♪AK-47 is the tool. Don't make me act a motherfucking fool ♪- Ice CubeAk47 oh shit!!
Last edited by SG854,
♪AK-47 is the tool. Don't make me act a motherfucking fool ♪- Ice CubeAk47 oh shit!!
laws will differ between countries but yes you're right.. though the negligence may be not having a 'slippery when wet' sign on a concrete walk way and the home owner is still responsible to cover damages.. that is why property insurance is recommened.
"If you're injured while visiting the property, one or both parties may be responsible depending on the circumstances of your accident. ... In general, the occupier of private property is responsible for maintaining a safe, hazard-free environment for visitors to the premises."
So having acessible firearms on a property whereby someone uses them to cause harm on others should also have the home owner accountable (and in most countries they would be held accountable for not having their firearms properly restrained and most likely have their licence to own firearms revoked.).
Ak47 oh shit!!
laws will differ between countries but yes you're right.. though the negligence may be not having a 'slippery when wet' sign on a concrete walk way and the home owner is still responsible to cover damages.. that is why property insurance is recommened.
"If you're injured while visiting the property, one or both parties may be responsible depending on the circumstances of your accident. ... In general, the occupier of private property is responsible for maintaining a safe, hazard-free environment for visitors to the premises."
So having acessible firearms on a property whereby someone uses them to cause harm on others should also have the home owner accountable (and in most countries they would be held accountable for not having their firearms properly restrained and most likely have their licence to own firearms revoked.).
True ThatI hate to throw a wrench in your theory, but there's a difference between a "visitor" and someone who breaks into a property illegally.
So having acessible Knives on a property whereby someone uses them to cause harm on others should also have the home owner accountable (and in most countries they would be held accountable for having their knives on a kitchen table and not properly put away.
If they are proper knives (ie: switch blades, daggers and other registered weapons) and not steak knives then yes, possibly - that would be for the court to decide levels of accountability and negligence. Looks like 'common sense' needs to be explained to some people.
I hate to throw a wrench in your theory, but there's a difference between a "visitor" and someone who breaks into a property illegally.
Possibly? Has this ever happened in any country in all of history?
common sense? yes it appears to have happened in most countries who aren't the USA or invaded by the USA
Yes actually
Trespassers, however, do not have a right to be on the homeowner’s property. In most cases, the homeowner has no obligation to protect the trespasser from dangers. This would include those invited to the home or licensees in the process of committing a crime in the home. For example, should an overnight guest attempt to steal your television in the night and injure themselves by dropping the television on their foot, the homeowner would not have a duty to protect from this danger
Become literate.
Yes actually
From the article you linked
This thread is about what happened in the USA. The laws in other countries don't apply.wow aren't you the Pot calling the Kettle black? Your illiterate trolling is legendary.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
different laws in different countries.. there is more to the world than just Murica.
https://www.google.com/search?q=bur...j0j0i67j0l5.7679j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
This thread is about what happened in the USA. The laws in other countries don't apply.
just like how laws and common sense don't apply in the USA as well? no worries.
It's common sense that someone breaking into your home un-invited is in the wrong. Taking your stuff without your permission and using it to attack police officers is always in the wrong.just like how laws and common sense don't apply in the USA as well? no worries.
It's common sense that someone breaking into your home un-invited is in the wrong. Taking your stuff without your permission and using it to attack police officers is always in the wrong.
I can't speak for the majority of our population and their tendency to lack common sense, but common sense tells me that laws from other countries don't apply to citizens of the USA unless those citizens are in the other country.
yet there are a string of posts saying how having dangerous weapons that are accessible is NOT the home owners responsibility.. common sense averted.
Whether or not the home owner stored the guns away is irrelevant to this case when someone breaks into your home. Any chance of the intruders to be in right and have the right to sue the homeowner is out the window.yet there are a string of posts saying how having dangerous weapons that are accessible is NOT the home owners responsibility.
Whether or not the home owner stored the guns away is irrelevant to this case when someone breaks into your home. Any chance of the intruders to be in right and have the right to sue the homeowner is out the window.
Stupidest argument ever peddled by pro gun boomers who are trying to pass the blame. The reason they chose video games is because they didn't grow up with them, but they grew up with 3 Godfather movies lmao.