Cars, guns and breakins in San Francisco

[Glenn E. Meyer]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/san-francisco-crime-policy/479880/

This is an interesting piece. SF has a plague of window breaking and theft for cars. The police are handicapped in catching and enforcing current laws. The laws might be lightened up. Quite a few guns are stolen from the cars - and used in terrible crimes.

One solution, mandating lock boxes in cars and heavy fines for the car owner:

Yet how did Campos (city supervisor) react to news that guns are being stolen in some of these smash-and-grab burglaries? He crafted legislation “to require that law enforcement officers as well as civilians who leave guns in parked vehicles in the city secure the weapons in lock boxes or in an enclosed, locked trunk. Failing to secure a gun in a parked car would be a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail or a $10,000 fine.”

In other words, he wants to punish some of the victims of smash-and-grab burglaries with longer jail sentences than he is willing to give the perpetrators of the crime.

Locking up your gun is a good thing, I suppose but the attitude of Campos is rather disgusting. I would also opine that this is one reason I oppose businesses being able to ban carry (except for technical issues of safety - like the gun in the MRI). Don't want to start the property rights argument again, just saying.

 

[ATN082268]

I would also opine that this is one reason I oppose businesses being able to ban carry (except for technical issues of safety - like the gun in the MRI).

If a business is able to ban carry, then they should be responsible for the security of their employees and customers along with all the consequences for the failure to do so.

 

[Lohman446]

As long as an appropriate storage device is defined and a protection from liability built in for the owner if it is overcome I really do not see a problem with the idea. Want to leave your gun unattended? Make sure it is secure. In many places a locked car does not count as secure.

 

[BarryLee]

the attitude of Campos is rather disgusting

Some people seem to have an attitude that criminals are not fully responsible for their actions. They see them as victims of an oppressive, racist, corporate, etc society and feel these folks are simply seeking justice in their own way. We’ve recently seen the Governor of Virginia restore the voting rights of thousands of felons. While some of these folks may deserve this I’m not sure murders, rapist and armed robbers do. The strange thing is many of these criminals, who might have used guns during the commission of their crimes, may actually end up voting for anti-gun politicians.

 

[Slamfire]

Where the heck does anyone find a parking place in San Francisco? Having a parking space almost doubles the value of housing.

 

[jmr40]

In many places a locked car does not count as secure.

Luckily in most places it does, and should. If a firearm is locked inside a vehicle and out of sight the gun owner has met all of the legal and moral obligations they need to meet where I live. If someone steals the gun, (or car for that matter) they are the criminal.

By this logic if a criminal steals my car and uses it in a bank robbery, kidnapping, or is involved in a crash that kills or injured others I should be held responsible. I think not.

 

[DaleA]

Yeah. I'm against this law too because I'm for 'common sense' gun laws---and this isn't one of them.

How do the authorities know a gun was stolen from the car? I'm guessing the owner reports it stolen. If the owner is going to get prosecuted if they report it stolen, well...

 

[TailGator]

If the owner is going to get prosecuted if they report it stolen, well...

That jumped out at me, as well. Punishing people for being truthful in communicating with police is a fine idea!

It is just another step in demonizing gun owners, really.

 

[lamarw]

Maybe I have been watching too many detective shows on TV lately, but it seems in urban areas there are cameras on every other building/business.

I wonder how many of the smash and grabs could be solved if law enforcement had the time or took the time to review all cameras in the area of the incident. At least on TV, they seem to solve a lot of homicides this way.

I can remove the slide from many of my pistols in a matter of seconds. In such an area with high smash and grabs, I would be tempted to do so and carry my slide with me. I suspect the thief might just leave the frame behind.

 

[kilimanjaro]

Even a frame is worth ten bucks to someone on the street, I doubt if it will save many pistols from being stolen. Parts can be obtained readily.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

The police in SF don't bother with property crimes, such as car break-ins. Even with folks on camera - they don't go after them. City policy now, or so I am told.

 

[turkeestalker]

About a year ago in Saint Louis there was a bit of an explosion of 'smash and grabs' so to speak involving vehicles in public parking venues such as shopping centers and the like. One in particular that I remember was at a downtown casino which involved twenty something cars.
At that time the news media reported that one in five cars have a firearm in them. Not sure where they got that statistic but it's likely not too far fetched here. There was speculation by law enforcement as to firearms being exactly what the perpetrators were looking for.
That said, I understand the intent, but not the execution. Of course there are a whole lot of laws on the books now that had good intentions saddled with poor execution.

