Hero Defends Shop With Unregistered Gun

[WillowTree]

I think he should be thanked for saving all those people, then immediately arrested for shooting someone with an unregistered gun. He is a criminal. A hero, but a criminal who broke the law.

Interesting dichotomy if you ask me.

I have seen so many people say over and over, if you break the law, you should be punished. This guy should be thanked and prosecuted.

By doing so you'd then make it so people think twice before using their guns for self-defense, and thus making it far more likely to have victims rather than heroes. This man should be praised for his bravery, not prosecuted for an unjust law that makes criminals out of law abiding citizens.

Perhaps you didn't read my post. I said he should be praised for what he did but he is not a law biding citizen. Using a registered gun for self defense is the American way. There are gun laws for a reason, so this should make people more aware of being legal. This will actually help the cause.

The people who were shot were wrong and so was the shooter. He is a hero, but he is wrong. There is no gray area with gun laws. You break the law, you should be prosecuted for doing so, but in this case, he should be thanked first.

I guess you know you sound like a moonbat.

 

[WillowTree]

Thank him, and arrest him. He is a law breaker. Technically he is as bad as the people he shot.

A store owner defending himself and his property is "technically" as bad as four violent criminals? Where in the fuck do you get that?

First of all, as a moral matter, such a man is NOT "technically as bad" as the people he shot. Not even sure how I'd go about arguing that one.

Second of all, as a legal matter, the possession of an unregistered firearm, I can ASSURE YOU, carries nowhere near the penalty as attempted robbery. So "technically" you're dead fucking wrong.

I swear...

Don't swear, just agree, if you break the law you should be punished. The old man thankfully stopped a robbery, but he broke the law and should be punished for BREAKING THE LAW.
There are gun laws for a reason, agree? If they determine he should get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

The next time a home boy shoots someone because he saw a crime and his gun is unregistered, please come back here and defend him as well. I will say the exact same thing, thank you and he should be prosecuted. Lets see if he gets a slap on the wrist and support from everyone like this old man.

alert us when those high ranking democrats who failed to pay their taxes are in jail,, then we will deal with the shop keeper. TIA

 

[Zona]

A store owner defending himself and his property is "technically" as bad as four violent criminals? Where in the fuck do you get that?

First of all, as a moral matter, such a man is NOT "technically as bad" as the people he shot. Not even sure how I'd go about arguing that one.

Second of all, as a legal matter, the possession of an unregistered firearm, I can ASSURE YOU, carries nowhere near the penalty as attempted robbery. So "technically" you're dead fucking wrong.

I swear...

Don't swear, just agree, if you break the law you should be punished. The old man thankfully stopped a robbery, but he broke the law and should be punished for BREAKING THE LAW.
There are gun laws for a reason, agree? If they determine he should get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

The next time a home boy shoots someone because he saw a crime and his gun is unregistered, please come back here and defend him as well. I will say the exact same thing, thank you and he should be prosecuted. Lets see if he gets a slap on the wrist and support from everyone like this old man.

alert us when those high ranking democrats who failed to pay their taxes are in jail,, then we will deal with the shop keeper. TIA

This is called a diversion. People tend to do it when they know they are losing. Here is a thought, stay on point.

The man who shot up those people did it illegally. I thank him for protecting his workers, but he did it illegally. He should be prosecuted. If they determine he is to get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

Gun laws are there for a reason, not for convenience when you think the shooter is justified.

Selective law enforcement is wrong. Agree?

 

[WillowTree]

Don't swear, just agree, if you break the law you should be punished. The old man thankfully stopped a robbery, but he broke the law and should be punished for BREAKING THE LAW.
There are gun laws for a reason, agree? If they determine he should get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

The next time a home boy shoots someone because he saw a crime and his gun is unregistered, please come back here and defend him as well. I will say the exact same thing, thank you and he should be prosecuted. Lets see if he gets a slap on the wrist and support from everyone like this old man.

alert us when those high ranking democrats who failed to pay their taxes are in jail,, then we will deal with the shop keeper. TIA

This is called a diversion. People tend to do it when they know they are losing. Here is a thought, stay on point.

The man who shot up those people did it illegally. I thank him for protecting his workers, but he did it illegally. He should be prosecuted. If they determine he is to get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

Gun laws are there for a reason, not for convenience when you think the shooter is justified.

Selective law enforcement is wrong. Agree?

