All crimes require a victim to be an actual crime. Find me one, in this instance.
Please refer to my previous post regarding a shooter shooting through a park full of children, but not hitting any of them. You would not consider this a crime?
This is the same, how?
You state that there must be a victim to be an actual crime. I'm asking your opinion. If a shooter is shooting through a park full of children, but not hitting any of them either:
A) There is no victim, therefore you do not consider this a crime.
or
B) This is a crime, and you can identify a victim in this action.
Is the park public property or private property?
What part of "refer to my previous post" confuses you?
2) So if I have this straight, someone can fire their rifle into a public park full of children repeatedly, and as long as they don't actually hit any child they should be allowed to continue? Sure there is a risk that they could hit a child, but risk is not harm.
I assumed that when I stated "into a public park" that it would be clear that I meant that the park is public property?