The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 21, 2017, 10:46 AM   #51
jmorris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2006
Posts: 3,072
Quote:
However I'm asking more specifically if you put the shotgun that's at your bedside in the safe every morning?
Mine stays there. The others on display stay where they are too as does the 4 wheeler shot gun. I don't lock up my TV's when I go to work and one of them is worth more than a beater shotgun, I suppose a pretty nice one too.
jmorris is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 03:16 PM   #52
Berserker
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2015
Location: WI & UP
Posts: 284
Good point. I got tools, I don't luck them up. TV was 1k new, 400 maybe now. 42" is small now. I got cheap laptop, but it is not locked

I have more than one gun, so not with me at all times.
Berserker is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 04:04 PM   #53
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,048
Quote:
Most of us are lucky enough to own more than one gun. I am not forced to use a small concealable gun around the house.
My primary carry gun is a Taurus 99, so it's a full size service pistol.

Even if I had something smaller on me instead I wouldn't bother getting something bigger out and changing holsters at home.

I don't like to leave a bunch of loaded guns laying around so I find the on me or next to me strategy to be the most comfortable from a piece of mind stand point..

I prefer pistols for home defense and always image the worse possible "kick the door in" type scenario where I won't have time to go fetch something that I don't already have on me.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 08:40 PM   #54
Berserker
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2015
Location: WI & UP
Posts: 284
I prefer to carry a gun I can conceal, or just light outside of the house. Something bigger around house. As do 99% of gun owners that have a carry permit and actually carry it.
Berserker is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 10:08 AM   #55
TailGator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,639
Quote:
As do 99% of gun owners that have a carry permit and actually carry it.
If you are saying that 99% of people with concealed weapons permits have different pistols for carry and for home defense, I have to doubt your statement. I imagine that there are quite a larger proportion who use the same pistol for both purposes.
TailGator is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 08:43 PM   #56
Berserker
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2015
Location: WI & UP
Posts: 284
99 may be high. But a lot of people own more than one handgun.


Anyone, that is into guns, and can afford it, has big hand gun and little handgun



Anyone who says I carry a gun all the time, but only have one, is in the minority.

I find that statement odd. I carry a gun. The gun 8 carry on me, is not the one I would choose for around house.

I am lucky, good job. I am not limited to using a pocket gun in the house.

I really have to wonder how many people that join a gun forum only have 1 handgun. Though I know lots of guys into hunting rifles. Many don't have permit.
Berserker is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 09:38 PM   #57
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,048
Do you know any women carriers? I know a few and have met many others and while I personally don't recommend off body carry purse carry is actually quite popular with ladies.

Really easy to carry just 1 gun when you carry it around in a glorified bag.
.. again I really don't recommend off body carry but it's popular method none the less.

I actually prescribe to the "fear the man with one gun" theory.
As the saying goes on.. "they probably know how to use it".
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 08:19 AM   #58
FAS1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 9, 2010
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 470
Quote:
99 may be high. But a lot of people own more than one handgun.
I think a high percentage keep a dedicated home defense gun that is separate from what they carry. Personally, I have always done that. I keep a full size for HD that is always there and ready, but secured. I carry a subcompact version of the same and always have a pocket gun on me, especially when at home.

At night, the subcompact CCW lays in the bottom of the quick access safe. If I open the safe and grab the primary gun, the CCW is there for my wife to arm herself too.

__________________
Glenn
FAS1 SAFE
FAS1 is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 09:51 AM   #59
TailGator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,639
Quote:
Anyone, that is into guns, and can afford it, has big hand gun and little handgun
I completely agree with your statement, but I added the emphasis because we need to consider that the number of people who consider handguns a hobby is a subset of handgun owners. There are a number of people who own one handgun for defensive purposes. I don't have enough data to even hazard a guess as to the proportion, but it is not rare. We have evidence that the number is significant in the number of times that folks come to boards like these to ask about a pistol that would do double duty.

The context of this discussion is securing firearms not in use. Those of us with multiples need to think about securing them when we are not present, but even those with only one need to think about what risks are present when we are sleeping, occupied with household tasks, in the bathroom, and such. For those folks, a quick-access device may be completely adequate.
TailGator is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 12:08 PM   #60
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,982
I expect those with guns as hobbies have a fairly large floor mounted gun safes or other appropriate means of securing a quantity of firearms. I don't think discussion of this was intended to be discussion of that.

Your home defense weapon needs to be both secure and quickly accessible and that is the quandary this discussion seeks to examine.
Lohman446 is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 01:06 PM   #61
Berserker
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2015
Location: WI & UP
Posts: 284
It is not required by law in many places to secure your firearm, other then for children.

