Reply #29: that ain't the law

[iverglas]

Threatening to take something from someone without consent is a threat to use force. The victim of the threat is 100% entitled to use force to prevent it, no matter what is about to be taken.

Where the victim is a child, about the only force that would work would involve a weapon, doncha think? I mean, the kid could try kicking the adult in the shins and then knocking them over when they grabbed their leg ...

I do hate to spoil the game, but I apologize if you thought I was serious.

The fact remains that what I said is 100% consistent with what any gun militant on the globe says -- they just won't admit it.

I'm the one in Canada, where we have mandatory licensing for all firearms possession, mandatory registration of all firearms (at least this week, the new majority right-wing government not yet having pushed through that bit of its plan to destroy Canadian society), limited (not limited enough) access to handguns, and laws requiring varying degrees of safe/secure storage. Which is how things are done in the modern world.