Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
1/14/2017 8:11:35 PM
Page / 6
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 1:58:34 PM EST
There is ALWAYS a victim. And it depends on who's law we're talking about. May not be a crime against the state, but there are eternal laws that always have consequences whether in this life or the next.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:00:18 PM EST
Originally Posted By waterglass:
I disagree..

If someone was peeping at me and someone elses wife doing it, and they told no one. They commited a crime.

I'd never sleep with another mans wife, but that doesnt change the fact that it is still a crime. Me commiting a bad act does not absolve the voyuer, that is the point here.


Try another analogy, this one sucks. He said victimless, your privacy was violated, you're the victim.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:01:27 PM EST
Originally Posted By WindRiver78:
There is ALWAYS a victim. And it depends on who's law we're talking about. May not be a crime against the state, but there are eternal laws that always have consequences whether in this life or the next.


Yeah, totally agree! Like those women walking around in miniskirts when they should be covered with a hijab! Stone them, for they have sinned! Aloha Snackbar!
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:01:56 PM EST
GD has been on a roll lately
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:01:57 PM EST
Originally Posted By Will:
Jesus Christ on the cross, enough Libertarian bullshit already around here. You're like fucking Moonies without the robes.


I worked with one for an entire day last month-he was so far out there that I asked him if he ever visited ARFCOM. I mean this guy used all the talking points we read here. He paused when I said "AR15.com" and denied being here at any time, but I suspect he was full of shit.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:02:04 PM EST
Originally Posted By Covert8645:
http://i.imgur.com/DX8Ymom.gif


Ah yes, the infamous drive by disagreement.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:02:16 PM EST
Originally Posted By outofstep:
It's none of your god damn business what someone else does, if it harms nothing and no one. If you don't "like" something or "approve" of something, well tough fucking shit.

Discuss




Careful OP, you're going to rial the anti freedom "but what if" crowd.

You go petal that freedom shit somewhere else.





Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:03:09 PM EST
The victim might be society at large - or perhaps the potential victim just got lucky this time.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:03:13 PM EST

Originally Posted By hotbiggun42:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan:


Should poaching be illegal?




Yes. There needs to be enough game for everyone to enjoy!

So... are you implying that you have a RIGHT to a "sporting chance" of bagging a deer next season!???

Someone poaching a deer has no direct affect on you or your property whatsoever. So are you stepping onto the slippery-slope of "potential" indirect affects on the "community" at large?



Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:03:23 PM EST
Originally Posted By NineLivez:
Originally Posted By learath:
Originally Posted By Global_Cooling:
Sometimes the State becomes the victim (ie domestic violence) even when the real victim doesn't want to press charges.


A victim unwilling to press charges is still a victim.


right up till the state says that no matter what, someone goes to jail A few years back when I lived in Tulsa my neighbors were in the back yard screaming at each other. I was watching in case it got physical, it never did, just a loud argument. Well, the cops show up because as it turns out, another neighbor call in a domestic. As he was getting arrested I got the attention of a cop standing off to the side and told him I saw the whole fight and neither one even touched the other. He stated that was what they both said and that neither had any marks, and as unfair as it is, when they show they HAVE to arrest someone. usually the male.
So yeah, sometimes there is no crime when there is no victim, even if the state has its panties in a twist to generate revenue.


That is fucking bullshit (not your story, but the actions of the police as mandated by law if that really is the case).
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:03:28 PM EST
Originally Posted By ArimoDave:
Originally Posted By Tweek218:
If you're talking a seatbelt or a little bit of weed, sure I agree.

DUI? You can just GTFO with your "victimless crime" bullshit.


Society becomes the victim when you wind up in a car crash, and because you were not wearing a seatbelt you are injured enough that EMS has to respond, or killed and the coroner has to go to work; it has to do with the tax payer being the victim. Now if EMS were not required to respond where a seatbelt was not used by an injured motorist, nor the coroner (your body just stays there until next-of-kin takes care of it), then you might have an argument here.



Logic fail.

The "crime" would be wrecking and getting injured sans seat belt. Simply not wearing one will not harm anyone whatsoever.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:04:08 PM EST
Necrophilia is okay in OP's eyes!





Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:05:46 PM EST
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Will:
Jesus Christ on the cross, enough Libertarian bullshit already around here. You're like fucking Moonies without the robes.


I worked with one for an entire day last month-he was so far out there that I asked him if he ever visited ARFCOM. I mean this guy used all the talking points we read here. He paused when I said "AR15.com" and denied being here at any time, but I suspect he was full of shit.


Yeah, fucking libertarians... minding their own goddamn business and shit? How are we ever going to have the perfect society with them spouting off about how the whole world should be like Somalia?

