PsychologicalAgent64 t1_j29hqxv wrote on December 30, 2022 at 4:54 PM

Reply to comment by 5teerPike in Boston man charged with bringing loaded gun to Logan Airport Terminal A security by JBupp

Same reason as everyone else I'd imagine.

5teerPike t1_j29i90s wrote on December 30, 2022 at 4:58 PM

Everyone else isn't a repeat offending criminal.

That's not an answer.

PsychologicalAgent64 t1_j29ifpt wrote on December 30, 2022 at 4:59 PM

Again his crime is victimless. Keep kneeling to the state. Daddy will keep on spanking you if you are a good boy.

5teerPike t1_j29ikn3 wrote on December 30, 2022 at 5:00 PM

I don't need a gun to walk through life lol

5teerPike t1_j29ishk wrote on December 30, 2022 at 5:01 PM

As per the article

"charged with his third offense of carrying a loaded firearm without a license, illegal possession of a firearm without a license with a prior violent offense"

It's not a victimless crime if it's a gun being carried by a person with a history of criminal violence.

His previous offense was not a victimless crime and it's why he's not allowed to have a gun.

PsychologicalAgent64 t1_j29kjry wrote on December 30, 2022 at 5:12 PM

So, tell me, who exactly was the victim in this current arrest. I'll send them a card. And again "his third offense" doesn't mean anything when the law is immoral and spurious. 🤷.

5teerPike t1_j29ky9f wrote on December 30, 2022 at 5:15 PM

Everyone who has a right to safety and to not sit next to an armed criminal with a history of violence.

But if you need a gun all the time is that what you're preparing for? Because then that would just be two criminals on a plane with guns.

BlaineTog t1_j29qho2 wrote on December 30, 2022 at 5:49 PM

Once you've outted yourself as a violent asshole why won't follow the rules, it's reasonable to presume that you might get violent in the future. This warrants restrictions that wouldn't be in place for other people precisely to prevent future victims.

You're moving the goalposts on us here. Laws don't require a victim to be valid. Restraining orders, for example, could be argued as not technically having a victim since their aim is to prevent future crimes that haven't happened yet rather than punish past crimes. You're trying to pretend that that very simple and obvious type of legal restriction doesn't exist, while in fact it does.

ManWithTheCats t1_j29rrvj wrote on December 30, 2022 at 5:57 PM

Ah, so I only need to follow laws that I agree with. Good to know 🙄