How can we regulate guns ... ?

I was under the impression that this would be aiding and abetting, but I could be wrong.

The mental state of an accessory is beyond mere negligence. A person guilty of being an accessory has intentionally aided a perpetrator. On the other hand, a person whose guns were stolen due to no negligence or intent on his own part has had the intent only to commit lawful acts. Perhaps, but that's not what was proposed.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I agree, that is why a reporting requirement would be necessary. The reasonable gun owner (the vast majority of all owners) already takes adequate measure to secure his firearms because they acknowledge the additional dangers gun ownership presents and the attached responsibility that goes with ownership. Should the gun get stolen or go missing the reasonable owner would report as required and thus would be legally free of consequence.The negligent owner who does not secure his weapons or report stolen/missing knows, using the "reasonable man" doctrine, that his guns may very well be used in a crime and he did nothing to prevent this. That can, in such a crafted law, be considered culpable intentional negligence.In such a law this probably would not be considered as an "accessory" as used in existing law subject to the same penalty as the principal perpetrator, but a felony class offense could be attached.I think this whole discussion is interesting but ultimately futile. If such a bill were presented anywhere the NRA would pull out its checkbook and buy whoever was necessary to defeat the attempt.

AZPaul writes: NO SHIT!IF you own a gun and it gets out there, FUCK YOU. You do the time AND you go to court to face the parents of the dead. You are an accomplice just as much as the getaway driver.Simple. You get robbed of your weapons, you get JAIL, baby.

Taq tries: Would everyone here PLEASE, PLEASE stop using cars for any analogies here. They don't work, never have, and never will.Edited by xongsmith, : spelled t a q

AZPaul muses: Again, I proposed that the NRA be given power of background checking. Give them more power to enforce the law and they will gladly take on the responsibility. The ATF and the FBI have no credibility anymore in this country. I want to have something done. I am conceding territory I would rather not concede, BUT I want something done.

I understand, xongsmith.I empathize.I feel your pain.But putting the loonies in charge of the loonybin?You're much too radical for me. My head hurts. I think I'll go have a lie down somewhere.

I'm generally with you, but 'intentional negligence' is an oxymoron. But yeah, I think a law based on your proposal could avoid constitutional problems. But xongsmith has confirmed that he wants something different.

OK, this is from memory and at my age it is somewhat suspect.Intentional negligence is not contradictory in law. Negligence is a failure to exercise some degree of care the law may require for the protection of others. It can be intentional. Example, locking fire escape doors to keep employees in the shop. Intentional failure to provide required egress in case of fire. Negligence. Criminal, misdemeanor or felony depending on severity of the injury.[edit = hours later]Memory, memory, how fleeting is thy life.In most statues this is termed Gross Negligence.[/edit]Versus unintentional negligence where a usual standard of care was not met through oversight or carelessness. The binding on your rented ski failed and you broke your leg. Usually a tort action.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Thank you AZPaul3.The very reason I would put forth this outrageous idea is that GUNS are not like anything else. This country is hurting so bad from guns. Let's put the hammer down on the lax gun owners....the very ones who are not yet fully appreciating the awesome responsibility of owning a gun.As ICANT would put it, "God bless".As I would steal from another writer, "May we all be good ancestors"