Right after the lawbreakers from the democratic party are jailed.. let us know we shall wait on your reports.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

The man who shot up those people did it illegally.

You don't know that. You are assuming. It was a shotgun the man used, and according to the story he bought it decades ago. Are shotguns required to be registered in New York? Is there a "grandfather" clause? Are Long rifles and shotguns required to be registered? Or just handguns and "assault" firearms?

Just because MSNBC deigns to tell us the shotgun wasn't registered, doesn't mean it was supposed to be. Their selective reporting left out that little bit of information, just like it left out whether the perp's handguns were registered or not.

 

[WillowTree]

The man who shot up those people did it illegally.

You don't know that. You are assuming. It was a shotgun the man used, and according to the story he bought it decades ago. Are shotguns required to be registered in New York? Is there a "grandfather" clause? Are Long rifles and shotguns required to be registered? Or just handguns and "assault" firearms?

Just because MSNBC deigns to tell us the shotgun wasn't registered, doesn't mean it was supposed to be. Their selective reporting left out that little bit of information, just like it left out whether the perp's handguns were registered or not.

and then right after "zona" finishes explaining away your points ask her/him why the "lawmaker/breakers aren't in jail and if the lawmaker/breakers don't follow the law why should the shopkeeper? I'd be interested in an answer.

 

[Zona]

alert us when those high ranking democrats who failed to pay their taxes are in jail,, then we will deal with the shop keeper. TIA

This is called a diversion. People tend to do it when they know they are losing. Here is a thought, stay on point.

The man who shot up those people did it illegally. I thank him for protecting his workers, but he did it illegally. He should be prosecuted. If they determine he is to get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

Gun laws are there for a reason, not for convenience when you think the shooter is justified.

Selective law enforcement is wrong. Agree?

Right after the lawbreakers from the democratic party are jailed.. let us know we shall wait on your reports.

You are diverting again. But it seems its all you have. In the future, try to stay on point.

 

[WillowTree]

This is called a diversion. People tend to do it when they know they are losing. Here is a thought, stay on point.

The man who shot up those people did it illegally. I thank him for protecting his workers, but he did it illegally. He should be prosecuted. If they determine he is to get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

Gun laws are there for a reason, not for convenience when you think the shooter is justified.

Selective law enforcement is wrong. Agree?

Right after the lawbreakers from the democratic party are jailed.. let us know we shall wait on your reports.

You are diverting again. But it seems its all you have. In the future, try to stay on point.

so,, here we are at the bottom line, you cannot answer the questions.. we get it moombat,, you are not unlike the thousands who have come before you. we mock you.

 

[jillian]

I didn't read the link, but if his gun was unregistered, doesn't that make him a criminal as well?

Well then we should arrest him immediately for likely saving the lives of his employees.

Then he should have registered his gun.

FWIW, they chose not to prosecute him. Funny how I agreed with that until I started reading this thread.

 

[elvis]

I HATE gun registration laws and most other forms of gun-control. I don't agree with them. Having said that, they ARE the law and if he'd been prosecuted, he wouldn't have any room to complain.

 

[xsited1]

I didn't read the link, but if his gun was unregistered, doesn't that make him a criminal as well?

Well then we should arrest him immediately for likely saving the lives of his employees.

Then he should have registered his gun.

FWIW, they chose not to prosecute him. Funny how I agreed with that until I started reading this thread.

You now think that he should be prosecuted or are you just joking?

 

[jillian]

You now think that he should be prosecuted or are you just joking?

half joking. I still don't think they should prosecute because from all reports, the guy had this gun for years, never used it and was a really decent person who saved his employees' lives. plus, people kept trying to rob the place because they had a lot of cash business.

that said, i think the fact that the people on this thread are using him as a shining example and saying it's a good thing that he broke the law is a problem.

 

[xsited1]

You now think that he should be prosecuted or are you just joking?

half joking. I still don't think they should prosecute because from all reports, the guy had this gun for years, never used it and was a really decent person who saved his employees' lives. plus, people kept trying to rob the place because they had a lot of cash business.

that said, i think the fact that the people on this thread are using him as a shining example and saying it's a good thing that he broke the law is a problem.

