User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 9:18:12 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Makarov: Convicted felons should serve REAL time until they have paid their debt to society and/or are no longer a threat. THEN they should be treated the same as any other free Citizen. Plea deals, refusals to prosecute, light sentencing and parole simply make society one big open prison for all of us (which is EXACTLY want the Leftists want). We would need to massively expand the judicial system to handle the additional trials, if prosecutors weren't able to use plea deals |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 9:24:46 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fssf158: Nope, felons never obtain guns. That’s illegal and it would be wrong. I’m sure glad I can’t legally drive 20 miles north and buy a handgun in a private sale. These gun control laws are doing a great job of keeping guns out of the wrong hands. Right now, a convicted felon caught with a firearm has a low chance of being punished for it, and if they are it will be a slap on the wrist. The vast majority are ether pled away or dropped. There is little deterrence in the present system. Now, if you knew that getting caught with the gun you bought 20 miles north meant 25 to life mandatory, it might make you less likely to make the drive, no? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 9:32:11 AM EDT
[#3]
"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."
/thread |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 9:35:12 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PA-Minuteman: Unpopular opinion but if they serve their time, and are productive members of society. Then their rights should be restored depending on the crime I don't totally disagree. There is a big difference between, between some person who commits insider trading and murder or a host of other violent crimes and someone who commits some type of white collar or administrative crime, that all seem to get branded as felonies now. I don't think Martha Stewart is much of a threat to society but she is a prohibited felon. I don't believe our founders ever envisioned or would have endorsed such a regulatory state where you can hardly get up in the morning and before you go to bed probably committed a half dozen crimes throughout your day, even if some or all are minor. One of them could easily w/o your intent to commit a crime or knowledge, be a felony. Google a list of felony crimes, many are administrative in nature and even at the state level it will be a multipage list, add to that federal offenses and it's an insane list most of which you will not even know what the hell they are or mean. |
|
|
MS, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 9:57:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Glocked]
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ParityError: Right now, a convicted felon caught with a firearm has a low chance of being punished for it, and if they are it will be a slap on the wrist. The vast majority are ether pled away or dropped. There is little deterrence in the present system. Now, if you knew that getting caught with the gun you bought 20 miles north meant 25 to life mandatory, it might make you less likely to make the drive, no? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ParityError: Originally Posted By fssf158: Nope, felons never obtain guns. That’s illegal and it would be wrong. I’m sure glad I can’t legally drive 20 miles north and buy a handgun in a private sale. These gun control laws are doing a great job of keeping guns out of the wrong hands. Right now, a convicted felon caught with a firearm has a low chance of being punished for it, and if they are it will be a slap on the wrist. The vast majority are ether pled away or dropped. There is little deterrence in the present system. Now, if you knew that getting caught with the gun you bought 20 miles north meant 25 to life mandatory, it might make you less likely to make the drive, no? Why not execute them or lock them up for 25 to life for actual crimes with victims? Stuff like murder, attempted murder, rape, robbery, fraud….. Why are we complicating the issue with pieces of metal and plastic? Sure, our system is broke. Do we want to give more power to the ones that broke the system to begin with? Don’t forget, our government loves the ability to restrict gun ownership so much, they even created their own State level felony category. |
|
|
KS, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 9:59:01 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ParityError: Right now, a convicted felon caught with a firearm has a low chance of being punished for it, and if they are it will be a slap on the wrist. The vast majority are ether pled away or dropped. There is little deterrence in the present system. Now, if you knew that getting caught with the gun you bought 20 miles north meant 25 to life mandatory, it might make you less likely to make the drive, no? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ParityError: Originally Posted By fssf158: Nope, felons never obtain guns. That’s illegal and it would be wrong. I’m sure glad I can’t legally drive 20 miles north and buy a handgun in a private sale. These gun control laws are doing a great job of keeping guns out of the wrong hands. Right now, a convicted felon caught with a firearm has a low chance of being punished for it, and if they are it will be a slap on the wrist. The vast majority are ether pled away or dropped. There is little deterrence in the present system. Now, if you knew that getting caught with the gun you bought 20 miles north meant 25 to life mandatory, it might make you less likely to make the drive, no? Why not just apply that mandatory sentence to the original felony? I think you missed the point of my post. I can drive 200 miles east and buy a handgun legally in a private sale. I can’t do it 20 miles north because of a completely illogical federal restriction on interstate sales that is supposed to somehow hinder hardened criminals willing to risk the penalty for murder or rape or armed robbery. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 10:15:36 AM EDT
[#7]
I have friends who went to prison in their 20s.
Did their time, got out of jail and have gone through the parole process without any failures. They are now late 40/50s, they are completely different human beings. They own businesses, employ other people, go to church, raise their children and pay lots of taxes. It is sad that they can't even go to the gun range with me. Keeping "tabs" on them is a complete waste of time, effort and money. They should be "free men" in every sense of the word. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 10:21:18 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ray9101: I don't totally disagree. There is a big difference between, between some person who commits insider trading and murder or a host of other violent crimes and someone who commits some type of white collar or administrative crime, that all seem to get branded as felonies now. I don't think Martha Stewart is much of a threat to society but she is a prohibited felon. I don't believe our founders ever envisioned or would have endorsed such a regulatory state where you can hardly get up in the morning and before you go to bed probably committed a half dozen crimes throughout your day, even if some or all are minor. One of them could easily w/o your intent to commit a crime or knowledge, be a felony. Google a list of felony crimes, many are administrative in nature and even at the state level it will be a multipage list, add to that federal offenses and it's an insane list most of which you will not even know what the hell they are or mean. Holy fuck in the other "get off my property" thread, I learned having an argument with my wife that a police officer hears from outside the front door, rises to the level of exigent circumstances and a cop would be justified in kicking in my door because he heard us arguing.... I shudder to think what James Madison would say about that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 10:22:11 AM EDT
[#9]
I don't really care. I agree it depends on the crime, but felons are felons. If someone wants to commit a horrid crime they don't need a gun to do it, doesn't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 10:25:35 AM EDT
[#10]
Non violent felons , ( except for pedophiles ) shouldn’t lose gun rights.
1. Violent criminals should be punished severely, which isn’t happening anymore to the extent needed. But they shouldnt be released if still dangerous, and shouldn’t lose gun rights except for certain offenses. ( but currently extremely dangerous violent felons are released daily ) 2. Repeat violent felons ( murder / rape ) shouldn’t exist in our society, as they should be either serving life long prison sentences or executed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 11:00:02 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Hillbilly62: I guess I’m one of these guys that believe if you don’t like it then vote to change the law. I’d love to have full auto AR’s and grenades or dynamite here at my house, but unless I follow the law I can’t have it. How many of you pay for can fees or NFA fees? Shouldn’t those be legal, I think they should, so why do you pay for them? Seriously?? You think felons should own firearms yet you pay what the .gov tells you too? Vote for who? There is no one running on that platform, and even if there were, it would take MANY like him to be voted in. And so once you've got both houses of Congress, plus a willingness by the president of each to bring them to committee- and then you get a committee that also agrees- and if you can overcome the rino betrayal votes- you will have the president himself. Can you think of a president in the last couple decades that would sign this into law? And then would start the battle at each state to repeal their laws... Does that sound like a realistic outcome? People don't really think through the logistics of "just vote your way out of this", but it's not that easy. Besides, as mentioned in the video- on paper, felon carry is a done deal. The 2a says so, nysrpa v bruen says so, us v Duarte says so, and rahimi is forthcoming. It would be like pushing for a constitutional convention just to amend the 2a to say that the 2a really really shall not be infringed! The people disregarding it don't give a fuck, just as our gov would not give a fuck if felon carry passed... we already have it on paper. Don't forget that they just tried to turn millions of gun owners into felons overnight with the brace ban, and now again with the "engaged in the business" redefinition. The writing is on the wall, the end game is very apparent. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 11:19:21 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PA-Minuteman: Unpopular opinion but if they serve their time, and are productive members of society. Then their rights should be restored depending on the crime Yep. If they can't be trusted with a firearm, they can't be trusted outside of prison. |
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 11:38:01 AM EDT
[#13]
No prohibited person categories.
