminal who then shoots someone with the stolen gun. Your solution is to sue the person who's gun was stolen? What a dumbass! Don't you have something better to do?
The fact the gun was stolen from that person show me they werent responsible enough to own the gun. How stupid is that?
number9

Oklahoma City, OK

#7 Feb 5, 2013
You Damn Fool wrote:
<quoted text>The fact the gun was stolen from that person show me they werent responsible enough to own the gun. How stupid is that?
You never answered the question: what criteria defines "responsible storage"?
Realist

Little Rock, AR

#8 Feb 5, 2013
You Damn Fool wrote:
<quoted text>The fact the gun was stolen from that person show me they werent responsible enough to own the gun. How stupid is that?
Guess we need to find some new Secret Service guys that are responsible.

http://www.npr.org/2012/09/04/160528529/secre...
number9

Oklahoma City, OK

#9 Feb 5, 2013
Realist wrote:
<quoted text>Guess we need to find some new Secret Service guys that are responsible.

http://www.npr.org/2012/09/04/160528529/secre...
Good one!
You Damn Fool

Holly Grove, AR

#10 Feb 6, 2013
I dont care how really just make sure it doesnt get into wrong hands after you buy it. If it ever will you would be held responsible.
number9

Oklahoma City, OK

#11 Feb 6, 2013
You Damn Fool wrote:
I dont care how really just make sure it doesnt get into wrong hands after you buy it. If it ever will you would be held responsible.
There's already laws against breaking n entering and theft etc. what if I buy a safe and the safe is broken into?
Realist

Oklahoma City, OK

#12 Feb 6, 2013
You Damn Fool wrote:
I dont care how really just make sure it doesnt get into wrong hands after you buy it. If it ever will you would be held responsible.
Should we also extend your liability policy to other things that can be dangerous when stolen such as cars and knives? I'm just trying to get a handle on how far you think we should take this.
You Damn Fool

Holly Grove, AR

#13 Feb 6, 2013
Realist wrote:
<quoted text>
Should we also extend your liability policy to other things that can be dangerous when stolen such as cars and knives? I'm just trying to get a handle on how far you think we should take this.
Before you start using the "Knife attack in China" BS no one died there as compaired to Sandyhook where preschool children were shot to pieces. Big difference there.
Ruthie Foster

Ballwin, MO

#14 Feb 6, 2013
Hey fool. How bout we enforce criminal laws that are already on the books before we start denying constitutonal rights to law abiding citizens.
Realist

North Little Rock, AR

#15 Feb 6, 2013
You Damn Fool wrote:
<quoted text>Before you start using the "Knife attack in China" BS no one died there as compaired to Sandyhook where preschool children were shot to pieces. Big difference there.
I didn't mention any knife attack. People get killed with them every day same as cars and guns.

Now I'll ask you again..... How far do you want to take this? What is the appropriate level of danger that is tolerable for an item so that it doesn't require liability after theft?
Roberta Flack

Ballwin, MO

#16 Feb 7, 2013
Realist wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't mention any knife attack. People get killed with them every day same as cars and guns.
Now I'll ask you again..... How far do you want to take this? What is the appropriate level of danger that is tolerable for an item so that it doesn't require liability after theft?
He's killing me softly with his stupidity. I hope he's carrying liability insurance.
You Damn Fool

Holly Grove, AR

#17 Feb 7, 2013
I dont care, this is an answer that should be followed up on. Anyone could purchase and own a gun under what I am proposing just if that gun is used for an act of violence the person who bought it should pay for the cost of the damage caused by not being a responsible gun owner. Make sure you give out a recipt when you sell it and keep up with it. How hard is that? Insurance should be purchased just in case, if you can afford the gun you should be able to afford the insurance.
You Damn Fool

Holly Grove, AR

#18 Feb 7, 2013
Most of yall only purchase a gun looking to shoot something or somebody dead anyway so, this is just part of the upkeep. Can you use a gun to cut plastic wrap or store orange juice in like a knife or a bottle? No? What other use is there for them?
number9

Oklahoma City, OK

#19 Feb 7, 2013
Here's an idea, since you think insurance is such a cure - people who think they might get shot take out an insurance plan on themselves in case of injury due to firearm. That way the law abiding gun owner is not inconvenienced, and the insurance companies can make even more money than they already do.
You Damn Fool

Holly Grove, AR

#20 Feb 7, 2013
number9 wrote:
Here's an idea, since you think insurance is such a cure - people who think they might get shot take out an insurance plan on themselves in case of injury due to firearm. That way the law abiding gun owner is not inconvenienced, and the insurance companies can make even more money than they already do.
Why? They arent the ones who are creating the risk. Thats not being a responsible gun owner.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Hunter Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Did you vote today? (Jun '10) 2 hr Even Better Quest... 30,601
Maid 5 hr JLO 3
charter schools 6 hr whadafuq 10
Is Cursive Making a Comeback in AR Schools? 9 hr whadafuq 41
where miranda at now 11 hr fyi 4
mechanic works in wynne? 12 hr clu3less 16
Brinkley school rumors 17 hr guest 6

Flood Warning for Woodruff County was issued at February 27 at 10:20AM CST

Hunter Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Hunter People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 5:36 pm PST

Yahoo! Sports 5:36PM
Falcons release veteran running back Steven Jackson
Bleacher Report 8:55 PM
St. Louis Rams: 5 Best Options to Replace Joe Barksdale This Offseason
Bleacher Report 4:00 AM
Why the Browns Need to Stay Far Away from Bradford
NFL 7:00 AM
Weinke makes a Luck-Bradford collegiate comparison
Bleacher Report 9:58 AM
Vince Young Registered at NFL Vet Combine