Those who sell guns to criminals should not be held responsible for crimes committed

https://web.archive.org/web/2013040...itzerland-mainly-theft-urban-areas-worst-hit/

 

lol
That’s not gun crimes. They still remain low. It’s mainly thefts from foreigners. There has been no correlation to gun crimes which is still much less then the US. It’s about as relevant as something like abortion rates. Just in case it was forgotten, we are talking about gun crime rates, not thefts.

 

Why presume a damn thing if you do not know it as a fact?
I am a liberal and own firearms and hunt, so do my kids, I am also a US army veteran. If you have something disparaging to try and hang on people try to be specific about that person and don't ASSume a damn thing. Carry-on-derps..

 

Mexico has many "GUN" deaths, and in many deaths, no guns are used.
Mexico had extreme gun control, yet Cartel members all have guns.

 

So if a person is murdered without a gun, is that ok ?
Let's say a person is raped and later, dies of AIDS/HIV, is that ok, since no gun was
used ?
Many people are killed without guns.
Is it better if a knife is used instead ?

Staten Island Ferry incident, a deranged man went on a rampage with a sword, and was only stopped by a retired Police Officer that threatened to shoot him.

Insisting that crime is related to firearms by calling it gun crime, as if crimes cannot be committed without firearms.

BTW, sometimes, people in NYC are pushed onto the tracks in the path of an oncoming train, is that train crime ?

 

The answer rests upon knowledge and intent.

If a person provides a weapon to someone with knowledge that the someone is a prohibited possessor or has criminal intent to make use of the weapon, then hell yes the provider has some responsibility for the crimes committed with that weapon. Laws vary across the States, but it is reasonable.to punish someone for their knowing aid to a criminal act.

If there is no knowledge that a crime is taking place or planned or intended, if there is no knowledge that the receiver of the weapon is a prohibited possessor, then hell no there should never be any liability to the weapon supplier.

Knowledge & Intent, these are what matter.

 

Some responsibility, but I would hardly hold them responsible for the crime [the crime someone else committed].

If they were actually handing the gun over to make a specific robbery or killing happen, that is a different matter.

You can't automatically assume that because someone handed over a gun to a prohibited person that makes them responsible [to more than a small degree] for the crime that may have happened. The person who actually used the gun is responsible for what happened.

That's the whole mentality behind gun control, that the gun is to blame for the crime.

If I hand someone a rock, and that person throws that rock at someone else, killing them, you wouldn't blame me for that killing, would you?

The fact that giving a gun to a prohibited person may be illegal does not change any of the fundamentals of that situation.

 

Intent to make another crime happen.

Someone who illegally sells a gun to a prohibited person isn't necessarily doing that.

 

It is illegal for a prohibited person to be in control of a firearm, regardless of how they obtained them, it, and if per chance, they obtained those guns before a conviction, it is no longer legal for them to continue to possess firearms as prohibited persons.

 

Which obviously doesn't matter if they're planning to murder someone.

 

I have a question, if a man walks up to you, and he is very strong, and as in the knock em out game, punches somone in the head hard enough to kill them and they die, is this gun crime ?

And before you say impossible, my uncle died in the following manner, he was attempting to park his car, a man started yelling at him, when my uncle asked the man what was the problem, the guy punched my uncle, he fell backwards and broke his neck on the bumper of his own car dying instantly.

Was that gun crime ?
My uncle owned a small grocery store and helped lots of people.
A judge ruled my uncles death an accident.
There were witnesses that saw what happened.

People are oftentimes killed without guns,
is this ok ?

 

‘Illegally sells’? What does ‘Illegally’ mean? If someone knowingly sells a gun to a prohibited person they are breaking the law.

 

This isn't about whether the law was broken, it's about blaming them for another crime.

It's about a mentality, a world view.
And that perspective will have a very real impact on how much punishment you think that person should get, when they violate the law.

 

Aside from breaking the law by knowingly selling a gun to a person prohibited from possessing one, the downstream consideration could be evaluated in assessing whether the seller know the buyer’s intention to commit a crime, which, would, in my mind, suggest complicity. Knowingly, selling to or acting as a straw agent for someone prohibited from possessing a gun who goes on to commit a crime does not have culpability for the specific crimes of the prohibited person, but certainly is an enabling agent; one doing the illegal act in the first place, and, second one resulting in the criminal act which should carry some additional burden, minimally, of neglect. That doesn’t mean they share in some proportion the responsibility of the specific crimes, just that their actions, contrary to the law, resulted in harm. It’s the ‘knowingly’ doing wrong that constitutes the illegality of being the agent of means for the prohibited person to commit a crime, or many crimes.
Somewhat comparable are the Dram Laws of which nearly anyone that serves alcohol is at least somewhat aware.
https://www.alcohol.org/laws/over-serving/
Note, the burden placed on the courts/juries for determining liability...

 

Should Ford be responsible for Ford-driving drunk drivers?

 

Exactly.

And even if, hypothetically, there were some law making it illegal to sell trucks to certain people, the one who [illegally] sold the truck to someone should not be held responsible if that person chooses to use that truck to intentionally run over another person.