and as far as I'm aware there's no mention of those 'arms'
having to be "legally registered"
Yet I notice that in defending the actions of the couple who
guarded their property with an AR and a mouse pistol, even
Judge Janine used the excuse that their weapons were legally
registered. Now, I have several firearms that I bought before
the bureaucrats got into the act, so presumably no one, including
me, can exercise their right to self preservation unless the have a
'legally registered' firearm. That implies that any firearm not duly
registered with the government is illegal.
How easily we bow to the liberal rules.
having to be "legally registered"
Yet I notice that in defending the actions of the couple who
guarded their property with an AR and a mouse pistol, even
Judge Janine used the excuse that their weapons were legally
registered. Now, I have several firearms that I bought before
the bureaucrats got into the act, so presumably no one, including
me, can exercise their right to self preservation unless the have a
'legally registered' firearm. That implies that any firearm not duly
registered with the government is illegal.
How easily we bow to the liberal rules.

Comment