Their actions here are among the worst, because this effort
will accomplish absolutely nothing of what they want it to.
Instead of greater accountability to those who actually break the law,
they intend to make it much more difficult for those of us who follow
the law.
Instead of penalizing those who do harm, this initiative will harm those who do good. And the fringe-left whacvk jobs at the democratian are tapping into that meme.
Instead of trying to injure our rights (What part of "shall not be infringed" do you people not get?) here's a series of laws from a place where gun crime is practically unknown.
Instead of penalizing those who do harm, this initiative will harm those who do good. And the fringe-left whacvk jobs at the democratian are tapping into that meme.
Instead of trying to injure our rights (What part of "shall not be infringed" do you people not get?) here's a series of laws from a place where gun crime is practically unknown.
Arms Offences[sic] Act
The Arms Offences[sic] Act regulates firearms offenses[sic].[19] Any person who uses or attempts to use arms (Section 4) can face execution, as well as any person who uses or attempts to use arms to commit scheduled offences[sic] (Section 4A). These scheduled offences[sic] are being a member of an unlawful assembly; rioting; certain offences[sic] against the person; abduction or kidnapping; extortion; burglary; robbery; preventing or resisting arrest; vandalism; mischief. Any person who is an accomplice (Section 5) to a person convicted of arms use during a scheduled offence[sic] can likewise be executed.
Trafficking in arms (Section 6) is a capital offence[sic] in Singapore. Under the Arms Offences[sic] Act, trafficking is defined as being in unlawful possession of more than two firearms.
[25/84]
(3) Where any person at the time of his committing or at the time of his apprehension for any scheduled offence[sic] has on his person any arm, he shall be guilty of an offence[sic] and shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for life and shall also be punished with caning with not less than 6 strokes.
(4) Where any person convicted of an offence[sic] punishable under subsection (1) or (2) is proved to have been previously convicted of a scheduled offence[sic], he shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than 5 years and not more than 20 years and shall also be punished with caning with not less than 6 strokes.4.
[25/84]
—(1) Subject to any exception referred to in Chapter IV of the Penal Code (Cap. 224) which may be applicable (other than section 95), any person who uses or attempts to use any arm shall be guilty of an offence[sic] and shall on conviction be punished with death.(2) In any proceedings for an offence[sic] under this section, any person who uses or attempts to use any arm shall, until the contrary is proved, be presumed to have used or attempted to use the arm with the intention to cause physical injury to any person or property.
[30/93]
THESE are the kinds of laws that would do the most to impact gun crimes... not this feel-good, left wing crap.
.
.
This initiative is a classic case of confusing “motion” with “action.” These idiots feel compelled to do SOMETHING
in the face of Sandy Hook, presumably. They obviously believe in this
effort, unintended consequences notwithstanding, or they wouldn’t be doing
it. Unfortunately, except for punishing those of us who obey the law for
the actions of those who do not, this bill accomplishes absolutely nothing
positive.
Sandy Hook is yet another name that will live in infamy. The question I have is this: what in this initiative would have stopped it?
.
Sandy Hook is yet another name that will live in infamy. The question I have is this: what in this initiative would have stopped it?
.
That
this initiative, had it been fully implemented, would have made no difference in
Sandy Hook is the thing.
.
That this initiative would do nothing to improve the security of soft targets like schools is the thing.
That this initiative would do nothing to improve the security of soft targets like schools is the thing.
.
That this initiative punishes those of us who follow the law for the actions of those who break the law is the thing.
That this initiative punishes those of us who follow the law for the actions of those who break the law is the thing.
.
That this initiative will make no impact on street sales where guns are sold to those who are not supposed to have them (Felons, for example) is the thing.
That this initiative will make no impact on street sales where guns are sold to those who are not supposed to have them (Felons, for example) is the thing.
.
That this initiative will do nothing to stop anyone from, say, buying a gun in Oregon or Idaho without undergoing this nonsense is the thing.
That this initiative will do nothing to stop anyone from, say, buying a gun in Oregon or Idaho without undergoing this nonsense is the thing.
.
In fact, I offer you one word that sums up the ultimate aim of the democrats you are joining with: Chicago.
In fact, I offer you one word that sums up the ultimate aim of the democrats you are joining with: Chicago.
.
This bill accomplishes absolutely nothing except to increase the bureaucracy (always a democrat goal) and provide revenue to the state (always a democrat goal) while making it more difficult for those who obey the law to purchase weapons.
This bill accomplishes absolutely nothing except to increase the bureaucracy (always a democrat goal) and provide revenue to the state (always a democrat goal) while making it more difficult for those who obey the law to purchase weapons.
.
It's difficult to see where THAT isn't the real goal of this idiocy: and why would government want it to be more difficult for the law-abiding to buy weapons?
It's difficult to see where THAT isn't the real goal of this idiocy: and why would government want it to be more difficult for the law-abiding to buy weapons?
.
We have a Constitution. It sets limits on government and initiative. This bill appears to cavalierly violate those limits.
We have a Constitution. It sets limits on government and initiative. This bill appears to cavalierly violate those limits.
.
Those who obey the law will suffer. Those who break the law won't even notice... or care. And it seems to me that whack jobs shilling this pap's priorities are just the tiniest bit screwed up here.
Those who obey the law will suffer. Those who break the law won't even notice... or care. And it seems to me that whack jobs shilling this pap's priorities are just the tiniest bit screwed up here.
.
I don’t doubt their sincerity. But I would wish that in this instance, like all others where initiatives are proposed or supported, those doing the proposing or supporting would stand back and see what the outcome would be BEFORE this (or any other initiative) is passed into law... except, hurting those who follow the law has always been their goal.
I don’t doubt their sincerity. But I would wish that in this instance, like all others where initiatives are proposed or supported, those doing the proposing or supporting would stand back and see what the outcome would be BEFORE this (or any other initiative) is passed into law... except, hurting those who follow the law has always been their goal.
.
This initiative will not do what it appears that they want it to do. But it will harm those of us who obey the law. And it is likely unconstitutional as a result.
This initiative will not do what it appears that they want it to do. But it will harm those of us who obey the law. And it is likely unconstitutional as a result.
No comments:
Post a Comment