 

[MurBob]

The police in SF don't bother with property crimes, such as car break-ins. Even with folks on camera - they don't go after them. City policy now, or so I am told.

Well there's the problem. And they wonder why there's an epidemic of property crime? Really?

There are only two things that are infinite.. The universe, and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe..
-Albert Einstein

 

[Lohman446]

I think I have failed to properly communicate my position. For the record I grew up and still live in a fairly rural setting. When I grew up respect for property rights and respect for guns was taught and taught well. If anyone had a gun cabinet it had glass doors more often than not. In my father's generation it was common for students to carry their rifles to school and leave and lay them in the unused watering trough.

My comment about locked cars not counting as secure was meant as observational and not a consideration of the legal status as such.

Gun ownership has changed and due to general changes in society and the knee jerk reaction to gun violence that focuses not on the criminal action but the equipment it is in the best interest, IMO, of gun owners to take measures much different than those taken in the past. No one should be able to "smash and grab" a gun from a vehicle and leaving guns in a way that this is possible is concerning. I want something a little more than a piece of automotive glass keeping those who should not possess firearms from possessing them.

Side note: Can you imagine the narrative if my 10MM was stolen? "...a round deemed too powerful by the FBI..." Things would go sideways quickly on that one.

Laws, even firearm laws, can be molded in way that accomplishes the stated goal while also shielding the actual victim of the theft. Maybe my original take on an appropriate storage container was too vague and too severe at the same time. Perhaps it should have referenced an idea such as "not visible to a passerby from outside an unattended vehicle" as jmr40 eludes to. The backside of that law is an owner who properly stores his or her firearms and reports the same as stolen once he or she is aware of such a state should be fully shielded from all civil and criminal liability involving the firearm going forward. Obviously these issues are different in urban and rural settings. A car parked in my driveway on the farm should likely be considered more secure than one parked on the streets of Detroit.

 

[2ndsojourn]

From the article:
...“to require that law enforcement officers as well as civilians who leave guns in parked vehicles in the city secure the weapons in lock boxes or in an enclosed, locked trunk."

So it's OK to lock it in the trunk, which is usually accessed by a release button in the car, but it's not OK to leave it somewhere else in a locked car.

And also mentioned, punishing the burglary victims more than the perpetrators is just insane.

 

[lefteye]

So in SF being the victim of a crime is committing a crime?

 

[Skans]

I suppose but the attitude of Campos is rather disgusting.

^^^^ 1000%! I despise any laws that criminalize victims of crime because the law-makers and/or law enforcers are inept and ineffective at doing their jobs. The fact is that our nation is not tough enough on crime or criminals. Given some level of punishment of true criminals (not saying what that level needs to be), I should be able to leave my loaded gun on the front seat of my car with the windows down and no one would even think about taking it.

No, I am not advocating keeping your gun on the front seat of an unlocked and unattended car. What I am saying is that our "leaders" are so soft on crime and criminals that we find ourselves being turned into criminals due to their (our political leaders) sheepish resolve.

 

[Ryker77]

Set up bait cars with non function guns that have tracking in them.

 

[ATN082268]

What is science fiction about the Dirty Harry movie is how a police officer like Harry Callahan could operate in city like San Francisco. Nowadays in San Francisco, the police are probably punished for enforcing the law...

 

[osbornk]

We’ve recently seen the Governor of Virginia restore the voting rights of thousands of felons. While some of these folks may deserve this I’m not sure murders, rapist and armed robbers do. The strange thing is many of these criminals, who might have used guns during the commission of their crimes, may actually end up voting for anti-gun politicians.

Our dear governor restored more than voting rights. He restored all rights other than gun rights (he would love to take gun rights from everyone). Our felons can now vote, serve on juries (so the crooks can be judged by a jury of their peers?), hold public office, etc. He is an over the top Clinton supporter and he claims it had nothing to do with elections but to make it more fair to minorities and since minorities are a high percentage of the felons and minorities vote overwhelmingly democrat, etc.