None. They all suffer from the same inherent flaw: other people determine the categories. The whole point of the second amendment is that other people don't get to determine that for other people...which is of special concern considering that the second amendment protects the mechanism through which that free state is enabled. |
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 11:51:10 AM EDT
[#14]
Depends on the crime. In PA, attempting to bribe a minor league baseball umpire was a felony. I don't think that's the same as aggravated assault.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 12:12:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: intercooler]
[#15]
if they restore your right to vote, then you should have full rights including 2a. if not then NO
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 12:21:28 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By burkeva: Yes. Fuck them and their bad choices. In well after the prohibited persons of GD who feel otherwise. You trust the government far too much. Also it's pretty rude and simple minded to think people with a different opinion then you only have that opinion because they are prohibited persons. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 12:48:31 PM EDT
[#17]
I think it depends on the felony and how long ago it was. The problem is a lot of things are felonies now that shouldn't be.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 12:52:11 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AKSnowRider: Alaska has a simple law..10 years clean even felons automatically get their gun rights back in full with the exception of one group, those found guilty of a crime against a person, they likely forfeit their gun rights for life..everyone else keep theirs..about as fair as can be..... I would agree with that plan. It gives the rights back; but walks the fine line between protecting the public from evil without infringement of the individual right. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:05:40 PM EDT
[#19]
Originally Posted By Alnen123: TLDR- Video at bottom. 2A is for everyone to my knowledge... Let's include all types of felonies for this thought exercise; from the young lady that prints off fake insurance cards to first degree homicide convicts. In my opinion and strict interpretation of the second amendment, and with my understanding of the Bruen decision from SCOTUS, I believe that all free men and women are entitled to the right of self defense and that on paper this is a done deal. The emotional argument will be to one-up the first degree homicide example with more extreme examples... I say go for it. My opinion is consistent across the board. Where the problem likely resides in any presented scenarios is the "light on crime" cycle of recidivism and the wide-reaching felony net designed to ensnare the average citizen at will. No matter how depraved the criminal, they should not be released back into the public while still dangerous- some crimes warrant never leaving the institution, while in a perfectly just world others probably warrant never even making it to confinement in the first place.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_MzKZzmZIQIf you have served your sentence and are out, then all your rights should be 100% restored. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be let out of prison. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:06:06 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Glocked: Why not execute them or lock them up for 25 to life for actual crimes with victims? Stuff like murder, attempted murder, rape, robbery, fraud….. Why are we complicating the issue with pieces of metal and plastic? Sure, our system is broke. Do we want to give more power to the ones that broke the system to begin with? Don’t forget, our government loves the ability to restrict gun ownership so much, they even created their own State level felony category. Because a huge percentage of the public doesn't support the death penalty or even locking up criminals at all. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:07:53 PM EDT
[#21]
Most felons should be executed
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:08:01 PM EDT
[#22]
My son will never own a gun due to having a herb garden in his house. Seems kinda harsh.
  
|
|
|
|
KS, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:25:58 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tc556guy: Because a huge percentage of the public doesn't support the death penalty or even locking up criminals at all. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tc556guy: Originally Posted By Glocked: Why not execute them or lock them up for 25 to life for actual crimes with victims? Stuff like murder, attempted murder, rape, robbery, fraud….. Why are we complicating the issue with pieces of metal and plastic? Sure, our system is broke. Do we want to give more power to the ones that broke the system to begin with? Don’t forget, our government loves the ability to restrict gun ownership so much, they even created their own State level felony category. Because a huge percentage of the public doesn't support the death penalty or even locking up criminals at all. America’s refusal to adequately punish violent criminals does not justify placing restrictions on the rights of innocent people in the vain hope of keeping guns out of the hands of those criminals. |
|
|
MS, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:27:14 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tc556guy: Because a huge percentage of the public doesn't support the death penalty or even locking up criminals at all. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tc556guy: Originally Posted By Glocked: Why not execute them or lock them up for 25 to life for actual crimes with victims? Stuff like murder, attempted murder, rape, robbery, fraud….. Why are we complicating the issue with pieces of metal and plastic? Sure, our system is broke. Do we want to give more power to the ones that broke the system to begin with? Don’t forget, our government loves the ability to restrict gun ownership so much, they even created their own State level felony category. Because a huge percentage of the public doesn't support the death penalty or even locking up criminals at all. I’m still not seeing why society being broken means it’s ok to put restrictions of other people’s rights, even a little bit. I think a huge percentage of the population is absolutely ok with those things like executions and harsh sentences. As long as the ones being executed have differing views. Progressives want their opponents dead or in jail, they’re also the anti-gun side. Any power they’re given or allowed to retain will be corrupted and abused. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:29:18 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PA-Minuteman: Agreed to both Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PA-Minuteman: Originally Posted By TheOtherDave: Agreed. Unless it was a violent felony. Originally Posted By ztug: I think that non-violent felons should be able to get their civil rights back including their second amount. But violent felons should never ever be allowed to have a gun I don't care if it's popular you're insane if you think that they should be armed after they've proven that they can't exist in society I think both opinions are valid. I'd also separate malum in se vs malum prohibitum crimes. Makes no sense to lose your civil liberties forever due to a process or regulatory "crime." |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:32:55 PM EDT
[#26]
I think non violent felons should be able to get their firearms rights back fairly easy.
I even think violent felons should be able to get them back after some time has passed and they have proven that they have gotten their act together. A very good friend of mine (whom I have been friends with since kindergarten) is a marine corp vet, Eagle Scout, volunteer and professional firefighter went through a nasty divorce, started drinking heavily and got himself into some felony charges. Did his time and now has his own business and a family. He went through the process to get his rights restored, it was lengthy and costly but being able to hunt with his kids and take them to the range like he did with his dad growing up was worth it. He paid the price for his mistakes and proved for about 10 years that he learned from them. We can’t expect felons to get back to being useful members of society if they don’t get the chance to do so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:36:13 PM EDT
[#27]
if you are safe enough to be out of prison, you should have your rights back.
If you are not safe enough to have your rights back, why are you out of prison? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:38:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PA-Minuteman: Unpopular opinion but if they serve their time, and are productive members of society. Then their rights should be restored depending on the crime That. If they’re considered too dangerous to fully engage with society they shouldn’t be on the street. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:45:44 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jollyg83: It’s pretty simple. If you can’t be trusted to fully function in society you shouldn’t be in society, period. If it’s a mental disorder, off to the mental hospital. If it’s a criminal problem, it’s either for life or more likely death. There’s no room for in between. This sums up my view point. If you can't handle freedom then you shouldn't be free. Not selling to convicted felons doesn't equate to convicted felons not having guns. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:51:19 PM EDT
[#30]
If someone is free to be on the street they should be free to own guns.
|
|
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:54:59 PM EDT
[#31]
Violent felons = hard no
Other felonies = yes |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:57:19 PM EDT
[#32]
FPNI.
No law, or prohibition will stop a criminal from having a gun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:58:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AR-10]
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mah_lee: sounds like there is much more to this tbh Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mah_lee: Originally Posted By AR-10: He did something wrong, along with three other people. He confessed. One of the others confessed. Now they are both felons. Two of them hired lawyers and ran the clock out on being prosecuted. Those two are not felons. My son should be able to own firearms. Two lives ruined. The county prosecuter doesn't care, because he bagged two felons and made the homeowner happy. I feel like an idiot because he followed my advice and did "the right thing". sounds like there is much more to this tbh No, it's exactly like I posted. Like someone else said, pay to play, and that stinks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:58:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: greenranger]
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BangStick1: Violent felons = hard no Other felonies = yes I could agree with that The only thing extra I’d add is three or more non violent felonies (different arrests/incidents) and you can’t own a gun either. A serial burglar is eventually going to hurt someone. |
|
|
|
KS, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 1:59:21 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BangStick1: Violent felons = hard no Other felonies = yes Violent felons who want guns will always be able to get them. Why do you want the government trying to enforce a futile ban when the methods use curtail your rights? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 2:03:52 PM EDT
[#36]
Nope.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 2:18:55 PM EDT
[#37]
If you are free to walk the street you should have all of your rights. If you can't be trusted with rights you should be expelled from society one way or another
|
|
|
|
DE, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 5:38:06 PM EDT
[#38]
If they're too dangerous to own guns then they're too dangerous to own knives or cars, and way too dangerous to vote.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 5:39:44 PM EDT
[#39]
If you are able to be released back to society, you should be able to get back your liberties
|
|
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 5:54:24 PM EDT
[#40]
There's a whole lot of "I support God-given rights and the Constitution, BUT..." going on around here.
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 5:59:52 PM EDT
[#41]
This is one of those, "hey, how can we make gun owners on the Right look crazy?" threads. This question has about as much merit as, what form does the ATF use to classify nuclear weapons, and does the 2nd Amend. allow us to?
