Proposed VA law will punish the victims of crime

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I support 2A but also support this law. People should be legally responsible for their weapons if they give them to others or leave them lying around. No brainer.

Aside from the gun part, the whole locked vehicle = laying around speaks volumes about our nation. There once was a time people left tons of tapes/cds scattered around unlocked cars and no one stole them.

You're nuts. I grew up driving in the 90s and people would have their CD books stolen all the time if left out in plain sight. That's why we always stuffed them under the seat. People would steal the nice aftermarket radios too - that's why mine had a detachable face plate that I would lock up in the glove box. If you were a rich brat, your parents bought you the fancy aftermarket radio where the motorized faceplate would reverse itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this law can be used to jail as many gun nutters as possible. I’m gleeful at the thought of them going to prison and getting sodomized in the shower every day because just had to have their penile substitute on display for the world to see. Better pack your soap-on-a-rope, ammosexuals! Big Bubba is waiting for you in the shower.

Reading is hard, gun owner does not go to jail. They receive a fine, which can be arbitrarily accessed, since they would be unable to prove a negative, gun was not stored in the open.

Gun owners should be responsible, but Virginia CHP holders are a law abiding group. So running into the post office or some other “sensitive” place requires them to leave their weapons somewhere (their car). Should be far less sensitive places to remove their need to leave a gun in a car.

If you leave your gun unsecured

in a car you are not a law abiding citizen. It’s that simple.

What if the gun is locked inside a box/safe/container inside the car?

Because there ARE places that do not permit people who are otherwise carrying a gun legally (people with permits) to carry a gun inside. If people are required by law not to carry a gun in these places, then what are they supposed to do with their gun if they also cannot leave it in their car. That seems like a Catch-22 situation.

Is is creating situations like that the *intent* of the law? Because that doesn’t seem like legislating in good faith.

Leave it at home? Why do you need it with you to run errands?

So is that the intent of the law? To intimidate/inconvenience people with legally obtained permits to catty a gun into not carrying them?

Do you think that’s a wise mindset for legislators to frame proposed laws around? Because it seems punitive and vindictive to me.

What do you think?

I think the legislature should do everything possible to discourage people from carrying guns.

They could pass a law doing just that. But they don’t.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this law can be used to jail as many gun nutters as possible. I’m gleeful at the thought of them going to prison and getting sodomized in the shower every day because just had to have their penile substitute on display for the world to see. Better pack your soap-on-a-rope, ammosexuals! Big Bubba is waiting for you in the shower.

Reading is hard, gun owner does not go to jail. They receive a fine, which can be arbitrarily accessed, since they would be unable to prove a negative, gun was not stored in the open.

Gun owners should be responsible, but Virginia CHP holders are a law abiding group. So running into the post office or some other “sensitive” place requires them to leave their weapons somewhere (their car). Should be far less sensitive places to remove their need to leave a gun in a car.

If you leave your gun unsecured

in a car you are not a law abiding citizen. It’s that simple.

What if the gun is locked inside a box/safe/container inside the car?

Because there ARE places that do not permit people who are otherwise carrying a gun legally (people with permits) to carry a gun inside. If people are required by law not to carry a gun in these places, then what are they supposed to do with their gun if they also cannot leave it in their car. That seems like a Catch-22 situation.

Is is creating situations like that the *intent* of the law? Because that doesn’t seem like legislating in good faith.

Leave it at home? Why do you need it with you to run errands?

So is that the intent of the law? To intimidate/inconvenience people with legally obtained permits to catty a gun into not carrying them?

Do you think that’s a wise mindset for legislators to frame proposed laws around? Because it seems punitive and vindictive to me.

What do you think?

I think the legislature should do everything possible to discourage people from carrying guns.

They could pass a law doing just that. But they

Why?

This would be why - https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:VA democratic lawmakers pushing a bill that would fine a person if their gun was stolen while in “plain view”.

https://theautowire.com/2024/02/06/virginia-bill-punishes-gun-theft-victims/#google_vignette

Proposed VA law will punish irresponsible gun owners who do not secure their guns like any reasonable and responsible gun owner should do and who fuel gun crime with their irresponsible behavior.

