View Single Post
Old 11-01-2011, 11:13 AM  
theking
Nice Kitty
 
theking's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The good old USA!!!
Posts: 21,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless View Post
In the specific instance of military enforcement, that's outside the civil courts in any case and the soldier following regulations should not be punished, though the regulations ought to be changed if they are faulty. In the case for a gun store owner or gun collector they ought to be responsible for the loss or theft of their weapons. If securing guns is too difficult, that's a good reason not to own them. Not a good reason to excuse people for losing them.
The insurance company was the one that dictated to him the security measures he had to take to secure his collection and he had to comply or not be insured. He went beyond the measures they provided. Who ever did it was clearly aware that he had the collection as they by passed his home alarm system...cut a hole in the wall of his secured room and used torches to cut into his gun safes. He had three safes.

Nothing is %100 secure including FT. Knox. Your suggestion is in fact a foolish one.
__________________
When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me!

FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html
theking is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote