Are you responsible?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Jailed or convicted? Enquiring minds want to know.

[onlinebiker]

Ok... Now I get it....
The anti-gun butt- brothers think everything is a fucking gun thread.

Typical cunt drippage....
.



....

When I am home - all my vehicles are inside garages. I do not remove the keys from the ignition.

Why?

None of them are actually worth that much - and my thought is - anybody desperate enough to risk jail to steal one of my cars is probably desperate - or crazy enough - to fight for, or even kill for the keys.

I' m not willling to die for, or kill someone over a car.

And before you bleat - "well call the POLICE" - response time here is a half hour at best.


In public - I do remove the key - and lock tthe doors. Except the convertible.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Well, you are pretty much a one-trick pony. And I'm not anti-gun, I'm anti-gun nut. Sorry if that ruffles your feathers.

[Yonadav]

My initial gut response to this was no. But then I started thinking about the possibility that I might be partly responsible for my car being stolen. For example, if I left the keys in the ignition while I went into the grocery store, I would immediately think that it was my fault when I came out and discovered that my car is gone. But that doesn't mean that it is entirely my fault. After all, a person doesn't have a right to steal my car just because I made it easy for them. If I found out that they killed someone with my car, I would be kicking the crap out of myself for leaving the keys in the ignition. But would I have some sort of criminal liability? Was I criminally negligent? No, I don't think so. That would open up a huge can of worms.  We could become liable for no end of crazy things.

One certain industry doesn't like taking responsibility. But, Yes it would be a blunder to leave your keys in your car. But, tons of vehicles today have better anti theft technology and even GPS tracking.

But just because the criminal is ultimately responsible, does not mean  a 5 year old driving is legal. It does not mean drunk driving is legal. And nobody can drive a Monster truck 4 lanes wide,  or army tank on a public road.

And over time cars have gotten better. They have seat belts and air bags now. The trend should be to electric to help stop global warming.

Laws have to change with changing technology. Just like the internet would not work if we stuck with protecting rotary phone manufacturers.

WTF are you going on about? You're a wind up toy that spouts gibberish every time your string is pulled. I'm starting to think that there might be a profitable franchise in marketing talking Brian Dolls as My Little Libtard. When someone says something to it, it starts spewing some random shit that is vaguely related to some of the words that were said to it.

[Brian37]

Well, you are pretty much a one-trick pony. And I'm not anti-gun, I'm anti-gun nut. Sorry if that ruffles your feathers.

 To quote the Columbian drug lord in Scarface, "I like you Tony, there is no lying in you."

BINGO.... I really wish more Americans would stop screaming about rights, because nobody is trying to deny rights. It is about prevention. They cannot argue, "Just keep them out of the wrong hands" then shit their pants when we agree we should keep them out of the wrong hands.

I don't think disturbed teens who shoot up schools should have guns.

I don't think racist assholes who shoot up churches  or Mosques or Synagogues  should have guns.

I don't think someone who is pissed off because they got fired, go into work and murder their co workers should have guns.

I don't think domestic abusers should have guns.

I don't think mentally ill people should have guns.

I don't think anyone for that matter, needs banana clips or spray weapons. <--- None of which is calling for a 100% ban.  Even the inventor of the AR-15 said he never intended it for civilian use.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ But unfortunately some have been needlessly scared shitless by one industry and it's lobby.

But as long as firearms are made like candy and handed out like candy, the events I listed above will continue.

[onlinebiker]

Well, you are pretty much a one-trick pony. And I'm not anti-gun, I'm anti-gun nut. Sorry if that ruffles your feathers.

I looked. I started 1 thread that was an open gun debate.

1 two part thread about deer hunting. And one thread about my new deer rifle.


How many anti gun threads between you and your poet butt- buddy?


And I don' t jump on your other threads and try to make it about MY issues -- that' s your bailywick -- as you' ve shown here.


Edit to add -  both of ya.

[Brian37]

One certain industry doesn't like taking responsibility. But, Yes it would be a blunder to leave your keys in your car. But, tons of vehicles today have better anti theft technology and even GPS tracking.

But just because the criminal is ultimately responsible, does not mean  a 5 year old driving is legal. It does not mean drunk driving is legal. And nobody can drive a Monster truck 4 lanes wide,  or army tank on a public road.

And over time cars have gotten better. They have seat belts and air bags now. The trend should be to electric to help stop global warming.

Laws have to change with changing technology. Just like the internet would not work if we stuck with protecting rotary phone manufacturers.

WTF are you going on about? You're a wind up toy that spouts gibberish every time your string is pulled. I'm starting to think that there might be a profitable franchise in marketing talking Brian Dolls as My Little Libtard. When someone says something to it, it starts spewing some random shit that is vaguely related to some of the words that were said to it.

i am not stupid. Gun rights advocates use this argument all the time. I was born at night, just not last night. 

I see the same tactic with just on religion itself too. 

Someone theist come in, try to argue science, then start a separate thread about their holy book, then flip out when I call them out on it.

This compartmentalizing is just a way for someone, on a given position to convince themselves they are right. OLB will somewhere else, if he hasn't already, use this same argument of "responsibility" in another gun thread, and I am sure this isn't the only website he hangs out at. 

He wants to make an excuse for himself to not face our gun violence epidemic just like car Companies accused Nadar of being anti car.

"Don't blame responsible car owners" is what he was fishing for in the title seeking people to tell him what he wanted to hear. When even cars do in reality have problems, and even with cars, no matter who uses them, have laws regulating that.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This is just Old Loud and Belligerent trying to be clever, which is obviously not a native skill for him.

[Pat Mustard]

If someone steals your car - and runs over someone and kills them - are you civilly or criminally liable?

Should you be?

Where I come from I would be neither criminally nor civilly liable. Because the hypothetica gouger stole my car I would in fact be due compensation for the damage.

My insurance premium would go up though.

[Brian37]

He ultimately wants to convince himself that if his version of "responsibility" with cars in his example works, why wouldn't it work with guns? The problem isn't "responsibility". The problem with both guns and cars, is that marketing sells humans a sense of entitlement, and that, far too often can lead people, with both guns and cars to not take those products seriously. But the difference between a gun and a car, is that if you leave your keys in your car and it gets stolen, while still a lapse in judgment, a car cannot be taken 32 stories up into a hotel to murder 52 music concert goers.