[fx85ms]

> You are justifying executing someone based on whether or not they broke a state law, not on whether or not they broke a moral law.

What are these moral laws you speak of? Your opinions on what is right and what is wrong?

The cases you present for firearm possession is simply a case of false dichotomy. Firearm possession is not inherently immoral. The armies of the country would definitely need them to protect the country against others, especially for Singapore who is surrounded by hostile neighbours.

Citizen ownership of firearms, on the other hand, is a highly impractical thing. It is illegal to own firearms in the country and that is just how the laws of the countries were set up in the first place. I would not go as far as to say that owning them is immoral, but by intentionally breaking the laws of the country, what are you trying to imply?

[jqgatsby]

First, we weren't intentionally breaking any law. Second, arguing for or against firearms is beside the point. I'm arguing against people blindly obeying any law, if it comes at the expense of exercising sound personal judgment.