Why can't they just like the parts of the constitution that we like? Then we could rally together in accusing the libtards of destroying the constitution!

Shitting in the business of others using the force of law - FUCK YEAH!
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:07:27 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/2/2013 2:08:10 PM EST by NineLivez]
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By NineLivez:
Originally Posted By learath:
Originally Posted By Global_Cooling:
Sometimes the State becomes the victim (ie domestic violence) even when the real victim doesn't want to press charges.


A victim unwilling to press charges is still a victim.


right up till the state says that no matter what, someone goes to jail A few years back when I lived in Tulsa my neighbors were in the back yard screaming at each other. I was watching in case it got physical, it never did, just a loud argument. Well, the cops show up because as it turns out, another neighbor call in a domestic. As he was getting arrested I got the attention of a cop standing off to the side and told him I saw the whole fight and neither one even touched the other. He stated that was what they both said and that neither had any marks, and as unfair as it is, when they show they HAVE to arrest someone. usually the male.
So yeah, sometimes there is no crime when there is no victim, even if the state has its panties in a twist to generate revenue.


That is fucking bullshit (not your story, but the actions of the police as mandated by law if that really is the case).


They took the guy away, and that was what one LEO on scene told me. Thats all I got.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:07:50 PM EST
Originally Posted By pilotman:
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Will:
Jesus Christ on the cross, enough Libertarian bullshit already around here. You're like fucking Moonies without the robes.


I worked with one for an entire day last month-he was so far out there that I asked him if he ever visited ARFCOM. I mean this guy used all the talking points we read here. He paused when I said "AR15.com" and denied being here at any time, but I suspect he was full of shit.


Yeah, fucking libertarians... minding their own goddamn business and shit? How are we ever going to have the perfect society with them spouting off about how the whole world should be like Somalia?

Why can't they just like the parts of the constitution that we like? Then we could rally together in accusing the libtards of destroying the constitution!

Shitting in the business of others using the force of law - FUCK YEAH!


libertarians are so mentally gifted. I just feel so inadequate around them.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:08:40 PM EST
Originally Posted By WindRiver78:
There is ALWAYS a victim. And it depends on who's law we're talking about. May not be a crime against the state, but there are eternal laws that always have consequences whether in this life or the next.


Basing laws for all on the opinions of your particular religion is ridiculous.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:09:05 PM EST
Statist response:

"Suicide is a crime, therefore any harm you do yourself could be a crime... drugs, fatty food and masturbation are illegal"
"Think of the children... they are victims of your irresponsibility and greed"
"Pick up that can, bitch"
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:13:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/2/2013 2:14:56 PM EST by WindRiver78]
Originally Posted By GUNGUY148:
Originally Posted By WindRiver78:
There is ALWAYS a victim. And it depends on who's law we're talking about. May not be a crime against the state, but there are eternal laws that always have consequences whether in this life or the next.


Basing laws for all on the opinions of your particular religion is ridiculous.


Whether or not you believe in something has no bearing on whether or not it is actually true. Sorry if that hurts your ego just a bit.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:16:18 PM EST
Originally Posted By NineLivez:
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By NineLivez:
Originally Posted By learath:
Originally Posted By Global_Cooling:
Sometimes the State becomes the victim (ie domestic violence) even when the real victim doesn't want to press charges.


A victim unwilling to press charges is still a victim.


right up till the state says that no matter what, someone goes to jail A few years back when I lived in Tulsa my neighbors were in the back yard screaming at each other. I was watching in case it got physical, it never did, just a loud argument. Well, the cops show up because as it turns out, another neighbor call in a domestic. As he was getting arrested I got the attention of a cop standing off to the side and told him I saw the whole fight and neither one even touched the other. He stated that was what they both said and that neither had any marks, and as unfair as it is, when they show they HAVE to arrest someone. usually the male.
So yeah, sometimes there is no crime when there is no victim, even if the state has its panties in a twist to generate revenue.


That is fucking bullshit (not your story, but the actions of the police as mandated by law if that really is the case).


They took the guy away, and that was what one LEO on scene told me. Thats all I got.


I believe it. In the state of NM when I worked as a patrol officer, an arrest was always made when one of the two had bruises, or there was a third witness who articulated that there was a victim of physical assault.

If no bruises or witness, then at our discretion we could make one of them leave (usually the male) until they both cooled down. Most were repeat offenders in volatile relationships well known to us, and most incidents involved alcohol abuse or weed (like the wife that spent four days in jail for throwing a beer bottle at her hubbies face after smoking a blunt. I guess the two substances don't mix).