OP I rewrote your title making it accurate. you are welcome

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

I am so relieved. I was worried that cars could be used to kill people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

If you want a car (bike, motorbike, et al) then be a responsible owner.

But allowing your meansof transportation to be stolen and therefore enable a criminal to have a means of transportation, that makes you complicit in the crimes they commit with the means of transportation you allowed them to steal. Were it not for your failing to prevent that car from being stolen, they would t have been able to commit whatever crime they committed while using it. You are party responsible too.

Be a responsible vehicle owner. Prevent your car from being stolen. Otherwise, you should be charged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

I am so relieved. I was worried that cars could be used to kill people.

Only about 40,000 people a year and climbing! Maybe I should get a concealed carry Suburban...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

I am so relieved. I was worried that cars could be used to kill people.

Only about 40,000 people a year and climbing! Maybe I should get a concealed carry Suburban...

Have any kind of vehicle you want. Just be responsible and don’t allow it to be stolen.

Because if it is, and gets used in a crime, you should be held criminally responsible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would go further and penalize any gun owner whose gun is stolen when it wasn’t locked up.

My gun is locked up in my house or car.

Anyone who steals my gun is stealing a gun that was locked up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

I am so relieved. I was worried that cars could be used to kill people.

Only about 40,000 people a year and climbing! Maybe I should get a concealed carry Suburban...

Have any kind of vehicle you want. Just be responsible and don’t allow it to be stolen.

Because if it is, and gets used in a crime, you should be held criminally responsible.

Why am I responsible for a thief breaking the law and stealing my gun?

What is the charge for being a victim of theft?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

I am so relieved. I was worried that cars could be used to kill people.

Only about 40,000 people a year and climbing! Maybe I should get a concealed carry Suburban...

Have any kind of vehicle you want. Just be responsible and don’t allow it to be stolen.

Because if it is, and gets used in a crime, you should be held criminally responsible.

Why am I responsible for a thief breaking the law and stealing my gun?

What is the charge for being a victim of theft?

Because the majority don't want guns, but the are a protected right. Therefore, the state is going to regulate them to then extent the courts will let them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

A gun is a device designed to propel a projectile using pressure or explosive force. It is not designed specifically nor is it mandatory to propel the projectile at another person.

Is a knife designed to stab/kill? Is a rope designed to strangulate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

I am so relieved. I was worried that cars could be used to kill people.

Only about 40,000 people a year and climbing! Maybe I should get a concealed carry Suburban...

Have any kind of vehicle you want. Just be responsible and don’t allow it to be stolen.

Because if it is, and gets used in a crime, you should be held criminally responsible.

Why am I responsible for a thief breaking the law and stealing my gun?

What is the charge for being a victim of theft?

Because the majority don't want guns, but the are a protected right. Therefore, the state is going to regulate them to then extent the courts will let them

There are more households in the US with at least one gun than there are with no guns.

You are an urban bubble dweller and think you’re in the majority. You aren’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in strict liability for gun owners. If your gun is used to commit a crime or unintentionally shoot someone, the owner is liable, period.

So do I. If your stolen car is used to commit a crime, you are liable.

This is a very good idea as well. Most vehicles used in carjackings are stolen vehicles themselves. Not too mention robberies and drive by shootings too.

If your car is stolen and is later used to commit a crime, you should definitely be held responsible for it. Absolutely.

A car, a bike, a motorbike are means of transportation. A gun is a weapon designed to kill. A gun owner should be held responsible if the gun is not secured. Think of all the idiots who keep a loaded gun in the car, purse and so on around young kids. Toddlers would not shoot themselves or their siblings (or even parents) if the guns were not left around loaded by irresponsible owners. If you want a gun, be a responsible gun owner.

A gun is a device designed to propel a projectile using pressure or explosive force. It is not designed specifically nor is it mandatory to propel the projectile at another person.

Is a knife designed to stab/kill? Is a rope designed to strangulate?

We need common sense rope control!