DIYbanter - View Single Post

Han

(Doug Miller) wrote in
:

In article , Han
wrote:
(Doug Miller) wrote in
:

In article , Han
wrote:
(Doug Miller) wrote in
- september.org:

And how do you propose to do that?

Real penalties for offenders.

In other words, enforcement of existing laws?

Re-instatement of rules that (IMNSHO) were
imprudently canceled, and enforcement of existing rules. Those
rules should also govern gun shows, and private transactions.

And how do you propose to guarantee that the rules are followed in
private transactions? Remember that -- by definition -- criminals
are people who don't obey the law. So what mechanism do you propose
that would ensure that criminals would abide by whatever new laws
you might instate?

The law says that you have to obey. As far as I know, even the excuse
"I didn't know that was the law" isn't a valid excuse. Don't you get
a ticket when going 75 mph in a 55 mph zone even if you didn't see the
sign?

Just make the penalty good enough for people to start paying
attention.

In most U.S. states, the crime of murder is punishable by death. Even
that penalty hasn't proven "good enough for people to start paying
attention" to the fact that murder is against the law.

Again, I ask: Since criminals are, by definition, people who don't
obey laws, how do you propose that *any* law is going to modify their
behavior?

It seems that you are now saying that laws have no use, since criminals
pay no attention anyway.
Are you advocating a free for all as the alternative? An eye for an eye?
Or sharia? Or what?

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid