Controversial Topic: Felonious persons & firearms. (Opinions please!)

[Andrew G.]

To be as precise as I possibly can, I am engaged in an ongoing debate with a certain few others, who argue FOR the rights of felons (non-violent, or otherwise) who have recently been released, to have their Second Amendment rights restored to them. That the prison sentence itself, is punishment enough (while disregarding the very nature of the person themselves) & that they should be allowed to resume their lives immediately as normal citizens: with all rights guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution.

Admittedly, I can & do see the difference between a person convicted of a violent felony, and that of a non-violent felony. Those convicted of non-violent felonies I would see as viable candidates to have their rights restored via pardon: Even though they have committed such an atrocity that would warrant felony status, they have not proven themselves violent, or otherwise dangerous to the public.

However, the major (proverbial) hump in this debate, is as to whether those convicted of VIOLENT felonies, should have their rights restored entirely; that they are magically trustworthy in society once again. That they have somehow changed for the better, and are now upstanding citizens without so much as a thought of malice in their mind.

MY primary argument, is that of what rational, mentally sound person in the FIRST place, would murder, rape, or use force to further their criminal agenda? With ingrained disregard for human life & all that is decent... can these particular people be trusted in society? Are they DESERVING of a pardon?

Likewise, the fact that someone who had been convicted of murder, rape, etc., who had been released would held in higher regard to those between the ages of 18-21 (Pistol Permit/Handgun ownership). I cannot reasonably see that someone who was convicted of a violent crime against society, is to be held with more trust than a legal adult, under the age of 21 with ABSOLUTELY no mark against him/her.

My main reason for posting this particular issue, is to see & hear the opinions of others. As open-minded as I am striving to be... I just am unable to comprehend the fact that a violent felony, is one that should be so easily forgiven.

Input please! This debate is starting to make me feel as though I had marched clear off base, & into the next county!

-Andrew

[Samuel]

Off the top of my head, among those who MIGHT support felons are:

other felons
family/friends of felons (who are usually also dirtbags/dirtbaggish)
clueless liberals
aclu (fuc& the aclu btw)
ignorant sheep (which are just about the same as clueless liberals)
certain politicians, entertainers, and other misc powers that be who live in ivory towers and wear 100x powered rose colored glasses
anyone/everyone related to rap music/culture
just really freaking stupid people

[greg72982]

Just consider that even though a violent felon (or even non-violent) is prohibited from buying/possessing a gun by law, it doesn't mean he won't. The guys that live their lives as violent people will get guns anyway. He can't go get one at the local gun shop but no doubt he has buddies that can get him one or he'll just go steal it.

[retdetsgt]

Just consider that even though a violent felon (or even non-violent) is prohibited from buying/possessing a gun by law, it doesn't mean he won't. The guys that live their lives as violent people will get guns anyway. He can't go get one at the local gun shop but no doubt he has buddies that can get him one or he'll just go steal it.

With the exception of a few domestic homicides and assaults, I don't recall ever working a case involving a firearm where the bad guy bought it from a gun store. Buying a gun off the street has never been a problem. That's why gun control laws are so ridiculous, they only inconvenience the people who aren't planning to commit a crime anyway.

[greg72982]

With the exception of a few domestic homicides and assaults, I don't recall ever working a case involving a firearm where the bad guy bought it from a gun store. Buying a gun off the street has never been a problem. That's why gun control laws are so ridiculous, they only inconvenience the people who aren't planning to commit a crime anyway.

Yep, but at least if gives you another charge/penalty to tack on when you arrest them...

[retdetsgt]

Yep, but at least if gives you another charge/penalty to tack on when you arrest them...

Not really unless the gun was stolen. I can sell a gun to someone privately, at least in Oregon. What they do with it is their business and they legally own it.

[ChesCopPodz]

I think Greg was alluding to chargine a convicted felon with possession of a firearm.

I'm against felons having guns. Doesn't matter what their felony was.

The ONLY exception I'm willing to consider is people who committed a non-violent felony as a juvenile, and have a clean adult record. I'd be willing to go with a set amount of time, say until their 30th birthday, until they're allowed to possess a firearm again. Reason being is that a lot of juvies get felonies for things like breaking into cars, or breaking and entering. As an adult, you should know better, and should suffer the full consequences. As a stupid kid, I'm willing to give another chance for non-violent offenders with no adult records.

[retdetsgt]

True, we have ex con in possession too, I was just saying that even on first offenders using firearms in crimes, they never get them from licensed gun dealers.

[Andrew G.]

The ONLY exception I'm willing to consider is people who committed a non-violent felony as a juvenile, and have a clean adult record. I'd be willing to go with a set amount of time, say until their 30th birthday, until they're allowed to possess a firearm again. Reason being is that a lot of juvies get felonies for things like breaking into cars, or breaking and entering. As an adult, you should know better, and should suffer the full consequences. As a stupid kid, I'm willing to give another chance for non-violent offenders with no adult records.

I absolutely agree. My issue with felony status/gun ownership, is the person in question, the crime committed, & how rational they can have been to commit such an act.

As an example, what RATIONAL person in the first place, will murder/rape/use force to further a criminal agenda against their fellow man? That is my big problem with the people I currently am debating with; that they really, truly believe that the prison system automatically reforms hardened criminals. (Correct me if I'm wrong).

Then again... I'm arguing with borderline FANATICAL Second Amendment people, who at times really, truly push the limits of what is legal "just because" (Ex: In CT, Open Carry is legal... but frowned upon). I'm highly pro-2A, but then again there are certain things that hurt the cause of gun-owners everywhere such as this; that we are irrational people without boundaries or control of any kind.

I appreciate all of the input so far, and at least I've found that I'm not as far off-base as had claimed I was. *Phew!*

[MountainMan]

I'm all about the second amendment. But felons give up certain rights upon conviction. Robbers rob, Rapists rape and others just branch out their crimes. Why would we want someone who has proven they can't handle responsibility to legally own firearms.

I'm all about the citizens arming themselves to prevent robbers from robbing and rapists from raping. The fact of the matter is different courts have wildly different sentences for the same crime. What mioght get you life in one state might get you a few years in another or probation.

[MikeG]

The issue with having civil rights restored (it's all or none as far as I'm concerned) is about whether someone who so heinously violated the social contract should be allowed to participate at the same level as people who didn't violate the social contract.

Felons have made a choice that choice has made them untrustworthy to exercise certain rights and privileges. Regardless of the felony. They can't be trusted with the right to vote or the right to bear arms. They can't trusted to fight for our country. That's the nature of committing a felony.

I could support a path to restore civil rights if it included demonstrated trust of the community and takes into account which culpable mental state was proven. Someone who intentionally commits a felony (regardless of type) should have virtually no chance of getting their rights restored.

Lastly, I don't like the implicit connection between the 2nd amendment and violent crime required to allow "non-violent felons" to have their rights restored. The right to bear arms is about being a well-equipped population to fight for a free country. If he's not trustworthy enough to join the army or vote, he's not trustworthy enough to be counted on to fight for the security of a free state.

[JoetheGI]

Depends on the felony IMO...

How many rights should an individual lose if they watch a streaming video on the internet?

US Senate bill could make illegal video streaming a felony - Neowin.net

There are folks who would like to convict such individuals as felons....just like rapists and murderers.

I don't support that.

While certainly not boned up on every act considered felonious on the books, I'll bet a case of beer that there are more than a few that wouldn't warrant stripping the rights of individual as if they were a murderer / rapist.