Half of the country already thinks we should all BE FELONS simply for owning the guns that we do. If you think sticking up for arming criminals is a winning position then I've got a bridge ti sell you. Only been hit by a floating pier once. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 6:01:29 PM EDT
[#42]
As a blanket law, absolutely not. As a condition for some criminals' release, I have no problem with it.
|
|
|
DE, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 6:20:09 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DADGAD: As a blanket law, absolutely not. As a condition for some criminals' release, I have no problem with it. A prohibition against carrying weapons in public seems reasonable as a parole condition but they should be able to defend their home from criminals who aren't turning their lives around. |
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 9:56:55 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By vxtip545: This is one of those, "hey, how can we make gun owners on the Right look crazy?" threads. This question has about as much merit as, what form does the ATF use to classify nuclear weapons, and does the 2nd Amend. allow us to? Half of the country already thinks we should all BE FELONS simply for owning the guns that we do. If you think sticking up for arming criminals is a winning position then I've got a bridge ti sell you. Only been hit by a floating pier once. And you suppose doing otherwise will placate them and get them to leave you alone? No. Guess what. They'll still make you a felon. So I guess you'd better decide if you'd rather still be able to keep your guns afterwards or not. Not that it really matters because the rest of the felons will keep theirs regardless so I guess you can just play by the honor system by yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/18/2024 11:23:40 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By vxtip545: This is one of those, "hey, how can we make gun owners on the Right look crazy?" threads. This question has about as much merit as, what form does the ATF use to classify nuclear weapons, and does the 2nd Amend. allow us to? Half of the country already thinks we should all BE FELONS simply for owning the guns that we do. If you think sticking up for arming criminals is a winning position then I've got a bridge ti sell you. Only been hit by a floating pier once. Half of the country thinks gun ownership should be a felony... exactly! That's why it needs to be solved now. FYI, the Supreme Court is making a major ruling on this specifically very soon and the NINTH CIRCUIT just protected felon carry in their decision. Since you didn't watch the video, figured I would just simplify it. And do you think that caving in on a 2a issue is suddenly going to flip the left? I've got news for you- they already think gun owners are crazy. They think anyone who didn't vote for Biden is crazy. And they damn sure think arfcom is crazy. Not really in the business of appeasing leftists... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/19/2024 12:08:48 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NotJackMiller: If they're too dangerous to have guns, they're too dangerous to be free. Fair. But that’s another subject altogether. We would have to talk about Truth in Sentencing laws that remove a judges discretion on going light on prison terms and remove parole for violent crimes. We also need to talk about making a prison a place that a released prisoner wants absolutely no part of ever again, because it’s not enough of a deterrent now. Personally, I’m a big fan of mandatory execution in cases of Murder, so those people can’t be redeemed by society and repay their debt IMO. |
|
|
|
SC, USA
|
Posted: 5/19/2024 12:14:05 AM EDT
[#47]
If they are too dangerous to possess firearms, they shouldn't be out on the streets.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/19/2024 12:04:19 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TheOtherDave: Fair. But that’s another subject altogether. We would have to talk about Truth in Sentencing laws that remove a judges discretion on going light on prison terms and remove parole for violent crimes. We also need to talk about making a prison a place that a released prisoner wants absolutely no part of ever again, because it’s not enough of a deterrent now. Personally, I’m a big fan of mandatory execution in cases of Murder, so those people can’t be redeemed by society and repay their debt IMO. The question in hand is about whether or not felons should be "allowed" to own guns. It is not dependent on the other fuck ups that our gov has created, such as light sentencing. That is obviously where the big problem lies, but as I said in the video in the op- the gov is not in a big hurry to fix that system. It gives them numbers that justifies more power grabs. Why would they fix that? In other words, felon 2a rights do not hinge upon those other things being fixed. 2a is the most obvious error in law as it directly infringes on citizens' rights. It must be fixed independent of light sentencing practices. Fix both, but 2a first. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/19/2024 12:06:57 PM EDT
[#49]
If we actually held people accountable for their actions and based their punishment off the severity of their crimes then questions like this would never need to be ask. Commit a crime using a firearm or other deadly weapon should be a minimum sentence with no chance for parole. Not sure what would be appropriate but 10 years sounds good me. Then knife or gun doesn't matter and once their 10 years is up the are allowed to do what everyone else is.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/19/2024 12:09:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Alnen123]
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By muniti: A prohibition against carrying weapons in public seems reasonable as a parole condition but they should be able to defend their home from criminals who aren't turning their lives around. Why? That sounds like a compromise of the 2a with zero historical precedent. Gun control laws must be consistent with the second amendment, as well as have a history of similar law from the time of ratification and also be consistent with American tradition. Felon ccw prohibition doesn't hit a single one of those markers. |
|
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
