Frankly, I don't see the difference (putting legality of 'place to keep' in Hawaii on the side) of someone stealing your car and stealing of the firearms. This is the reason I cannot grasp 2A supporters utter condemnation of dude that was victimized.
I seen the same thing, in one other topic a while back, where a dude stopped a brawl or fight with his firearm, with out firing a shot mind you. He was charged with 'place to keep' and probably lost his rights for doing the right thing, IMO. Many many 2A supporters severely chastised that person and his actions.
Don't take this as me saying the dude that left his gear in his car was doing the right thing, because that is not the point I am trying to make. My point is there is a double standard in thinking here that needs thinking about. This is prevalent here in Hawaii, one reason, I believe, is that people's rights have been infringed for so long that they are conditioned to react in certain ways, which in my eyes, are contradicting the ideals we say we support.
ie. We argue the gun is just an inanimate object that needs an operator to function. The intentions of that person are what makes it's use good or bad. If you take away the law that requires a certain storage requirement, which is the case in many other states, it is just like any other stolen piece of property. Same as if the thief stole an auto, which statistically is far more dangerous and deadly that any gun has ever been in civilian society, and a more dangerous implement in the wrong hands. By that token, 2a supporters would also say anyone who leaves their auto unattended should be responsible for any evil doing that is perpetrated by the felon that stole it?
No you wouldn't because that is absurd.