Yeah...that’s really going to encourage reporting stolen guns....

[larryh1108]

There is a good reason there is an Ignore feature on THR.

Totally agree.
Some people just deserve to be ignored.

 

[jar]

The problem with that concept is what is reasonable to one person isn't to another. It's a comparison word, like tall. Is a six foot tall man tall? In a roomful of jockeys, yes. In a roomful of NBA players, um, no.
Right up there with that good old phrase "Common sense gun laws". What does that really mean?

That is what would have to be specified (as in the law in question in this thread) in the law.

 

[jmorris]

Cars I own the key needs to be in the ignition but not running to pop the trunk with the button. If your car is not equipped that way you can turn on the "valet" button in the trunk and it will not open unless you have the trunk key.My older beater car is this way.

On lots of cars these days you yank the loops beside the seat backs and they fold down, so you can run longer objects in the car. More than a few also have the battery in the trunk, with electric latches only to open them. So in the event of a dead battery you fold down the seat backs and grab the glow in the dark trunk release to pop the trunk and replace the dead battery.

 

[Waveski]

And yes, if a person leaves a car unlocked and it is used in a crime then they too should be partially responsible.

Then where does this "logic' end? Should a man who wears a valuable watch in public and is beaten and robbed of that watch share the blame for the crime because he presented opportunity to the robber?
This attitude sickens , really sickens me.

 

[herrwalther]

Cali has a list published by the DOJ of what storage devices are acceptable to the state. The storage law says your firearms have to be locked up in one from the list unless you have it with you.

I have bought enough safes to know about the California DOJ "requirements." And yeah I agree. Some of the safes on the list have proven pretty easy to beat.

 

[Ironicaintit]

I pity the poor man who was robbed once by a hoodlum, then robbed again by elected hoodlums.

I think laws that enable things like this, are at least in part, designed to make us afraid to own guns at all!
Not just to confiscate, but to have us so nervous about possible litigation and liability, that we disarm ourselves voluntarily.

 

[SamT1]

lawyers are destroying America slowly but surely from within. Changing our culture through the law. Controlling us through fear.

I pity the poor man who was robbed once by a hoodlum, then robbed again by elected hoodlums.

I think laws that enable things like this, are at least in part, designed to make us afraid to own guns at all!
Not just to confiscate, but to have us so nervous about possible litigation and liability, that we disarm ourselves voluntarily.

 

[jar]

Then where does this "logic' end? Should a man who wears a valuable watch in public and is beaten and robbed of that watch share the blame for the crime because he presented opportunity to the robber?
This attitude sickens , really sickens me.

No, the issue is not one of encouraging some criminal activity, it is rather about the responsibility of all of us who own firearms to keep them secured.

 

[GAF]

Some of you are suggesting that the victim of the crime be punished. I think this is wrongheaded. The criminal has no right to go into your personal property and steal your property. I do agree that the victim made a big mistake leaving the gun in an unlocked car.

What I do when I am going to a place like the VA hospital in Minneapolis where I don`t even have the option of leaving the gun in my locked vehicle is leave it at home. I will not tread on federal property with weapons of any kind. If caught I most likely lose my guns and gun rights.

Think before you act!

 

[Spats McGee]

....It really is just all about confiscating guns, isn’t it?

Yes. But I think we knew that, didn't we?

The new law makes it a crime to store a gun in a locked car if it is not also put into a safe, locked in the glove box or stored in the car’s trunk.

Capt. Richard Conklin ... felt obligated to mention that small safes are not a solution to theft either, because they can be removed easily.

Well, that's interesting. Does Capt. Conklin mean that small safes are insufficient to satisfy the law? That one could be charged for not using a large enough safe? Or simply that they don't solve the problem of theft? I hope it's the last one, because I don't see any authority for him to determine what kind of safe a gun owner uses.

