ak56
Campaign Veteran
10 feet? I thought it was SIX feet. Where'd I leave that sledgehammer and shovel? This is going to ruin my whole weekend.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Stolen XD9..be on the lookout please
- Thread starter skopro
- Start date
10 feet? I thought it was SIX feet. Where'd I leave that sledgehammer and shovel? This is going to ruin my whole weekend.
Ok that goes to show you , its always better to talk to someone that knows what their talking about. I spoke with my wife and she says that what we have besides our renters is something called Personal Articles policy, its only $40(minimum premium) per year and yes it covers your things outside the house. So for example, I have a nice camera that I use when I go hiking. If I were to drop it or lose it in the mountains it would be covered.
mobiushky
Regular Member
Are you then implying that taking the time to secure the handgun in the trunk is NOT taking any personal responsibility? The way I see it, there are obviously levels of securing. Taking no responsibility at all would be leaving the gun fully loaded on the seat and car unlocked in the driveway with the windows down. Taking the time put the gun out of sight and locking the doors is the next step. Putting it in a trunk and putting your car in the garage is a relatively reasonable step to secure it. Having a safe is a good idea if you can afford it, but you might want watch the Defcon-19 video on how easy it is to break into a safe in seconds if you think it's that hard. I mean you could go to the extreme and have it in a safe inside a safe and have that safe tied to the concrete of your drive way, but that might make it tough to drive the car.
All I'm saying is, the guy did exercise a pretty reasonable amount of responsibility. IOW, a reasonable person should expect that a locked vehicle in their own garage should be safe. I know it's not, but a reasonable person has that right to assume it should be. It's probably smart to have a safe in your car, but it's not the defining factor that suddenly concludes with skopro being irresponsible.
twoskinsonemanns
Regular Member
Inside a locked car, that was inside a garage...
This guy deserves no guilt whatsoever.
SteveH2210
Regular Member
Taking something from a vehicle is First Degree Trespassing, which is a felony. Also, it could be felony theft based on the value of the gun.
cloudcroft
Campaign Veteran
[deleted]
Last edited:
so what would you shoulda/coulda/woulda done in this situation?
i know, a dissasembled pistol, locked in a biometric safe locked in a larger safe stuck inside a secured vault buried under the house with a locking nuclear blast door to ensure your pistol isnt stolen. Is that effective for your personal view of what reasonable responsibility should be?
or is it enough to say that he placed his pistol in the locked trunk of his locked car in a locked garage?
He made his choice to secure it as best he could, no need to tell him that he is wrong for not doing what you think he should have done.
twoskinsonemanns
Regular Member
I don't care if he left it on his dinning room table or the dash of his car. It may not be smart financially, but attributing any part of the blame, for the evil act of theft, to the victim is wrong.
mobiushky
Regular Member
This is my biggest issue with the "WE have to have SOME responsibility" line. This might be a long one, so hang on. Lets take a brief look at how the legal system deals with laws. With few exceptions, the law is generally applied with the criteria of what's called the "reasonable person" test. The idea is this, what would a reasonable person do or believe given the circumstances. In cases of self defense, the test is whether a reasonable person would have felt the need to use lethal force under the circumstances of the event. We may argue about the laws, but the "reasonable person" test is a fact. That test is applied to nearly all laws and is also used in civil disputes etc. So, as regards burglary, that test applies to both the criminal and the victim. Would a reasonable person believe that the vehicle was not theirs and that the intent was that someone shouldn't take things from inside. I used to live in a small community that was a "support" town if you will to a large ski resort. Not in CO btw. Anyway, they had a rash of burglaries from cars in the area. Being a small town, the people usually felt pretty safe and often you'd see people (during the stupidly cold winters) leaving their cars running with doors unlocked in the parking lots when they would run into the grocery store. For several years there was never a problem. Then one year there was a rash of thefts from unlocked cars. The town council was asked to try to do something to stop the spree. Do you know what they responded with? BTW, I'm really not making this up. The town council decided to inform the people that if they were robbed and they had left their cars unlocked, it was not the fault of the thieves. They told the town that it was the owner's fault for leaving the car unlocked and that they would not pursue the crime if the doors were unlocked.
Now, let's all be honest, it's just plain stupid to leave your car unlocked. Anywhere. For any length of time. We all know that. But in this case, the town decided to ignore the actual law (burglary) and blame the people instead of the criminals. There is a line that was laid down that stated that you have a right to reasonably assume that your property is your own and should not be victimized. The law makes it illegal to take what is not yours. BUT, the town decided to move that line to allow a violation of the law to try to force people to do something. In essence the town told the citizens that you do not have the right to assume that your property is safe and that criminals have the right to take your property under certain circumstances. Once that line is moved, it will never be moved back. In that town, criminals now know that unlocked cars are fair game.
So back to our case. What bugs me here is the attempt to move the line even further. Now it's no longer enough to lock your car. What we're saying now is that a locked vehicle inside private property is now fair game because it's the owners fault for not putting his gun in a safe also. It's moving the line even further. It's BS. Sorry but it is. You as a citizen have the right to assume that your property is "sacred" of you will. That your house is your castle. That your vehicle belongs to you and that it should not be touched in any way by criminals. The moment the criminal crosses that boundary, 100% of the responsibility falls squarely on their shoulders. They have violated the law and there is no excuse that shunts any responsibility for that action to the property owner. Further, if that gun were to be used in the commission of a crime, the legal owner of that gun is 100% absolved of any responsibility because they are not the one who committed the crime. It is utterly ridiculous to even insinuate that a person who has taken what should be well regarded as reasonable care has any level of responsibility for these actions. The fault lies entirely on the perpetrator of the action. I will go so far as to say that in fact even if the gun is left out in the open in an unlocked car, the fault STILL lies 100% on the criminal. Now of course that's not smart and I would never deem to recommend that we start leaving our guns out in the open like that. But the absolute fact is that if ain't yours DON'T TOUCH IT! The problem is we have allowed that line to be moved ever so subtly away from where it started. And now we are contemplating moving it further. That should bother more people.
Now lest I get flamed by a bunch of safety nazi's, I in no way am trying to say that we should be careless with our firearms. In fact, quite the opposite. We should take all possible care in every way we can. If that means a safe, or car locks, or handcuffs or what ever we should take those steps when we can. Locking a handgun in the trunk of a car inside a garage is a reasonable amount of care. My personal feeling is that I don't want to leave a gun in a car that I'm not physically sitting in if at all possible. But sometimes I might have to for unknown reasons. I have the right to regard my car as my property and the moment a criminal violates that boundary, it's ALL on them. I will feel no guilt at all. I will feel angry. I will have possibly some rage issues. I will feel loss that I don't have my gun. But I will NOT feel guilty. It is entirely the scum's fault. As it should be.
Last edited:
cloudcroft
Campaign Veteran
[deleted]
Last edited:
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
What!?! A firearm was returned to someone in MD!?!
That puts a strain on my credulity it is quite unable to withstand. Oh, I'm afraid we'll have to see documentation on this one. With notarized attestations by the thief, the victim, the judge who had to swallow bile to order it, and the cop who had to take sedatives to follow the court order. Yes, yes. Documentation please.
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
+1
What they're really doing is blaming. Assigning causation in order to blame. "You're responsible! You caused this! Now, cops and victims are gonna die! Because of you!!" Of course, as you've noted, this just moves the line once it becomes accepted. And, of course, this sort of thing is readily accepted by those who already use responsibility to blame.
Last edited:
twoskinsonemanns
Regular Member
As cloud indicated you just don't know how the world works. You've got blinders on because you have the attitude of a producer. What you don't realize is that those who can't or won't produce have the right to take from the producers in the world. A right justified by their need.
What!?! A firearm was returned to someone in MD!?!
That puts a strain on my credulity it is quite unable to withstand. Oh, I'm afraid we'll have to see documentation on this one. With notarized attestations by the thief, the victim, the judge who had to swallow bile to order it, and the cop who had to take sedatives to follow the court order. Yes, yes. Documentation please.
