SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!!
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: nihil who wrote (41105)6/20/1999 12:44:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte  Read Replies (1) of 108807
 
>But if I were gun czar of the United States I would 1 insist on mandatory sentences and big fines (10 per cent of
wealth or more) for violations of the gun laws. I would 2require manufacturers to post huge bonds to guarantee
damages in the case of wrongful sale or distribution. 3 All convicted criminals (including juveniles) would be
barred from owning or possessing or shooting guns. 4 All owners would be required to have safety training and
use automatic safety devices that could only be unlocked by registered range officials or rangers for hunting.
5 Hunting violations (like Ish's friend's sawed off 10 gauge pistol) would mean a lifetime ban on gun ownership
or use.<

(numbers inserted for my convenience)

1) Agree in principle - but the fine should be equitable. No percentages - flat amounts. A fine as a percentage of wealth is imho a civil rights violation. The entire concept of "deep pockets" litigation is corrupt.
2) No. The manufacturer's liability ends with making a reliable product. Irregularities in distribution should be the distributors' issue. If a gun merchant somewhere is being remiss - it strikes me as unfair to hold the manufacturer responsible. The only possible argument for this is punitive - a way to say-without-saying that guns are bad.
3) Agreed. With a codicil: If the guns are legally owned - they should be held in trust for the convict's relatives and/or designated beneficiaries.
4) Disagree. This disables the gun's most noble purpose - defense of self and home against all comers. Furthermore it makes it impossible to properly maintain a gun or have a gunsmith work on it. The very utility of an owned or caried gun hinges on its ability to function.
5) Too draconian. Confiscate the offending weapon - fine or jail - but removing the owner's rights to his other guns is once again revealing of a definite punitive agenda.

I shoot. I like to shoot. I don't want to put up with the crap that comes hand-in-hand with military affiliation. I restrict my targets to pieces of paper or the occasional can of Diet Pepsi. But I use real bullets from real guns at a good kilometer per second. And I get antsy when folks try to tell me that guns are bad. They aren't. Crime is bad. Let's work on crime and stop this underhanded campaign to demonize a class of inanimate objects.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News