This is where I found what I believe to be the text of the law: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2019/TOB/h/pdf/2019HB-07223-R00-HB.PDF

I did a little digging in Westlaw and found the law, but the full publication isn't quite caught up yet. Meaning the law in available in Westlaw, but the title had to be supplied by the publisher, etc. So, with those caveats, let's unpack this:

(a) (1) No person shall store or keep any pistol or revolver in any motor vehicle that is unattended unless such pistol or revolver is in the trunk, a locked safe or locked glove box.
(2) For purposes of this subsection, (A) a motor vehicle is unattended if no person who is at least twenty-one years of age and who is the owner or operator or a passenger of such motor vehicle is inside the motor vehicle or is within close enough proximity to the motor vehicle to prevent unauthorized access to the motor vehicle, (B) “pistol” and “revolver” mean pistol and revolver, each as defined in section 29-27, (C) “motor vehicle” means a motor vehicle, as defined in section 14-1, and (D) “trunk” means (i) the fully enclosed and locked main storage or luggage compartment of a motor vehicle that is not accessible from the passenger compartment, or (ii) a locked toolbox or utility box attached to the bed of a pickup truck, as defined in section 14-1. “Trunk” does not include the rear of a pickup truck, except as otherwise provided, or of a hatchback, station-wagon-type automobile or sport utility vehicle or any compartment that has a window.
(b) The provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to any pistol or revolver issued or possessed by: (1) The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, police departments, the Department of Correction, the Division of Criminal Justice, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, the Department of Revenue Services or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States, (2) a sworn member of a law enforcement unit, as defined in section 7-294a, including, but not limited to, the Department of Correction or the Division of State Police within the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, a chief inspector or inspector in the Division of Criminal Justice, a salaried inspector of motor vehicles designated by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, a conservation officer or special conservation officer appointed by the Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection pursuant to section 26-5 or a constable who is certified by the Police Officer Standards and Training Council and appointed by the chief executive authority of a town, city or borough to perform criminal law enforcement duties, for use by such sworn member, inspector, officer or constable in the discharge of such sworn member's, inspector's, officer's or constable's official duties or when off duty, (3) a member of the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States, or (4) a nuclear facility licensed by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the purpose of providing security services at such facility, or any contractor or subcontractor of such facility for the purpose of providing security services at such facility, provided such pistol or revolver issued or possessed by any such agency, department, municipality, organization, force or entity or person described in subdivisions (1) to (4), inclusive, of this subsection, is being kept or stored in accordance with such issuing or possessing agency, department, municipality, organization, force or entity or person's policy concerning safe keeping or storage of a pistol or revolver in a motor vehicle.
(c) The court may order suspension of prosecution if the court finds that a violation of this section is not of a serious nature and that the person charged with such violation (1) (A) will probably not offend in the future, (B) has not previously been convicted of a violation of this section, and (C) has not previously had a prosecution under this section suspended pursuant to this subsection, or (2) was charged with such violation because of facts or circumstances accurately reported by such person to an organized local police department concerning a lost or stolen firearm in accordance with the provisions of section 53-202g. The court shall not order suspension of prosecution unless the accused person has acknowledged that he or she understands the consequences of the suspension of prosecution. Any person for whom prosecution is suspended shall agree to the tolling of any statute of limitations with respect to such violation and to a waiver of his or her right to a speedy trial. Such person shall appear in court and shall be released to the custody of the Court Support Services Division for such period, not exceeding two years, and under such conditions as the court shall order. If the person refuses to accept, or, having accepted, violates such conditions, the court shall terminate the suspension of prosecution and the case shall be brought to trial. If such person satisfactorily completes such person's period of probation, he or she may apply for dismissal of the charges against such person and the court, on finding such satisfactory completion, shall dismiss such charges. If the person does not apply for dismissal of the charges against such person after satisfactorily completing such person's period of probation, the court, upon receipt of a report submitted by the Court Support Services Division that the person satisfactorily completed such person's period of probation, may on its own motion make a finding of such satisfactory completion and dismiss such charges. Upon dismissal, all records of such charges shall be erased pursuant to section 54-142a. An order of the court denying a motion to dismiss the charges against a person who has completed such person's period of probation or terminating the participation of a defendant in such program shall be a final judgment for purposes of appeal.
(d) Any person who violates any provision of subsection (a) of this section shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor for a first offense and a class D felony for any subsequent offense.

Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § P.A. 19-7, § 1 (West)

So that's the text. Let's take a peek at a few specific provisions, just for fun, shall we?

....(2) For purposes of this subsection, (A) a motor vehicle is unattended if no person who is at least twenty-one years of age and who is the owner or operator or a passenger of such motor vehicle is inside the motor vehicle or is within close enough proximity to the motor vehicle to prevent unauthorized access to the motor vehicle,....

So if the car is owned and operated by a 19-yo and a thief steals a gun, it was never unattended and he can't be charged? (Not that I have any idea at the moment if a 19-yo may even own a gun in CT.)

....(D) “trunk” means (i) the fully enclosed and locked main storage or luggage compartment of a motor vehicle that is not accessible from the passenger compartment, or (ii) a locked toolbox or utility box attached to the bed of a pickup truck, as defined in section 14-1. “Trunk” does not include the rear of a pickup truck, except as otherwise provided, or of a hatchback, station-wagon-type automobile or sport utility vehicle or any compartment that has a window....

I just did a bunch of car shopping. Pretty much every sedan I looked at had fold-down seats. I've even seen one that had an opening behind the back seat arm rest so that back seat passengers could reach through.

...(b) The provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to any pistol or revolver issued or possessed by: (1) The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, police departments, the Department of Correction, the Division of Criminal Justice, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, the Department of Revenue Services or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States, (2) a sworn member of a law enforcement unit, as defined in section 7-294a, including, but not limited to, the Department of Correction or the Division of State Police within the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, a chief inspector or inspector in the Division of Criminal Justice, a salaried inspector of motor vehicles designated by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, a conservation officer or special conservation officer appointed by the Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection pursuant to section 26-5 or a constable who is certified by the Police Officer Standards and Training Council and appointed by the chief executive authority of a town, city or borough to perform criminal law enforcement duties, for use by such sworn member, inspector, officer or constable in the discharge of such sworn member's, inspector's, officer's or constable's official duties or when off duty, (3) a member of the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States, or (4) a nuclear facility licensed by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the purpose of providing security services at such facility, or any contractor or subcontractor of such facility for the purpose of providing security services at such facility, provided such pistol or revolver issued or possessed by any such agency, department, municipality, organization, force or entity or person described in subdivisions (1) to (4), inclusive, of this subsection, is being kept or stored in accordance with such issuing or possessing agency, department, municipality, organization, force or entity or person's policy concerning safe keeping or storage of a pistol or revolver in a motor vehicle.....

That's a whole lot of .gov exceptions! What if my department, agency, organization, etc., doesn't have a safe storage policy?

....(c) The court may order suspension of prosecution if the court finds that a violation of this section is not of a serious nature and that the person charged with such violation (1) (A) will probably not offend in the future, (B) has not previously been convicted of a violation of this section, and (C) has not previously had a prosecution under this section suspended pursuant to this subsection, or (2) was charged with such violation because of facts or circumstances accurately reported by such person to an organized local police department concerning a lost or stolen firearm in accordance with the provisions of section 53-202g. The court shall not order suspension of prosecution unless the accused person has acknowledged that he or she understands the consequences of the suspension of prosecution. Any person for whom prosecution is suspended shall agree to the tolling of any statute of limitations with respect to such violation and to a waiver of his or her right to a speedy trial. ....

So, I can't get my prosecution suspended unless I agree to waive other constitutional rights?!? How about I hang onto my constitutional rights, like the one to challenge this law on constitutional grounds?

....Such person shall appear in court and shall be released to the custody of the Court Support Services Division for such period, not exceeding two years, and under such conditions as the court shall order.....

I'm pretty sure this Division is for probation, but I wonder exactly what its powers are. If it could jail me for more than a year, I'd be extremely cautious about my dealings with them.

...(d) Any person who violates any provision of subsection (a) of this section shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor for a first offense and a class D felony for any subsequent offense.
Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § P.A. 19-7, § 1 (West)

Class A misdemeanor = Not to exceed 1 year jail.
Class D felony = not more than 5 years prison. Of course, this would include loss of gun rights.

