Our founding fathers would be ashamed of us.

[Piece Corps]

Why people keep mentioning the "militia" when talking about the 2nd Amendment is beyond me. The amendment is very simple, and doesn't need deep interpretation. Let's read it together:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

It does indeed mention a "well regulated militia" in the first part, but does it mention the same militia in the next part? No, it does not. It states, "...the right of the PEOPLE. IOW, it is saying that in order to provide that "well regulated Militia" it is necessary for everyone to have the right to keep and bear arms. Remember that states rights trump federal rights, so we're not talking about the Army or the National Guard.

The 2nd Amendment grants everyone the right to own and carry ARMS. This could be a pistol, a revolver, a shotgun, a rifle, a muzzle-loader, or even a machine gun.

Period!

[Landavazoaj]

We are merely arguing against the fact that people say it is reserved to the militia- by saying the people are the militia...

[utimmer43]

I even think convicted felons should have the right to keep and bear arms once they have paid their full debt to society for whatever they were convicted of. Assuming they were appropriately punished for their crime in the first place. (I will draw the line on child molesters and rapists though).

The way I see it, if you are a "free man", society has decided you are no longer a threat (to include rapists etc.), and so you have the right to own, possess, buy, sell, bla bla bla. Is that to say that I think a convicted rapist or murderer should have a gun? In our current system, no. Because I don't believe that everyone who comes out of prison is rehabed.
If you are still a threat, you still belong locked up. But rather than fix the real problem, we only fix the symptom.
Symptom: threat to society possessing a gun. "Asprin": ban ALL ex-cons from possessing (regardless of threat). REAL problem: threat to society left free to roam. REAL solution: drastically change the minimum sentancing/ parol system.

Well i'm not a felon but I think to say that Felons cannot own firearms is to admit that the rehabilitation of prison is an epic failure. They are either rehabilitated or they are not there can be no half...

Which is why I believe in longer harder sentances/ more capitol punishment. I don't really think prison is for rehab, it's for punishment. But regardless, if you are still a threat, you don't leave. And if after you are convicted we believe that you will NEVER not be a threat, you either die or we lock you up and throw away the key.

[Landavazoaj]

And I thought I was alone.

The way I see it, if you are a "free man", society has decided you are no longer a threat, and so you have the right to own, possess, buy, sell, bla bla bla. If you are still a threat, you still belong locked up. But rather than fix the real problem, we only fix the symptom.

Symptom: threat to society possessing a gun. "Asprin": ban ALL ex-cons from possessing (regardless of threat). REAL problem: threat to society left free to roam. REAL solution: drastically change the minimum sentancing/ parol system.

No, definitely not alone. I've never even received a speeding ticket (knock on wood). But I do know that people in prison are raped, beaten, and denied things that you and I take for granted every day. If prison is only a temporary solution to keep them off the streets, well i'd say that is failure and we need to make an island of cons. However, if the stance of rehabillitation is the stance our lawmakers take then full rights need to be restored to those imprisoned after their release.

Keep in mind you can petition for your rights back, but from what I understand it is nearly impossible to succeed.