TexasCHLforum.com

If I had an "heirloom" Thompson m1a1 laying around the house that my grandfather brought home from WWII and it wasn't registered before '86, the same thing would happen here. I don't like all BAFT laws but I follow them. If I was across "The Pond", I would follow the laws until I was able to flee to a more gun friendly place. Ignorance is no excuse.

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:If I had an "heirloom" Thompson m1a1 laying around the house that my grandfather brought home from WWII and it wasn't registered before '86, the same thing would happen here. I don't like all BAFT laws but I follow them. If I was across "The Pond", I would follow the laws until I was able to flee to a more gun friendly place. Ignorance is no excuse.

I think it entirely depends on the circumstances, assuming that I would even tolerate the assumption that it is a "crime" in the first place.

Except that your case, you had the opportunity to rectify the situation and keep the gun... ...until 1986.

Gail Cochrane has never been given that opportunity. She, and thousands of other gun owners were criminalized by the stroke of a pen. That could happen here. Would you meekly obey if it happened, or would you put up a fight and perhaps bury a gun or two?

Just askin'...

First, I would not live in a society that has such restrictions on its subjects, I mean, citizens. I believe the 5 year minimum is too much for this particular case and feel any case should be judged on its own. However, handguns have been effectivly outlawed since Mrs. Cochrane was 10 years old, she had many years to rectify this situation. This is no different than inheriting any illegal item, you either refuse possession, destroy it, or turn it in to authorities. If my dad died and left me a kilo of heroin, I sure wouldn't hold onto it for three decades, its the same logic.

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Ignorance is no excuse.

This is exactly why there are such a tremendous number of equally tremendously long and complicated laws in this country. They are purposely written to be too numerous, complex, and convoluted for anyone to understand. The fact that ignorance is no excuse allows the government to pass nearly anything, which gets applied and interpreted in uncountable and unthinkable ways, they want with little notice. The simple volume of laws in this country to too much for anyone, even full time legal scholars and lawyers (including those that write them), to track. And people, who are not full time lawyers and legal scholars, are supposed to not be ignorant of the laws when those who sign them do not read them, nor understand them themselves.




I was watching Prime Minister's Questions last weekend and one MP brought the issue of his constituents begging the government to install more cameras in their area to cut down on crime. It is truly sad and disheartening that a people, that once lived in the world's bastion of liberty, can be so imprisoned and debased as to beg and plead for themselves to be watched like criminals. All because they are denied the basic natural right of private property, be it their homes or their own bodies, and the right to defend that property. What is even sadder and more disheartening is that we are following right in their footsteps.

The Annoyed Man wrote:Would you meekly obey if it happened, or would you put up a fight and perhaps bury a gun or two?

Just askin'...

If it is time to bury them...It is time to use them!

I cant help but giggle when i read about grannys going to jail.......im so ashamed of myself.

An epic fail for "zero tolerance" and the "rule of law", jailing (or is that "gaoling" over there) a 53 year old woman for five years on account of what is essentially an artificial "crime".

Ridiculous.