View Single Post
Old 11-01-2011, 11:19 AM  
Relentless
www.EngineFood.com
 
Relentless's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by theking View Post
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.
In this example, nobody got hurt as a result of the lost guns. Had your friend's gun collection been used to shoot up a school, rob banks, kill cops or harm the neighboring society in any way... his failure to secure those guns and decision to own them would have been a significant cause of danger to the other people in the equation. Even in this extreme example, he should have been fined and punished for failing to secure the guns he chose to own. The decision to own a gun and failure to secure it is what puts illegal guns on the streets.
__________________


Website Secure | Engine Food
ICQ# 266-942-896
Relentless is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote