>

Well that depends...  In the case of shoplifting? The company being shoplifted from. In the  case of burglary? The homeowner. In the case of a mugging? The person getting mugged. Etc...   Is this that hard to understand?
So they want to police themselves?  It’s looking like this is where most of the crimes are being committed, is by those in the republican party all the way to the top. >

Do you have any proof of this claim? >

How many people who worked for Trump were subsequently convicted of crimes? >

I dont know how many? 
What does that have to do with crime in CA? >

You did a sea lion. >

Rare that I see someone on reddit use this correctly and I believe you are correct >

Crime is already illegal. That's the best they have? >

And they claim that gun control is useless because criminals will just ignore it.  Would that also apply to crime control? >

"Criminals don't follow laws" >

We just have to make it illegal for criminals to not follow laws. >

Innocent people murdered because of how easy it is to get a gun in this country...
Republicans: can we get back to locking up drug users and valuing property over people? >

Most proposed gun laws just create more victimless "crimes" and are therefore unacceptable 
Things like shoplifting need to be taken seriously because they have ACTUAL VICTIMS.  
All drugs should be legal >


Things like shoplifting need to be taken seriously because they have ACTUAL VICTIMS. 

Who? >

Whoever is being stolen from. Theft as a concept inherently has a victim. >


Whoever is being stolen from. Theft as a concept inherently has a victim.

That's what I'm asking you. Who is the victim. Be specific, please.