(06-14-2016, 02:07 AM)grue Wrote: no ben, that's the point I was making. in your scenario owning the weapon is illegal, and it was lack of proper enforcement that allowed it to happen. that enforcement can be achieved through new laws, tighter regulation or both (it seems they ask for both) - regardless, it's a legislative and executive move, so people are perfectly entitled to ask for it. I don't think there's any misinterpretation at all (well, generally speaking, that is)
i think they (myself included) are perfectly entitled to ask for better enforcement. thats the solution
the reason i used the word "grammar" was because it's misleading to say that the gun was obtained legally, as if the system operated entirely as intended and still failed to work. what would you call this? it is "legal" because he didnt break any laws (the gun wasnt stolen or anything), and yet it's obviously not what was intended
the reality is that the system broke down somewhere and allowed this to happen, so instead of making another machine that may also be broken we should instead just get someone to patch up the hole in our existing machine (is my suggestion)
