Should a convicted felon be allowed to carry firearm - Page 5
Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 155

Thread: Should a convicted felon be allowed to carry firearm

  1. #41
    Lots of naive people here...
    Most people really dont change. Look at the high recidivism rates in this country. A person goes to prison, gets out, commits another crime or the same crime, and goes right back to prison. Some of you think a person who commits a violent crime and serves 5 years in prison is automatically a good person now? Wow.
    A person's willingness and decision to commit a felony tells us a lot about what kind of person they are. For those of you who think convicted felons fresh out of prison deserve guns, would you let a convicted child molester who "paid his debt" play with your child? Most likely not. Why? Because society loses their trust in individuals who break our most serious laws.
    If you commit a felony, especially a violent one, you do not deserve the right to own a gun.

  2.   
  3. #42
    I stil think all the time and energy spent on fiddling who can own what could be better spent going after actual criminals.

  4. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Deserteagle View Post
    Lots of naive people here...
    Most people really dont change. Look at the high recidivism rates in this country. A person goes to prison, gets out, commits another crime or the same crime, and goes right back to prison. Some of you think a person who commits a violent crime and serves 5 years in prison is automatically a good person now? Wow.
    A person's willingness and decision to commit a felony tells us a lot about what kind of person they are. For those of you who think convicted felons fresh out of prison deserve guns, would you let a convicted child molester who "paid his debt" play with your child? Most likely not. Why? Because society loses their trust in individuals who break our most serious laws.
    If you commit a felony, especially a violent one, you do not deserve the right to own a gun.
    Naive? You mean like letting the government specify who can defend themselves and who cannot and trusting that they will not abuse that privilege?

    After a career in law enforcement, it is sort of funny to be told I am naive about criminals.

    The right to keep and bear arms is not conditional on whether you (or I) believe a person is the "type" that should have a gun. If we truly feel that a person in society cannot be trusted among the populace, then we need to remove them from society...removing the right to one thing (of many) he or she might choose to use in an antisocial manner does nothing except give a power to the government that the founders risked everything to assure it didn't have.

    Remember the quote about folks who give up liberty for safety...

  5. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by PaxMentis View Post
    Naive? You mean like letting the government specify who can defend themselves and who cannot and trusting that they will not abuse that privilege?

    After a career in law enforcement, it is sort of funny to be told I am naive about criminals.

    The right to keep and bear arms is not conditional on whether you (or I) believe a person is the "type" that should have a gun. If we truly feel that a person in society cannot be trusted among the populace, then we need to remove them from society...removing the right to one thing (of many) he or she might choose to use in an antisocial manner does nothing except give a power to the government that the founders risked everything to assure it didn't have.

    Remember the quote about folks who give up liberty for safety...
    You have a background in law enforcement, good, you obviously have much experience dealing with criminals. My point of view is coming from my background in psychology and sociology.

    What do the high recidivism rates mean to you other than the fact that our prisons do not reform people? To me, it means in addition to the previous stated, it means that most people do not change, and letting people who cannot control their violence have guns is not going to help society. Sometimes you have to take away rights to protect rights. Its a slippery slope but I trust our criminal justice system to determine who should not have a gun after they commit certain crimes because they gave up that right.

    In regards to who we think can be trusted in society, it is obvious that violent felons should not be in the population. But we cant execute all of them, and we cant keep them all in prison forever, so some of them are allowed to eventually come back into society. That does not mean we fully trust them. We only trust them to a certain extent, and owning guns is not part of what we trust them with. Probation and parole- we trust them enough to let them start transitioning back into society, but they have restrictions and are not fully trusted and nor should they be.

  6. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    1,880
    2A is a "right" but it's not a God-given one. It's granted by the Constitution. Our founding fathers made it clear that such rights could be taken away so long as due process was used.

    In most cases I believe that felons should have their rights restored. Not all felons are the same and it should depend on the nature of the crime and whether the felon has shown that they can be trusted after leaving supervision. Obviously a written law won't stop a felon from carrying a gun if they want to but it will provide a basis for re-arrest and punishment.
    (Insert random tough-guy quote here)
    "See my gun?? Aren't you impressed?" - Anonymous sheepdog
    The hardware is the same, but the software is vastly different.

  7. #46
    Good question! Said another way; should someone who acted out a very serious crime against society, most likely many times before he was eventually caught, be trusted with a potentially deadly tool? Everyone makes bad choices at times but, not everyone makes bad choices to the level of a felony. A felony attests to the character and competence of an individual. Nuff said IMHO.