There are plenty of cheap shotguna under beds, so to spesk,I suspect.
Berserker is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 01:17 PM   #62
PlatinumCore16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2017
Location: Colorado
Posts: 416
The law may very well not say anything about securing guns, but there are a good portion of states (last time I did research, I don't have a reference) that do have laws in response to a stolen firearm being used in a crime. Which would suggest that the law would say "Keep your firearm secured" but the law only states "if it's yours and it got used, it's your fault". So if you can prove you put a reasonable attempt to secure it, a jury or judge could say that you did your best to prevent it's theft and you can be released from responsiblity. Is hiding it good enough? Probably not. Is a trigger lock secure enough? Depends on the jury. A quick access safe? I would wager the vast majority would say that is clear evidence of a more than reasonable attempt to secure it. Anything beyond that would be obvious.
PlatinumCore16 is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 01:44 PM   #63
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,584
Didn't the supreme court rule in DC V Heller that guns kept in the home didn't have to be secured because the self defense rule meant the gun had to be in usable condition and easily accessible?

From Justice Antonin Scalia:
"...and prohibiting firearms from being kept functional in the home, the area traditionally in need of protection, violates the Second Amendment."

The entire dissertation can be found here.
ShootistPRS is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 01:45 PM   #64
45_auto
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2011
Location: Southern Louisiana
Posts: 1,399
Anyone know of any actual cases where the owner of a stolen handgun was charged when it was used in a crime?

Loyola Law Professor discusses theft of a gun from an unsecured car in Louisiana here:

Quote:
Loyola law professor Blaine LeCesne weighed in on the question of liability. Could a citizen be found legally responsible in a lawsuit that stemmed from a victim injured by a gun stolen from an unlocked car or a vehicle taken after the keys were left inside?

If the gun is used to intentionally commit a crime, to kill or injure someone, the court will not impose civil liability on the gun owner for the acts of a third person. Again, under the proximate cause doctrine, the actions of the thief would supersede the negligence of the gun owner, cutting off his liability, LeCesne said.

The courts, he said, generally view the shooting another person as unforeseeable act for a lawful gun owner who simply forgot to secure their weapon. "It's unfair and unjust to hold that person responsible," LeCesne said.

But a gun owner could find him or herself in court if the stolen gun is negligently discharged. LeCesne described it as any subsequent use of the gun that injures because of lack of reasonable care: sticky-fingered kids goofing around, someone picking up the weapon and accidently pulling the trigger or a fumbling thief who doesn't know how to use a gun.

The question is whether the gun owner could have reasonably foreseen that the weapon could accidently harm someone if left unsecured. It's similar to leaving a gun lying around in the open. "It's more likely or more foreseeable that that kind of action could happen," LeCesne said.

But many other variables would come into play if the courts attempt to decide legal responsibility. Was the gun left in a place where it was easily accessible to be stolen? Was it in a car in front of the gun owner's house? Was it in a very high crime area or across the street from a school?

In short, if the gun is used negligently, a gun owner may end up in court. But if the gun is used intentionally and criminally, the owner isn't responsible.
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/...er_of_a_s.html

Last edited by 45_auto; May 24, 2017 at 01:51 PM.
45_auto is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 01:54 PM   #65
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,584
There is the fact that the gun was in a home. As long as the home was locked up the gun was inherently locked up as well. There is no room for negligence in that case.

If your car is stolen, locked or not, in a garage or not, are you held responsible if it is stolen and used in a crime or if it is involved in an accident? NO! You are only responsible if you give permission for its use.

You can't be responsible for the criminal acts of another unless you willingly and knowingly give aid before or after the fact.
ShootistPRS is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 03:28 PM   #66
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShootistPRS
Didn't the supreme court rule in DC V Heller that guns kept in the home didn't have to be secured because the self defense rule meant the gun had to be in usable condition and easily accessible?...
The short answer is "no." That's not the issue being addressed in Heller and would have no bearing on a negligence claim based on some unauthorized person getting access to an unsecured gun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 45_auto
Anyone know of any actual cases where the owner of a stolen handgun was charged when it was used in a crime?

Loyola Law Professor discusses theft of a gun from an unsecured car in Louisiana here:...
Which is somewhat inconsistent with what the Montana appellate court said in Estate of Strever v. Cline, 278 Mont. 165 (Mont., 1995) regarding the standard of care with respect to the storage of a firearm (see post 10).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShootistPRS
There is the fact that the gun was in a home. As long as the home was locked up the gun was inherently locked up as well. There is no room for negligence in that case.....
Really? Can you cite some actual law on point, or are you just making stuff up?

Once again, a negligent act which results in the injury or death of another can subject the actor to civil liability to compensate the person who was injured. Negligence in law is basically:
Quote:
A failure to behave with the level of care that someone of ordinary prudence would have exercised under the same circumstances. The behavior usually consists of actions, but can also consist of omissions when there is some duty to act (e.g., a duty to help victims of one's previous conduct).
Negligence is generally a question for a jury. If one is sued for damages base on an injury allegedly arising from his negligence the jury will need to decide, after all the evidence about what took place and what everyone said or did is presented whether the defendant acted as a reasonable and prudent person would in the same situation.

There are cases in which an intervening act cut off liability, but whether an intervening act will do so, and under what circumstances it will do so, depends on the applicable case law in the relevant jurisdiction. Without doing the appropriate research, it's not possible to make categorical statements about a gun owner's civil liability if an unauthorized person gets access to an unsecured gun.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 03:59 PM   #67
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,584
It might be negligent to leave a gun in certain places where it could be picked up and be involved in an accidental shooting but In a locked home? Stolen and used intentionally in a crime? Where does negligence come to play in the purposeful use of deadly force?

Is it possible in the anti-gun, fear mongering, society in which we live that someone could bring charges or a law suit? Sure! Is it likely that such a process would be successful? I thoroughly doubt it. Is it possible? All things are possible. After all if they were able to break into your house and break into your safe it is apparent that you didn't do enough to protect the public from the criminal act of theft of a firearm and the resulting death of a shop owner by the guy who bought your gun from the thief. Is that a likely scenario? I don't think so but you have every right to disagree.
ShootistPRS is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 04:20 PM   #68
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,204
Quote:
.... Stolen and used intentionally in a crime? Where does negligence come to play in the purposeful use of deadly force?...
In other words you can't cite any law and are just making things up.

The point of the exercise is to understand what the applicable law is, the scope of the legal risks, and the utility of one's options, and, with that information, make what one hopes will be wise choices. On one hand we have the unattended gun left out on the table. On the other hand we have the unattended gun secured in a safe or lockbox. The former is unlikely to be considered reasonable and prudent. The latter is very likely to pass muster as reasonable and prudent. Somewhere between those extremes? No one knows.

That's it in a nutshell. Do as you like. Your fate is not my concern.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 04:29 PM   #69
Berserker
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2015
Location: WI & UP
Posts: 284
Going to tell me some breaks in stieals my booze, drives off and kills someone I am going to prison?

Maybe CA or NY, NJ. Not even sure there.


It is illegal to break into homes. Liberals place blame on victim.
Berserker is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 04:37 PM   #70
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berserker
Going to tell me some breaks in stieals my booze, drives off and kills someone I am going to prison?...
If you read and tried to understand the discussion, it's not about going to prison. It's about possible civil liability for money damages. And that sort of question is much harder to answer.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 05:10 PM   #71
PlatinumCore16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2017
Location: Colorado
Posts: 416
Basically what Frank said. According to my CCW class: penal code is pretty cut and dry (relatively speaking). Civil code is much more gray.

I would guess that if you could prove some sort of attempt to protect your gun beyond just a locked door, that would convince a jury that you did enough to help protect it. Whilst stealing is illegal and using a stolen item in a crime is doubly illegal, civil code is weird. There was a lawsuit a while back (cannot think of the name or time frame, if someone remembers please help me out) where a thief brought suit against a home owner OF THE HOME HE WAS ROBBING for medical charges for injuries sustained whilst he was committing the crime. I do not remember the outcome of such a suit, but the fact that it was attempted in the first place is nuts.
PlatinumCore16 is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 11:37 PM   #72
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 10,010
It's really no wonder that people aren't fond of lawyers.
An attorney would attempt to make you liable in any way possible if he were representing someone suing you.
And, if he's slick enough-he just might convince a jury of idiots that you are liable.
Isn't that what you are trying to convey in lay terms, Frank?

Tell us what would happen if someone stole your baseball bat or masonic sword......
__________________
Bill DeShivs, Master Cutler
www.billdeshivs.com
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old May 24, 2017, 11:47 PM   #73
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill DeShivs
....An attorney would attempt to make you liable in any way possible if he were representing someone suing you.
And, if he's slick enough-he just might convince a jury of idiots that you are liable....
It is what it is. You're free to live in a fantasy world, if you wish. Of course there might be consequences.

Or you can take the time and trouble to learn how things work in the real world and try to make intelligent choices based on reality.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old May 25, 2017, 01:09 AM   #74
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 10,010
What is untrue about my statement?
And what about the other weapons?

BTW- if the lawyer WAS able to convince the jury that you were somehow responsible for someone else's actions, or if he were able to make YOUR attorney think he might win the case- the two attorneys sit down and figure out how much of your money will be awarded to the plaintiff. Usually 1/3 of your money will go to the plaintiff's attorney-sometimes more.
Am I correct?

Frank, I spent 40 years in the criminal justice and court system. I know how the system works-and often times it's just plain wrong.
__________________
Bill DeShivs, Master Cutler
www.billdeshivs.com
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old May 25, 2017, 02:20 AM   #75
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill DeShivs
....I know how the system works-and often times it's just plain wrong.
The fact that you think it's wrong is irrelevant. Your opinion of the system doesn't change anything.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
burglary , home defense , safety

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10070 seconds with 8 queries