My opinion is that the law is unjust in this case. A grandfather provision should have been included in the law. Perhaps that's why he wasn't prosecuted.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Don't swear, just agree, if you break the law you should be punished. The old man thankfully stopped a robbery, but he broke the law and should be punished for BREAKING THE LAW.
There are gun laws for a reason, agree? If they determine he should get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

The next time a home boy shoots someone because he saw a crime and his gun is unregistered, please come back here and defend him as well. I will say the exact same thing, thank you and he should be prosecuted. Lets see if he gets a slap on the wrist and support from everyone like this old man.

alert us when those high ranking democrats who failed to pay their taxes are in jail,, then we will deal with the shop keeper. TIA

This is called a diversion. People tend to do it when they know they are losing. Here is a thought, stay on point.

The man who shot up those people did it illegally. I thank him for protecting his workers, but he did it illegally. He should be prosecuted. If they determine he is to get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

Gun laws are there for a reason, not for convenience when you think the shooter is justified.

Selective law enforcement is wrong. Agree?

No, because the law he broke is unjust in the first place. Had he not broken the law he would have at least been robbed, probably assaulted, and maybe dead. Any law that makes it illegal to defend yourself, your property, and other innocent people is unjust and needs to go immediately.

 

[jillian]

You now think that he should be prosecuted or are you just joking?

half joking. I still don't think they should prosecute because from all reports, the guy had this gun for years, never used it and was a really decent person who saved his employees' lives. plus, people kept trying to rob the place because they had a lot of cash business.

that said, i think the fact that the people on this thread are using him as a shining example and saying it's a good thing that he broke the law is a problem.

My opinion is that the law is unjust in this case. A grandfather provision should have been included in the law. Perhaps that's why he wasn't prosecuted.

I think he wasn't prosecuted because no one wants to put him in jail for saving lives. I don't know if there's a grandfather provision or not. But I don't think it's unfair for people to register their weapons.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You now think that he should be prosecuted or are you just joking?

half joking. I still don't think they should prosecute because from all reports, the guy had this gun for years, never used it and was a really decent person who saved his employees' lives. plus, people kept trying to rob the place because they had a lot of cash business.

that said, i think the fact that the people on this thread are using him as a shining example and saying it's a good thing that he broke the law is a problem.

No one's arguing that breaking the law in general is a good thing, otherwise we'd probably be defending the four criminals. We're saying we don't have a problem with the shop owner breaking an unjust law since it allowed him to defend the people in his shop and his property.

 

[jillian]

No, because the law he broke is unjust in the first place. Had he not broken the law he would have at least been robbed, probably assaulted, and maybe dead. Any law that makes it illegal to defend yourself, your property, and other innocent people is unjust and needs to go immediately.

Who cares if you think a law is unjust? If you think it's unjust, petiton your representatvies to change it.

You don't get to unilaterally decide what laws you observe and what laws you don't.

 

[jillian]

No one's arguing that breaking the law in general is a good thing, otherwise we'd probably be defending the four criminals. We're saying we don't have a problem with the shop owner breaking an unjust law since it allowed him to defend the people in his shop and his property.

There is always prosecutorial discretion. And judges always have the right to dismiss charges in the interests of justice, even when they are brought.

But again, you don't have the right to pick and choose.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

alert us when those high ranking democrats who failed to pay their taxes are in jail,, then we will deal with the shop keeper. TIA

This is called a diversion. People tend to do it when they know they are losing. Here is a thought, stay on point.

The man who shot up those people did it illegally. I thank him for protecting his workers, but he did it illegally. He should be prosecuted. If they determine he is to get a slap on the wrist, so be it.

Gun laws are there for a reason, not for convenience when you think the shooter is justified.

Selective law enforcement is wrong. Agree?

No, because the law he broke is unjust in the first place. Had he not broken the law he would have at least been robbed, probably assaulted, and maybe dead. Any law that makes it illegal to defend yourself, your property, and other innocent people is unjust and needs to go immediately.

Personally, I don't believe there should be any restrictions on the right to bear arms. However, according to the Constitution, the individual states have the authority to place restrictions on the said right as they see fit.

If the restriction was passed without the ability of the employers to have a say, I would agree with you that said law is unjust. That isn't the case though.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No, because the law he broke is unjust in the first place. Had he not broken the law he would have at least been robbed, probably assaulted, and maybe dead. Any law that makes it illegal to defend yourself, your property, and other innocent people is unjust and needs to go immediately.

Who cares if you think a law is unjust? If you think it's unjust, petiton your representatvies to change it.

You don't get to unilaterally decide what laws you observe and what laws you don't.

I don't live in New York, so it's not for me to try and change their system. Though pointing out why it's unjust is my choice.