Sometimes the law was justified, but there were exceptions where officer discretion would have been beneficial to all. Not everyone that has a domestic has a history of it, and not all domestics warrant an arrest (such as the wife trying to punch her husband in a rage. Women trying to beat up on a man is a joke most of the time).
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:19:52 PM EST
Originally Posted By outofstep:
It's none of your god damn business what someone else does, if it harms nothing and no one. If you don't "like" something or "approve" of something, well tough fucking shit.

Discuss




Uhmmm... So what am i supposed to do with this hacksaw, and the two bags of lye?
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:30:59 PM EST
Originally Posted By learath:
Originally Posted By Global_Cooling:
Sometimes the State becomes the victim (ie domestic violence) even when the real victim doesn't want to press charges.


A victim unwilling to press charges is still a victim.


Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:51:43 PM EST
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:52:24 PM EST
Originally Posted By pilotman:
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Will:
Jesus Christ on the cross, enough Libertarian bullshit already around here. You're like fucking Moonies without the robes.


I worked with one for an entire day last month-he was so far out there that I asked him if he ever visited ARFCOM. I mean this guy used all the talking points we read here. He paused when I said "AR15.com" and denied being here at any time, but I suspect he was full of shit.


Yeah, fucking libertarians... minding their own goddamn business and shit? How are we ever going to have the perfect society with them spouting off about how the whole world should be like Somalia?

Why can't they just like the parts of the constitution that we like? Then we could rally together in accusing the libtards of destroying the constitution!

Shitting in the business of others using the force of law - FUCK YEAH!


Nobody wants to hear their Goddamn bullshit every fucking day in every fucking thread. Enough already. Here's a hint for the socially inept, people get tired of hearing the same fucking broken record and at some point they simply tune out.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:52:35 PM EST
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


No one.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 2:56:57 PM EST
Prostitution sting, John?
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:00:17 PM EST

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


No one.

The children. It's a common sense law.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:02:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


No one.

The gun laws are ridiculous when it comes to pre-crime. If someone used a sawed off coach gun to rob a store, they committed armed robbery. Who cares what type of weapon was used?
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:04:03 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/2/2013 3:04:17 PM EST by ContrarianIndicator]
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


Something that COULD be a problem IS a problem and therefore should be illegal.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:04:45 PM EST
Originally Posted By Derwood18:

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


No one.

The gun laws are ridiculous when it comes to pre-crime. If someone used a sawed off coach gun to rob a store, they committed armed robbery. Who cares what type of weapon was used?


I can't think of any laws that are more useless than those restricting the length of a weapon's barrel or OAL. Also, the restrictions on select fire weapons serve absolutely NO purpose in preventing crime.

Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:12:27 PM EST
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Derwood18:

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


No one.

The gun laws are ridiculous when it comes to pre-crime. If someone used a sawed off coach gun to rob a store, they committed armed robbery. Who cares what type of weapon was used?


I can't think of any laws that are more useless than those restricting the length of a weapon's barrel or OAL. Also, the restrictions on select fire weapons serve absolutely NO purpose in preventing crime.



All gun laws are ultimately just insanely illogical pre-crime murder laws. 10 years for a gun that's too short? Obviously you were going to kill someone with it hiding it under your trenchcoat. More than 7 rounds in your mag in NY? Clearly about to mow down 8+ people in a murder rampage. Everyone with a 1919 is a illegal side plate away from setting up at the end of a shopping mall and killing their fellow citizens.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:12:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Derwood18:

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


No one.

The gun laws are ridiculous when it comes to pre-crime. If someone used a sawed off coach gun to rob a store, they committed armed robbery. Who cares what type of weapon was used?


I can't think of any laws that are more useless than those restricting the length of a weapon's barrel or OAL. Also, the restrictions on select fire weapons serve absolutely NO purpose in preventing crime.


Only benefit I see is the edge given to government agents to use any weapon they choose to point at the populace.

The law must be obeyed or the citizens will begin to believe they can ignore govt's orders. Then where would we be?

(Italics denote sarcasm)
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:15:36 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:44:23 PM EST
Originally Posted By Derwood18:

Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Derwood18:

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


No one.

The gun laws are ridiculous when it comes to pre-crime. If someone used a sawed off coach gun to rob a store, they committed armed robbery. Who cares what type of weapon was used?


I can't think of any laws that are more useless than those restricting the length of a weapon's barrel or OAL. Also, the restrictions on select fire weapons serve absolutely NO purpose in preventing crime.


Only benefit I see is the edge given to government agents to use any weapon they choose to point at the populace.

The law must be obeyed or the citizens will begin to believe they can ignore govt's orders. Then where would we be?

(Italics denote sarcasm)


I actually believe the NFA of 1934 had some merit, in that over the years very few legally owned NFA weapons were used in crimes (IIRC, two up until 1986 when the Hughes Amendment was passed), one of which was a suicide according to a Small Arms Review article I read years ago.

A $200.00 transfer tax in 1934 was ridiculous, but in this day and age, would serve to deter most criminals from purchasing one. The added hoops you would have to jump through makes buying an NFA weapon somewhat more challenging, and involves a level of effort that would discourage most criminals to begin with.

If USMCTanker ran for prez, overturning the Hughes Amendment would be one of my primary goals of the first four years of my administration, along with selling surplus M14s and M16s to qualified individuals along the lines of the old DCM program (one per lifetime). In fact, I'd eliminate the CMP and bring back the old DCM (along with growing the size of government by subsidizing the program with taxpayers money) and return it to its original purpose of promoting marksmanship training via DoD and selling those weapons at a subsidized cost to make them more affordable to those with an interest in competitive shooting. This would serve to merge the goals of DoD (promoting rifle marksmanship for young people that may serve in uniform at a later date) with those who were actively interested in learning rifle marksmanship skills.

Then, I'd use the Swiss model of *state*-sponsored matches a reality by offering free ammo for matches utilizing those rifles sold by the DCM at rifle ranges ran by Army or Marine SNCOs. These events would also be state-sponsored (as in, the federal government), and promoted by private sector vendors and made to be family friendly as well. These matches would be attended by military armorers to service the weapons in need of repair free of charge. If a rifle needed a new part, it would be replaced free of charge to the owner. Taxpayers would pay for this.

In addition, I'd develop a program to give public school districts more taxpayer revenue when they agreed to offer small bore marksmanship training at high schools as extra credit for PE. Every HS would have a small bore rifle team. Taxpayers would fund the acquisition of rifles, the construction of new ranges on school property, and the costs of equipping the team. Private sector vendors would be free to sponsor such teams for their financial benefit in advertising.

My America would be a better place.





Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:46:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Derwood18:

Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Derwood18:

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
So who is victimized when someone cuts the barrel on their rifle shorter than 16" and threads a homemade suppressor on to it?


No one.

The gun laws are ridiculous when it comes to pre-crime. If someone used a sawed off coach gun to rob a store, they committed armed robbery. Who cares what type of weapon was used?


I can't think of any laws that are more useless than those restricting the length of a weapon's barrel or OAL. Also, the restrictions on select fire weapons serve absolutely NO purpose in preventing crime.


Only benefit I see is the edge given to government agents to use any weapon they choose to point at the populace.

The law must be obeyed or the citizens will begin to believe they can ignore govt's orders. Then where would we be?

(Italics denote sarcasm)


I actually believe the NFA of 1934 had some merit, in that over the years very few legally owned NFA weapons were used in crimes (IIRC, two up until 1986 when the Hughes Amendment was passed), one of which was a suicide according to a Small Arms Review article I read years ago.

A $200.00 transfer tax in 1934 was ridiculous, but in this day and age, would serve to deter most criminals from purchasing one. The added hoops you would have to jump through makes buying an NFA weapon somewhat more challenging, and involves a level of effort that would discourage most criminals to begin with.

If USMCTanker ran for prez, overturning the Hughes Amendment would be one of my primary goals of the first four years of my administration, along with selling surplus M14s and M16s to qualified individuals along the lines of the old DCM program (one per lifetime). In fact, I'd eliminate the CMP and bring back the old DCM (along with growing the size of government by subsidizing the program with taxpayers money) and return it to its original purpose of promoting marksmanship training via DoD and selling those weapons at a subsidized cost to make them more affordable to those with an interest in competitive shooting. This would serve to merge the goals of DoD (promoting rifle marksmanship for young people that may serve in uniform at a later date) with those who were actively interested in learning rifle marksmanship skills.

Then, I'd use the Swiss model of *state*-sponsored matches a reality by offering free ammo for matches utilizing those rifles sold by the DCM at rifle ranges ran by Army or Marine SNCOs. These events would also be state-sponsored (as in, the federal government), and promoted by private sector vendors and made to be family friendly as well. These matches would be attended by military armorers to service the weapons in need of repair free of charge. If a rifle needed a new part, it would be replaced free of charge to the owner. Taxpayers would pay for this.

In addition, I'd develop a program to give public school districts more taxpayer revenue when they agreed to offer small bore marksmanship training at high schools as extra credit for PE. Every HS would have a small bore rifle team. Taxpayers would fund the acquisition of rifles, the construction of new ranges on school property, and the costs of equipping the team. Private sector vendors would be free to sponsor such teams for their financial benefit in advertising.

