Personally, I'd place the point at which getting arrested for engaging in civil disobedience to protest a bad law becomes an acceptable risk somewhere between a law which, at its worst, deprives me of the ability to legally own an amusing toy and one which sanctions genocide.
As with most things in life, that point will differ from person to person. It will also vary, at least for those with some intelligence, based on the relationship between the risk of punishment, the severity of punishment, and the egregiousness of the law. Other factors can enter into it too. I know that both my age and five years of working "in population" in prisons have made me more risk averse in that regard that I might have been thirty odd years ago.
There are, of course, some laws which can be broken by individuals with relative impunity, as long as they are broken quietly. But to claim that is civil disobedience would be absurd. The one act is altruistic, the other totally self-serving.



But my question was meant in a more general way not specifically weapons. For example pogroms in nazi Germany - where do we draw the line on wrong laws, at what point do we react, when do we stop being frightened of beng punished for breaking a law that is wrong? And I stress again it is much easier to pass a law than to repeal it.
Reply With Quote
s: ZDP endura, zdp delica, orange delica, Para 2, Delica II, delica wave trainer, 2 x Swick 2, SPOT, stainless Jess Horn, Snap-it
, Lava, Custom & American Gray Baliyos, Smallfly+trainer, Szabofly, Rock Salt, 2 x damascus mules, orange dodo, ss poliwog, Kiwi3, Caly 3.5 Superblue, Caly 3.5 VG-10, Temperance 2, Caly3 Damascus Collection