- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 6,920
- Likes
- 615
So it doesn't bother you that most "firearms felonies" are based off malum prohibitum bullshit? (things which are illegal only because they are illegal, not because they could harm someone). 95% of all gun laws on the books today have nothing to do with things that actually place another person in danger.
It's one thing to say a guy popping off live ammo in the air in the town square is dangerous to others. It's another thing entirely to try to suggest that someone getting bagged for a felony because his barrel was too short, is some kind of a "community danger".
Yeah... David Olofson... real big threat to society.... (There are countless more, but I would probably exceed the character limit, as well as my blood pressure, while typing them all up... )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Olofson
-Mike
Mike, I was being very general in that last statement, and was not intending to include those other stupid felony busts in the scope of that statement. I agree with your point, and did not even consider those other type of firearm related felonies. I was directing it specifically at armed robbery, armed B&E, armed home invasion, armed kid napping, etc., etc. The NFA, and AWB bullshit is a whole different story altogether, but those things are a lot harder to differentiate from "real" gun crimes than say money laundering, tax evasion, etc. Hopefully this clears up my position a bit better.
For the other guys that are on the page of saying that they should be locked up if they are too much of a threat to society, you know that is a strawman, bullshit argument because there are many circumstances where dangerous people are released every day who shouldn't be simply because of overcrowding, technicalities, or other stupid reasons. That really is ignorant thinking inmo to say that anyone, even if they committed armed assault, homicide, etc. should have their gun rights restored simply because they are released from incarceration? Are you really that f'd up?