From: Dave Reay, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>< The problem with the argument on retrospective legislation
> is that even if we successfully argued it in court, the
> outcome would be meaningless.
The point would be that we were entitled to hold on to
our legally owned property and that the guvermint had
acted illegally in depriving us of our handguns. We could
then claim that we were entitled to replace the stolen
property with like for like. We would be in a far better
position to argue that the ban was a useless waste of
public finances if we all had our handguns and the crime
rate had not increased because of it. We have seen the
crime rate with firearms increase after the ban, if the
handguns were returned and their logic was correct, then
surely the crime rate with handguns must rise! I would be
prepared to offer odds of 20 to one that the crime rate
with handguns would not rise because we were allowed to
shoot handguns for sport. We are not criminals and do
not use firearms for criminal purposes, therefore the
crime rate with handguns would not rise, safe bet!
>
--
Dave Reay
--
Well of course it would be great PR, but the question is
the practical implications to you and I and everyone else
who shoots.
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
