This is an example of criminal behavior with guns. Are the folks who do stuff like this to be considered criminals like inner-city murderers? No, of course not. Yet, some of our commenters are big supporters of the all-or-nothing theory of criminal justice. They say it's the letter of the law that counts. I don't believe it's quite that black and white. I say there's a big gray area among the lawful gun owners and many of the folks who shoot up road signs are in it.
What's your opinion?
Let's see, in the post you linked to, I didn't see anyone disagree with shooting up road signs being criminal behavior. And you say that some lawful gun owners break the law (which no one has disagreed with). So what is your point? Are you trying a stealth way of getting people to agree that it is your unsupported 10%?
ReplyDeleteYeah Mike, because shooting a sign is exactly the same as murdering someone......
ReplyDeleteYes, Reputo, no one disagreed that it's illegal to shoot road signs, but no one admitted having done it either. My point is this is a behavior limited to gun owners who are not inner-city gang-bangers. The guys who do this are hunters and other gun enthusiasts who, I would imagine, are law abiding citizens, for the most part. And that's the crux of the matter, "for the most part." Things are not black and white like some of you like to pretend.
ReplyDeleteMikeB,
ReplyDeletebut no one admitted having done it either.
So the assumption is because many of your readers are gun owners we must have broken the law and shot up street signs?
Then you wonder why we get upset are your arrogance and insults to us.
My point is this is a behavior limited to gun owners who are not inner-city gang-bangers.
Your bigotry is showing again. As if criminals don't exist outside of the inner city.
No one has claimed that gun owners are perfectly law abiding.
What we have claimed and proven that the number of gun owners who are criminal is small.
It is so small that it is ridiculous to continue to call for restrictions on our rights.
Especially since you present no evidence that gun control laws advocated by you reduce crime.
but no one admitted having done it either.
ReplyDeleteMaybe because none of your regular posters have done it. Maybe it isn't as common as you believe it is. Frankly, I am with W'eerd on this. I have never seen a road sign with bullet holes in them. Never. I have seen pictures, but never seen a sign in person. I have seen lots of signs with grafitti on them. Il principe stated that he was with a friend who did it. That is the closest you have. Perhaps the vast majority of gun owners really are, like some of us say, law abiding citizens and don't use firearms in stupid ways. If you believe that since you did, then everyone must, that is projection. It doesn't mean its true.
In the post you link to, you show a picture of a sign on private property. How do you not know that the property owner didn't shoot up his own sign? It's not criminal behavior to shoot your own stuff if there is no law against discharging a firearm on your property.
ReplyDeleteIf someone is shooting a state owned road sign, that's already against the letter of the law. There is no gray area. Some people are obeying the law. Some people aren't.
Guys, maybe that's because we're far more law-abiding than MikeB, especially when guns are involved.
ReplyDeleteI'm really not following your post/questions, but why NOT enforce all the laws that are there?
ReplyDelete"Are the folks who do stuff like this to be considered criminals like inner-city murderers?"
You SEEM to be implying that there are only a few firearms laws such that an inner-city murderer and a sign-shooter would be prosecuted under the same law, but that doesn't make sense.
Yes, the people doing the sign shooting are guilty of a crime (actually, numerous crimes). I'm not sure, but I'm betting most of the charges would be misdemeanors for this, but it's still a crime, making the perpetrators, in fact, criminals.
Of course, with all the laws on the books, it's nearly impossible NOT to be break some laws in this country...every day when I go for a walk, I cross the street to the sidewalk, technically jaywalking. No where near the gravity of discharging a deadly weapon, but still makes me technically a criminal.
The jaywalking example is a good one. We could probably come up with even milder examples of breaking the law, which in my opinion make the arguments of AztecRed and Bob S. absurd. That's the gray area I keep talking about. There are many minor infractions which "good guys" commit, which when it comes to guns, do not make them criminals but do make them potentially dangerous.
ReplyDeleteSo jaywalking makes me potentially dangerous with a firearm?
ReplyDeleteAnd you wonder why we jump to the conclusion that you want to ban all guns?
Maybe we should change tactics and say you don't have a problem with guns, you just want to ban ownership of guns by anyone in the gray area (which is everyone - only Jesus has been claimed to be perfect and Hitler was an inspirational speaker who was fond of kittens).
What's the difference between the two?
"There are many minor infractions which "good guys" commit, which when it comes to guns, do not make them criminals but do make them potentially dangerous."
ReplyDeleteIf those minor infractions are against the law, then you are not in a gray area. You are a law breaker.