Example from this thread 60 Minutes piece on 'Stop Snitchin' and countless others.

Apparently, only "non-violent" criminals should do time is the gist of a lot of responses to threads like above.  Search the archives and you'll find topics along the lines of "Should a felon own a gun", etc. etc.

Where did this attitude come from?  Mostly from libertarian types.

Why shouldn't these "non-violent" crimes be felonies?

- someone steals your id and wipes out your savings, checking, Roth, 401K, other accounts?  Where's the violence?  You'll have to live off Alpo for the rest of your life, but that's OK, no violence is involved.

- someone steals your car in the middle of the night while you're smoking a little weed and watching Spongebob Spongepants?  Where's the violence?  In Texas you can shoot the perp(s)

- illegals cross the border, give a fake SSN, work for 5 months, racks up thousands of $ in government handouts, hospital bills, etc, then skip town.  Where's the violence?

- Clinton commits perjury, a felony, but never convicted.  Did he bitch slap anyone while perjuring?

- spys steal military secrets and sell them to China or North Korea? Who got physically hurt?

- tax evaders, everyone hates taxes, but I hate paying taxes on those who evade them.  I pay enough, why should I pay for a liar and cheater as well?

The above are just a few examples of "non-violent" felonies.  Theft, obtaining property under false pretenses, fraud, burglary, a lot if not most white collar crime, are felonies, and just as deserving of being a "felon" as are so called "violent" felons

Identity theft...Steal my ID and watch how violent I become. Steal anything from me and watch the violence occur.  

Quoted: I think you missed what people were saying in the "felon owning gun" threads Most people werent saying there should be no non violent felonies. They were just saying non violent felons should be able to own guns.

I didn't miss it.  A car theif that steals your car should own a gun? is my point.

Keeping granddad's machine gun that he brought back from WWII and never registered - non-violent felony.

Quoted: Quoted: I think you missed what people were saying in the "felon owning gun" threads Most people werent saying there should be no non violent felonies. They were just saying non violent felons should be able to own guns. I didn't miss it.  A car theif that steals your car should own a gun? is my point.

So are you trying to start another felons owning guns thread? We just went over this like a week ago.

Quoted: Quoted: I think you missed what people were saying in the "felon owning gun" threads Most people werent saying there should be no non violent felonies. They were just saying non violent felons should be able to own guns. I didn't miss it.  A car theif that steals your car should own a gun? is my point.

Inalienable rights are just that...inalienable.

Quoted: Why shouldn't these "non-violent" crimes be felonies? - someone steals your id and wipes out your savings, checking, Roth, 401K, other accounts?  Where's the violence?  You'll have to live off Alpo for the rest of your life, but that's OK, no violence is involved. - someone steals your car in the middle of the night while you're smoking a little weed and watching Spongebob Spongepants?  Where's the violence?  In Texas you can shoot the perp(s) - illegals cross the border, give a fake SSN, work for 5 months, racks up thousands of $ in government handouts, hospital bills, etc, then skip town.  Where's the violence? - spys steal military secrets and sell them to China or North Korea? Who got physically hurt? - tax evaders, everyone hates taxes, but I hate paying taxes on those who evade them.  I pay enough, why should I pay for a liar and cheater as well?

In the above examples, people should do hard time.  For the tax evaders/identity thieves, the time spent behind bars should be proportionate to what they stole.  The problem is we don't make people do hard time.  If you spy, you either die or spend the rest of your life in prison.  

Quoted: Inalienable rights are just that...inalienable.

I wouldn't let third time convicted car thieves out on the loose and give them CCW permits based on that quote, or someone that stole my life savings.

You said exactly what i was going to say. So +1

Quoted: Keeping granddad's machine gun that he brought back from WWII and never registered - non-violent felony.

There's been an amnesty or two since WW2 for such guns, but this example is where I'd think harsh penalties for some non-violent felonies and other non-violent felonies should be drawn.  

Just based on this example I wouldn't automatically draw the line between violent and non violent felonies and give my OP examples a free ride.

Quoted: Keeping granddad's machine gun that he brought back from WWII and never registered - non-violent felony.

Here all gun crimes are classified as "Violent"  

Shop lifiting over a certain amount (like $500 I think - might vary by area) and you commited a non-violent felony.

Think those people should be permanantly barred from gun and voting rights?

When I was in college I bounced my rent check.  I had the money but procrastinated/forgot to deposit it.  Under Arkansas law any hot check over $200 dollars is a felony.  If my landlord was an ass and reported it, I would have a felony record today.

