A 30-year-old woman found dead in some Daytona Beach woods may be the latest victim of a serial killer already blamed for the deaths of several women in the same area.
I have a question for the "just give them what they want" advocates: What if this is what they want?
We talked about this a while back. But the victims are part of the criminal underclass, prostitutes, drug users, so they're prohibited by law from possessing the means of defense. And most "enforce existing gun law" gun owners are OK with that.
9 comments:
That's because the "enforce existing gun law" gun owners are worse for gun ownership than Sarah Brady is. The current gun "laws" are total treasonous BS and should be thrown out, not enforced.
Kent,
Hey now I support an existing gun law and believe that it should be enforced. It's called the Second Amendment, which admittedly ought to invalidate any and all other so-called gun laws.
Whenever I say "enforce existing laws", I mean all laws, I mean we should get tough on crime in a reaonable way.
Not just mindlessly persecuting people with mandatory sentences, not letting people off the hook because of the inefficient, overcrowded bureacratic clusterf*ck that is the prison system.
I support progressive ways to tackle crime, if they work.
I support repressive action, if it works.
I DO NOT support simply turning your back on the lawbook because you don't believe in it, because you think it's injust. I consider myself to be a political activist, and I try to improve legislation, improving society.
The Second Amendment is a "Government Control Law" and does need to be enforced against the government.
"Getting tough on crime" usually involves violating rights. No problem was ever solved by a law, unless it was created by a law in the first place.
Ditch the counterfeit "laws" that pollute civilization and most of the crime problems will be gone automatically. Any law that attempts to control or regulate anything other than actual agression or fraud is counterfeit and should not be enforced.
Not all of the existing gun laws are bad things. I like most of the gun laws I've seen that actually deal with misuse of a firearm. It's the ones dictating who can have a firearm that I have a problem with.
Laws should be used to punish people for actually doing bad things (assault, discharge in public without good cause, brandishing, etc.), not because they might do a bad thing.
Thing is, LD, aside from public discharge, those aren't specifically gun laws. I can't attack you with a knife or a stick or a rock or a chair, or deploy same in a way where others are endangered, or threaten you with them. That's the crime.
If a gun allows me to harm or jeopardize or menace more people, those additional acts of violence are what I should be punished for, and/or may require enhanced responsive violence to be used against me if I don't stop.
"Brandishing" is a BS "law" that is used against people for simply carrying if some moron gets scared. If an act is wrong, it is wrong whether you commit it with a gun or not. Control criminal actions, not tools.
""Brandishing" is a BS "law" that is used against people for simply carrying if some moron gets scared"
Brandishing is not a BS law, at least not the way it is worded in my state (virginia). I've never even heard of anyone being charged with it in this state without good cause, and if it did happen, it would be all over the opencarry.org forum here.
Or do you think it's reasonable for someone to lift up their shirt as a threat of deadly force to intimidate people?
"Brandishing", if illegal, should only be used against someone who pulls out a gun and waves it around, trying to scare innocent people into doing something against their will (you know, like cops do). But I have known of people who got charged with "brandishing" for simple open carry when it scared bystanders. Even more often I have seen cops threaten to charge someone with brandishing for open carry. I am not even talking about them pulling the gun from the holster. I was threatened with that charge a couple years ago because I had a lighter that was shaped like a gun. As it stands, and is used, "brandishing" as an offense has no place in a country with The Second Amendment. It is simply an excuse to harass people into leaving their guns at home.
Post a Comment