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.

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

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!

GD has been on a roll lately

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.

Ah yes, the infamous drive by disagreement.

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

You go petal that freedom shit somewhere else.  

The victim might be society at large - or perhaps the potential victim just got lucky this time.

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?
 

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

Logic fail.

The "crime" would be wrecking and getting injured sans seat belt. Simply not wearing one will not harm anyone whatsoever.

Necrophilia is okay in OP's eyes!


     

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!

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

libertarians are so mentally gifted.  I just feel so inadequate around them.

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

Statist response:

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.

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).

Uhmmm... So what am i supposed to do with this hacksaw, and the two bags of lye?

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

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.

No one.

Prostitution sting, John?

The children.  It's a common sense law.

 

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?



 

Something that COULD be a problem IS a problem and therefore should be illegal.

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.

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.







 

WTF is a Hokie? A neutered turkey?








 

Wow!

Scary shit right there.

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

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.

Truthiness

VMI or Citadel grad?

 

So we get rid of dangerous guns.
Got it.

This.

Do you even lift?

Fucking doper paulbot hippie scum!!!!

There.  Got that out of the way.  


I agree with OP completely on this issue.  MYOB Biyotch!

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.

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!

I wanna wkwno how th do the travdmarmk thin3g.

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.

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

GR

It is in the best interests of the government to make everyone a criminal.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile