If you believe it's wrong, work to get it changed through non-violent means.
> This indicates that you don't believe in opposing unjust laws
Using violence to oppose laws perceived by you as unjust is wrong so long as there is a democracy at work. And no, I will not accept the argument that because the majority happens to disagree with you, the democracy must not be working.
> and shooting any one who disagrees.
As far as I can tell, it is you who wants to shoot anyone who tries to enforce a law you don't like. I call that reprehensible and have no sympathy for you.
Resisting a law is non-violent, but often gets a violent response from authorities, with guns. Most existing approved methods to change law simply dont work for most normal people.
Its not as black and white as you think. If a minority is oppressed by a majority, then yes, the democracy is broken. The point of democracy is not legalized mob rule, it MUST protect minorities.
> Resisting a law is non-violent, but often gets a violent response from authorities, with guns.
People don't always do the right thing, film at 11. That's not a reason to eradicate law enforcement nor government as a whole.
> Most existing approved methods to change law simply dont work for most normal people.
Failure to change a law to suit your own whims is not a failure of the mechanisms. It is your failure to persuade.
> The point of democracy is not legalized mob rule, it MUST protect minorities.
In the end, minorities are only ever protected by consent of the majority. A society whose people do not believe in rule of law cannot and will not effectively protect minorities, no matter the governance structure or what any piece of paper says.
All we can do is try to instill the rule of law, and set up rules and institutions to protect everyone's rights in anticipation that, at any given moment, the majority may wish to treat a minority unjustly. We must then hope that either the majority is persuaded that their hatred does not justify damaging those rules and institutions, or that the majority view changes before it succeeds in punching a hole in them.
> The last bit you just made up.
You made up my alleged desire to shoot people who "resist" laws.
If you believe it's wrong, work to get it changed through non-violent means.
> This indicates that you don't believe in opposing unjust laws
Using violence to oppose laws perceived by you as unjust is wrong so long as there is a democracy at work. And no, I will not accept the argument that because the majority happens to disagree with you, the democracy must not be working.
> and shooting any one who disagrees.
As far as I can tell, it is you who wants to shoot anyone who tries to enforce a law you don't like. I call that reprehensible and have no sympathy for you.