My America would be a better place.






I would vote for you if you ran on a platform like that.


Link Posted: 7/2/2013 3:52:37 PM EST
WTF is a Hokie? A neutered turkey?
Originally Posted By Matt_The_Hokie:
DUI? Who is hurt when the driver drives into a ditch? Or their own garage?


But then again when you run over a group of kids...


Link Posted: 7/2/2013 4:15:28 PM EST
Originally Posted By WindRiver78:
There is ALWAYS a victim. And it depends on who's law we're talking about. May not be a crime against the state, but there are eternal laws that always have consequences whether in this life or the next.


Wow!

Scary shit right there.

It isn't illegal, but if you do it, a mythical being will shove it up your ass.

Link Posted: 7/2/2013 4:19:40 PM EST
Originally Posted By AudiDat:
Originally Posted By waterglass:
I disagree..

If someone was peeping at me and someone elses wife doing it, and they told no one. They commited a crime.

I'd never sleep with another mans wife, but that doesnt change the fact that it is still a crime. Me commiting a bad act does not absolve the voyuer, that is the point here.


Try another analogy, this one sucks. He said victimless, your privacy was violated, you're the victim.


I am setting on my bed undressing, uncovering a huge unsightly birthmark.. Some one watches me undress, and sticks around to get a good look, but tells no one, I would never know, but I would still be the victim of a crime.

Link Posted: 7/2/2013 4:20:49 PM EST
Originally Posted By outofstep:
It's none of your god damn business what someone else does, if it harms nothing and no one. If you don't "like" something or "approve" of something, well tough fucking shit.

Discuss




Truthiness
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 4:28:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By Traderjac:
WTF is a Hokie? A neutered turkey?
Originally Posted By Matt_The_Hokie:
DUI? Who is hurt when the driver drives into a ditch? Or their own garage?


But then again when you run over a group of kids...



VMI or Citadel grad?
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 4:56:30 PM EST
Originally Posted By ArimoDave:
Originally Posted By Tweek218:
If you're talking a seatbelt or a little bit of weed, sure I agree.

DUI? You can just GTFO with your "victimless crime" bullshit.


Society becomes the victim when you wind up in a car crash, and because you were not wearing a seatbelt you are injured enough that EMS has to respond, or killed and the coroner has to go to work; it has to do with the tax payer being the victim. Now if EMS were not required to respond where a seatbelt was not used by an injured motorist, nor the coroner (your body just stays there until next-of-kin takes care of it), then you might have an argument here.





So we get rid of dangerous guns.
Got it.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:19:41 PM EST
Originally Posted By Tweek218:
If you're talking a seatbelt or a little bit of weed, sure I agree.

DUI? You can just GTFO with your "victimless crime" bullshit.


This.

Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:21:37 PM EST
Do you even lift?

Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:23:03 PM EST
Originally Posted By outofstep:
It's none of your god damn business what someone else does, if it harms nothing and no one. If you don't "like" something or "approve" of something, well tough fucking shit.

Discuss




Fucking doper paulbot hippie scum!!!!

There. Got that out of the way.


I agree with OP completely on this issue. MYOB Biyotch!
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:27:09 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:28:47 PM EST
Originally Posted By TerryC:
Originally Posted By Tweek218:
If you're talking a seatbelt or a little bit of weed, sure I agree.

DUI? You can just GTFO with your "victimless crime" bullshit.


This.



The owner of the road is the victim. The perp violated the terms of use by using it in an unsafe manner. If he hut anyone, they're a victim of wilfully negligent endangerment, and battery with a deadly weapon.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:31:36 PM EST
And poaching is theft of game as well as trespassing. It should be illegal, unless it's eggs or Codfish, and it's served with bernaise and. Garlic sauteed spinach. In that case, rock on!
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:50:29 PM EST
Originally Posted By pilotman:
But...but... think of the effects on society

Oh, and don't forget the children™


I wanna wkwno how th do the travdmarmk thin3g.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:51:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/2/2013 5:52:50 PM EST by outofstep]
Yes. I am everything listed so far in this thread. Got a DUI (pot and beer) and seatbelt ticket while fucking my dead sister (who I paid for from a pimp), while driving to my deer stand to poach some out of season bucks with a 10in shotgun. I dont however like Ron Paul.
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:52:44 PM EST
Originally Posted By The_Macallan:


Should poaching be illegal?






if it weren't illegal it wouldn't be poaching.

GR
Link Posted: 7/2/2013 5:53:20 PM EST
It is in the best interests of the government to make everyone a criminal.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Page / 6
Top Top