Well from my point of view - not every non-violent offender should avoid jail time. The problem I see it is there are too many laws that classify as a 'felony' for my taste. I would HATE to loose my gun from some BS law - such as the $200 check as mentioned by someone in Arkansas.

Where I hear most 'non-violent' offenders being supported relates to the gun laws. Give them a damn ticket and send them on their way. Jail does NOTHING to help the drug problem. It probably makes it worse in some cases, as people make connections and learn more tricks. I am not talking about the guy with 100 lb of pot in his car, but the guy with the bag of weed doesnt need to suck up any more tax dollars.

In WA, gambling online is a felony.

Quoted: Quoted: Inalienable rights are just that...inalienable. I wouldn't let third time convicted car thieves out on the loose and give them CCW permits based on that quote, or someone that stole my life savings.

How about this one:

"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"

I'm supposed to declare everything I buy out of state and pay taxes on it in MA.  

I should loose my rights over that one.

Quoted: You know what is the real kicker?  Felonious "White Collar" criminals don't lose their right to own firearms..  Even if they embezzle millions.  You and I steal a loaf of bread and get nailed for more than a year in the pen even if you do community service or summary offense... Barred for life. Isnt it great how the folks writing the rules make it so they are easier for them to live with when they break them?

How could that be ? I thought it was ALL felons, unless rights are restored.

Soon enough everything will be a felony, just wait.

read the fine print on the questionaire and the actual statutes.  

Ok, this should be clear:

The only time it is moral to deprive someone of their rights is upon a due conviction for an actual time that has been committed- while they are serving a just sentence for that crime.  Once sentence has been fulfilled, there is no longer any moral justification for oppressing that person!

That said, a crime is a crime (though there are many things that should not be crimes that are created by statute alone (look up Malum Prohibitum vs. Malum in se).  Just because a crime is non violent does not mean the person did not infringe on the rights of another.  Libertarians do not propose we ignore crimes because they are non violent- they propose that we do not criminalize things that are not morally a crime.  If someone infringes on another person's rights- they should be punished.  Once they have been punished, we should not then become the infringers/aggressors and continue punishing them.  Make sentences stick, bring back the death penalty, whatever, but do not criminalize stupid crap in retaliation for a defunct justice system.

Quoted: Quoted: Keeping granddad's machine gun that he brought back from WWII and never registered - non-violent felony. There's been an amnesty or two since WW2 for such guns, but this example is where I'd think harsh penalties for some non-violent felonies and other non-violent felonies should be drawn.   Just based on this example I wouldn't automatically draw the line between violent and non violent felonies and give my OP examples a free ride.

I think you missed the point. Some(wait... most) felonies, probably shouldnt be felonies in the first place.

If someone has an AR15, that they legally purchased, with a barrel that is 15.5 inches, its a felony. So should he not be allowed to own a firearm again? He was probably just unaware of the law, but now he is sitting in federal pound me in the ass prison. Yep, welcome to Amerika comrades!!

Politicians push for making crimes, especially the political hot patato ones(like gun laws) felonies, in order to make themselves appear "tough on crime". Rarely do they think about the consequences of these arbritrary laws on thier subjects, they only think of how it will make them do in the next election. Have that attitude in elected government for nearly 200 years, and it becomes hard to walk down the street without commiting a felony.

Then good luck getting a job after that.

Normally I laugh when I hear some hippy complaining about "the man keeping him down". But I have simpathy, because one tiny mistake in this life, and thats it, you get slapped with the scarlet F for life. Hell, if I get pulled over tommorow and forget to tell the officer immediately that I have a CHL and a loaded G19 in the locked glove compartment, "click" big F for life. I would have to kiss goodbye my dream of being a career firefighter, my guns, basically my life...

We are far less free than we believe...

Its only a crime if they feel sorry for the victim, if you are the victim and they don't like you, its your fault. I have seen it. If the police of prosecuter does not like you you get no help.

Depriving someone of their right to keep and bear arms should not be a punishment as it is an inalienable right. It would be like trying to punish someone by preventing them from practicing their religion - simply not acceptable under any circumstance.

If someone commits a crime (a REAL crime, not this made up BS like your gun is the wrong color on the second tuesday of the month), then simply punish the criminal by making them do hard time, or even the death penalty. "Gun control" shouldn't even come into the arguement.

Quoted: Depriving someone of their right to keep and bear arms should not be a punishment as it is an inalienable right. It would be like trying to punish someone by preventing them from practicing their religion - simply not acceptable under any circumstance. If someone commits a crime (a REAL crime, not this made up BS like your gun is the wrong color on the second tuesday of the month), then simply punish the criminal by making them do hard time, or even the death penalty. "Gun control" shouldn't even come into the arguement.

+1!