 

[Bill_in_TR]

No, the issue is not one of encouraging some criminal activity, it is rather about the responsibility of all of us who own firearms to keep them secured.

Yes but then you extended your logic to include making a victim of any theft responsible for what a criminal does with what they stole. That goes way beyond being responsible for safeguarding your dangerous weapons. It is bad enough that I should even have to worry about someone taking my possessions. But now you're saying I should also have to worry about what they do with them. Absolute nonsense.

 

[FlSwampRat]

Then where does this "logic' end? Should a man who wears a valuable watch in public and is beaten and robbed of that watch share the blame for the crime because he presented opportunity to the robber?

Agreed, Waveski. It's like the "logic" of a woman dressing sexy is asking to be raped, therefore whatever happend was her fault.

This attitude sickens , really sickens me.

Sorry, using the vomitorium at the moment, you'll have to get your own.

 

[1KPerDay]

If the computer owner did not use reasonable methods to secure his computer and network the yes, that person should be held partially liable.

And yes, if a person leaves a car unlocked and it is used in a crime then they too should be partially responsible.

The point is that te law will establish what are reasonable precautions and as adults we should follow those laws.

Good grief

 

[MedWheeler]

FlSwampRat writes:

It's like the "logic" of a woman dressing sexy is asking to be raped, therefore whatever happend was her fault.

Yes, unless she keeps her "girl parts" properly secured with an approved, locked chastity belt.

 

[Ironicaintit]

Totally agree.
Some people just deserve to be ignored.

This is off topic, but I feel the need to respond to it anyway...

I believe you do that at your own peril. (the ignore feature)

I think it's much more beneficial to hear the inanity that comes out of some mouths, and disagree! Than it is to block them out altogether, and know not at all what they say.
How else better to "understand" the buffoonery of the incorrect? The wisdom found in an echo chamber may be vast, but it is indeed circular.

It is wise to have an open mind, but with the filters of Logic and Reason applied.

There will be no refunds of my $.02

 

[Ironicaintit]

.... it is rather about the responsibility of all of us who own firearms to keep them secured.

duh. We don't need new laws punishing the bystanders of crime to know this.

anybody who appeals to government to "do more" and broaden the scope of what a criminal action is, has truly misunderstood what our newfangled style of government is supposed to be about.

 

[FROGO207]

Heck Cali can't even get the transient population to use the public rest rooms. I can't possibly condone those onerous firearms laws the oppressive states push on the population. The loud screamer minorities are causing fear amongst the rational of us in the general population now and it has to stop or we are going to end up without a country soon.

 

[larryh1108]

I believe you do that at your own peril. (the ignore feature)

I think it's much more beneficial to hear the inanity that comes out of some mouths, and disagree! Than it is to block them out altogether, and know not at all what they say.
How else better to "understand" the buffoonery of the incorrect? The wisdom found in an echo chamber may be vast, but it is indeed circular.

It is wise to have an open mind, but with the filters of Logic and Reason applied.

I agree... to a point but also disagree.
I choose to not ignore people who have a contrary view but could affect my life. e.g. public officials, bosses, spouses, friends, etc. I believe that you should be closer to your enemy than your friend, at times. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer, as the saying goes. That is wise.

Now, on an open forum where every has (and is entitled) to their own opinion and they continue to state it as a fact instead of an opinion and they come across as the only one in the room with enough intelligence to grasp the premise of his opinion, well, I have better things to do with my free time than listen to drivel from someone who is obviously so full of himself that only his opinion matters, no matter how many refute it. These people are easy to ignore. I now have 1 person on ignore from this forum. From my point of view, I am better off not listening to his drivel no matter how much he believes he is right.

 

[Ironicaintit]

Yeah, I'll agree that there are people who have zero to add, on any occasion, and so there's no net loss.
I can just skim over the drivel pretty easily. Or, it's good for comic relief.

There's a guy on here with whom I disagree politically, and I could ignore him.
But, he's pretty well rounded, and his scope of knowledge outside of politics is deep.
So, I'd be doing myself a disservice to wholly ignore him.

it's not too tough to sort the wheat from the chaff.
That's just my take on it.

 

[Odd Job]

I think we've gone far enough here.