Originally Posted by JimRau
I posted that 'I' had had enough and would not 'ask' the government for permission to give my kids or grandkids guns....(non violent civil disobedience)
According to some posters the 'government' REQUIRES that if you wish to give a family member a gun who lives in another state you MUST ask the government for permission to do so, in the form of a background check,(requiring you to go through FFL dealers on both ends)WHICH IS JUST WRONG ANYWAY YOU CUT IT
and I refuse to comply and my post was removed.
If you have not noticed, I am an activist and I thought this was the proper place to state my concerns and state how I intended to oppose the wrongs I see, was I wrong????
If others wish to be sheepeople and comply, that is their choice.
Its all in your interpretation. There is a legal requirement that all interstate transfers be executed through FFls in both states. That is the law.
Some people do not comply with this law (or others). That is fact. This could be a form of protest (IE: "refuse to comply") and we have the right to engage in such activity, right or wrong.
As to the "right to free speech", you have the First Amendment that protects you from the government abridging that right. It does not protect you elsewhere, such as on a private forum on the internet. There is a measure of responsibility in the forum ownership to not allow promotion of illegal behavior and it is only prudent to enforce that policy as it is stated.
JimRau, I would suggest that you state such things in a more ambiguous manner. That can be perfectly acceptable if done correctly.
Now as to prohibiting "Immoral behavior"? I think you are quite incorrect about that G30. I don't think we need any morality police here and I don't think there is any clearly defined moral code we can go to in order to gauge our posts by. For example, I am living with a woman out of wedlock right now. For some that is immoral. For me it is not (not only that but it is quite practical too! ;-)), so where does that line get drawn?