  8. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by B2Tall:236325
    2A is a "right" but it's not a God-given one. It's granted by the Constitution. Our founding fathers made it clear that such rights could be taken away so long as due process was used.

    In most cases I believe that felons should have their rights restored. Not all felons are the same and it should depend on the nature of the crime and whether the felon has shown that they can be trusted after leaving supervision. Obviously a written law won't stop a felon from carrying a gun if they want to but it will provide a basis for re-arrest and punishment.
    Wow, I'd sure like to see you pull some direct quotes from the Constitution or even the Federalist Papers to back THAT one up!

  9. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    1,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Providence Ranch View Post
    Wow, I'd sure like to see you pull some direct quotes from the Constitution or even the Federalist Papers to back THAT one up!
    5th Amendment. You may not interpret it as such but SCOTUS, the final arbiter in such matters, does and has done so for quite some time...since the early 1800s I believe. It's called "civil death" and it applies to felons and it means that they lose most of their rights until the state and/or fed say otherwise.
    (Insert random tough-guy quote here)
    "See my gun?? Aren't you impressed?" - Anonymous sheepdog
    The hardware is the same, but the software is vastly different.

  10. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Deserteagle View Post
    You have a background in law enforcement, good, you obviously have much experience dealing with criminals. My point of view is coming from my background in psychology and sociology.

    What do the high recidivism rates mean to you other than the fact that our prisons do not reform people? To me, it means in addition to the previous stated, it means that most people do not change, and letting people who cannot control their violence have guns is not going to help society. Sometimes you have to take away rights to protect rights. Its a slippery slope but I trust our criminal justice system to determine who should not have a gun after they commit certain crimes because they gave up that right.

    In regards to who we think can be trusted in society, it is obvious that violent felons should not be in the population. But we cant execute all of them, and we cant keep them all in prison forever, so some of them are allowed to eventually come back into society. That does not mean we fully trust them. We only trust them to a certain extent, and owning guns is not part of what we trust them with. Probation and parole- we trust them enough to let them start transitioning back into society, but they have restrictions and are not fully trusted and nor should they be.
    The high recidivism rates say the same thing to me they do to you...that SOME people just don't play well with others. However...I don't believe that justifies, either morally or constitutionally, denying a basic right recognized and guaranteed (not created) against government interference by the Second Amendment. Government can rightfully restrict those rights while a person is incarcerated, they can restrict as a condition of probation or parole...but, once the individual is released from supervision, due process has run it's course and the person is restored to society.

    It is too easy for a government to declare all who disagree as felons through incremental measures "protecting" us from those who might in some way threaten the security of the homeland.

    I have spent too many years surrounded by collegues who were willing to ignore and circumvent the constitution in the name of expediency...and security. The limitations the constitution sets for the federal (and, unfortunately, thanks to the 14th amendment, all other levels of government) were meant to be exactly that, limitations. The job of constitutional government is to do the best job possible of protecting society WHILE NOT VIOLATING THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND THOSE CONSENTING TO BE GOVERNED. For a government official to conspire to ignore and/or circumvent the constitutional limitations is, at the very least, a violation of their oath to support and defend the constitution...and arguably felonious or even treasonous.

    Preventing violent people from having guns (accepting arguendo the idea that we cannot remove these people permenently) will do very little to prevent violence...or even mitigate it. A person in a murderous rage is going to use whatever weapon is at hand, and a person plotting a crime will obtain whatever weapon they choose regardless of the law. Preventing non violent offenders from being armed is unlikely to have any effect at all. Even if we wish to ignore old Ben's (or whosever) warning about trading liberty for security, do we really want the government to have that kind of discretion for security that is only illusory at best?

  11. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by B2Tall:236353
    Quote Originally Posted by Providence Ranch View Post
    Wow, I'd sure like to see you pull some direct quotes from the Constitution or even the Federalist Papers to back THAT one up!
    5th Amendment. You may not interpret it as such but SCOTUS, the final arbiter in such matters, does and has done so for quite some time...since the early 1800s I believe. It's called "civil death" and it applies to felons and it means that they lose most of their rights until the state and/or fed say otherwise.
    The supreme court was NEVER intended to create law, only to interpret. Based on your response you cannot answer my challenge. But I did not expect you to. There is no language that would support your claim. And civil death was intended only to apply to incarcerated felons. The founding fathers, as someone aptly stated above, never intended for people to be released to society who were not worthy of the full measure of citizenship.

    I agree with them.

Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast