Posted on 12/13/2014 12:35:19 AM PST by marktwain
In a small percentage of cases, a victim disarms an attacker. The attacker usually runs off. In one case, they even asked for the gun back! My experience is that disarms by victims are considerably more common than disarms by attackers. It is not hard to understand why. The victim has a lot more to gain from a disarm; the attacker a lot more to lose if he continues the fight. Sometimes the victim turns the gun on the attacker, as happen in this case in Chicago. It happened in the 6600 block of South State Street, one of the most dangerous areas of the city. From DNAinfo.com:
After the victim handed over an undisclosed item, he made a move for the gun, Antonietti said. During a brief struggle, the gun went off and Esper was shot in his back, court records show.In a science fiction novel, the Probability Broach, people who disarm their attackers get to keep the weapons. It seems a reasonable idea, once it is determined that the weapon is not legitimately claimed by another person. There is no reason to destroy a finely crafted self defense tool like the little Taurus shown. The victim took a serious risk in obtaining it. He accomplished a significant amount of societal good by preventing numerous future crimes to be committed by the attacker. It only seems just that he should have it, after due process, of course.
Esper ran off, and the victim gave the gun, a .22-caliber Taurus Ultralight, to police. Antonietti said officers recovered six live rounds and two spent rounds.
if they themselves are not a violent criminal, yes.
I would think that the crime with the gun is a felony. How can a felon make a claim for a gun?
This is a silly idea Physical taking, merely by itself, is no basis for ownership.
The problem is that crooks usually don’t maintain their weapons well, so there’s a potential for the would-be victim to end up with a low quality, or unsafe weapon. If this proposal were pursued, what I’d prefer to do is that the weapon gets confiscated and destroyed, and the crook is ordered to make restitution to the victim in an amount that includes the full purchase price of a new weapon of similar make. That way, if he grabs it, instead of getting somebody’s old piece of junk, he gets a brand new gun. We’d also be injecting a little extra money into the economy that way.
I think the victim should keep the attacker’s wallet.
If the victim so desires and is not otherwise legally barred from possession plus the weapon is not reported stolen, sure. Just spoils of combat.
Many street guns have been used in violent crimes including murder and have a legacy ballistic evidence trail that could get any owner in a lot of trouble.
Any gun obtained from a criminal should be sent to the police for forensic evaluation to determine it's criminal history.
On the topic of returning guns to violent criminals who hold others at gunpoint and threaten to murder innocent people in unprovoked assaults, lets just say I'm not in favor of leaving the offender in any position or condition to have a weapon of any sort returned to them.
Shoppin for a gun...shoppin for a gun! :-)
SIX LIVE ROUNDS!!!!!! Everybody stand back!
If'n your talking about that purdy 'lil Taurus 941 in the picture above, it holds EIGHT LIVE ROUNDS of .22 MAGNUM!!!!!!
A high percentage of street guns are very high quality because they were stolen from honest homeowners who were burgled.
The guns should be used for ballistic matching and evidence at trial and then immediately returned to the rightful owner with the rightful owner’s homeowner’s insurance policy paying a standard 10% finder’s fee to the individual who recovered the stolen property.
If by some stretch, an individual used a lawfully purchased weapon in a home invasion, the weapon should be returned by police (after trial) to the homeowner who recovered the gun or disposed of at that new owner’s discretion.
It is the homeowner’s home and bringing the weapon onto his property equates to a gift. The government has no more right to private property than their employers: the public.
A gun is not illegal. The original owner relinquished his/her right to own a gun (by committing a felony) and the gun now belongs to the last legally entitled possessor.
To the victor goes the spoil.
Give them a choice - keep the weapon or an ear...
Look up the “Broken Window Fallacy."
Spot on. Did the perp show up for treatment? Was the gun stolen? If yes, it should be returned to its rightful owner.
Why not create a bounty on criminals? If the guy helps apprehend a criminal isn’t that worth a $1000 prize. Have the criminal work that off in prison.
If the weapon is a Taurus, make sure it works properly before your life depends on it.
Give the victim a choice: the attacker’s wallet, their weapon or their scalp.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.