No documentation. Not even first hand information. He's just a buddy of mine that has a C&R license. He was ranting for quite a while because the cops called him to tell him they had the firearm but it still took like a year and half after that call to get it back. He was quite pissed. But in fairness they said they had to keep until until the case against the BG was over.
twoskinsonemanns
Regular Member
More evil than not not taking responsibility for one's own actions, is asking someone else to take responsibility for yours.
mobiushky
Regular Member
Bye. But before you go, who are you even talking to? The OP isn't even in the thread anymore because he's being attacked for a reasonable action. If you talking to me, I don't leave my gun in the trunk. What's the point of a gun in a trunk? Wait Mr. robber, I need to get my gun our of my trunk. It takes a minute cause I have to do the combination and they I have to get the key to unlock the handcuffs I put on it. My gun is on me. Period. At home. In the car. Doesn't matter. I'm wearing it. I don't see the point to being sure that the inside of a safe has access to a gun to protect itself. Where is it now? Guess. If you really want to insult the OP, why not spend more time on the angle that he left his gun in the car while he was home instead of on his hip? Wouldn't that be a more effective approach for blind insults?
Your problem is your are self centric. You don't seem to be able to think beyond the confines of you. Do you know how many times I've had my car broken into since I started driving 25 years ago? Zero. Not one time. See I generally live in places with very low crime rates. In fact, it's usually a thing I check before I move. Which means, the odds of suffering a break in are incredibly low to begin. So for my personal situation, I would have no problem putting my gun in a trunk if the need were there (even though it doesn't) because I don't personally live in a bad part of town. For others, more protection or safety is warranted. But that doesn't seem to occur to you.
The next thing can't seem to grasp is that I was not even talking about the probability of whether the gun could be stolen. I was talking about you calling the OP irresponsible for his actions. I don't care how much you insult or huff and puff. The moment a criminal crosses that boundary into your rights, it his fault. End of discussion. Now if you want to talk about intelligent ways to protect your firearms that's a different subject. If you are going to call someone irresponsible for their actions, then you need to back that up. The law would render the OP not at fault because he proceeded with reasonable caution. But you want to move the bar and allow the criminals access to our cars and our private property. So absolve the criminal of the crime because the gun owner didn't meet your standards. The fault is on the criminal even though you try with tortured logic to absolve them. Now what I think you intend to say is that it's smart as a property owner to protect both your property and your investment and the small cost of locks vs the cost of a gun is worth it to protect your investment. That I agree with.
What kind of idiotic threat is "let me know where you live..." Are you seriously threatening a known to be armed person with theft of property? I mean I know it was in jest. But still. What makes you think that your safe is the bomb if someone who knew you had a gun in there decided to get it? Cause honestly, based on the OP, this seems like a person who knew he had the gun and where it was. IE a targeted attack if you will. So, are you that confident in your rig that it can 100% sustain a targeted attack? IF so, great. Happy for you. But I think you might find it's not as much a given as you think.
mobiushky
Regular Member
Still fighting over this........... Oh God
I got nothin else to do....:lol:
Wolfstanus
Regular Member
skopro
Regular Member
I guess i should add that i live in a gated community, so its not easy to get in. You know some of us are on such tight budgets that its very difficult to get a locked box. The reason i keep it in my trunk is because i don't want to be unarmed, i don't have a ccw and i can't take it into the mall, incase you watched the news i work at the Aurora mall, yup the one with the movie theatre. Also a couple weeks ago one of our stores (i work for ATT) got robbed at gun point. I might not be able to carry it with me everywhere,but at least i have it close. I'm a law abiding citizen and followed laws that prohibit me from carrying in certain areas, i guess i should have just ignored the laws and carried huh?! I'm very upset that it got taken, i do feel responsible and funds permitting would have taken even more precautions in securing it,but like i said my budget is extremity tight. This incident has got me thinking about switching to a job that will make things easier financially on me, on my days off i teach dance to make extra money, but its only one hour. Not all of us are doing great in these times.