Free felons have a constitutional, moral, and natural right to bear arms

Rich,
We finally find something we agree on. That program would be costly.
I've read a lot of good points and agree with some disagree with others.

With all the laws passed in recent years you need a staff of lawyers just to figure out if you can go to the store and get a gallon of milk while carrying a pistol.
I personally have no sympathy for those who knowingly commit crimes. i.e murder, rape, embezzlment, assault. Yes, I put embezzlment in with violent crimes. If you take millions from a retirement fund I don't see how that is different than rape. You have victimized the people entitled to the retirement fund even if you didn't bash their skull.
 
If that person isn't locked up (whether it be in a prison or mental institute), then that tells me you believe they are safe for society. Let them have a gun.

Maybe it'll at least make parole boards think twice before releasing people.
 
In the 20th century when the federal tyrants were making their power thefts, the situation was made more complex by their complete perversion of the meaning and usage of the term "felon." Government schools of course do not teach that the actual meaning of that term (before non crimes like drug possession/sales were elevated to felonies) refers to someone who is so dangerous as to warrant A. permanent arrest, and/or B. execution. Now, calling non crimes felonies is government's way of punishing it's non compliant children in a more severe way.
Click to expand...

And therein, my friends, lies the rub. "The Government" was, is, has been, and will be on a binge to make anything and everything a felony crime.

Why?
calling non crimes felonies is government's way of punishing it's non compliant children in a more severe way.
Click to expand...

It gives "The Government" more and more control over We The People. Never mind that the control is unlawful, unconstitutional, illegitimate and immoral - "The Government" wants more power and doesn't give a rat's @$$ how it gets it.

In my home state (Indiana), non-payment of child support is a felony crime.
In no way does this "felony" meet the requirement of
someone who is so dangerous as to warrant A. permanent arrest, and/or B. execution.
Click to expand...
IMHO, it is an outrage that a person can be stripped of their Constitutional Rights for something so petty as not paying child support. Yes, people should pay their child support - I'm not saying it is okay to not do so. But to brand them as a felon for breaking a money-based law?? To take away their right to vote, to take away their right own firearms and to hold a passport for not forking over, say, $300 a month to the ex?? Wrong, wrong, wrong!!!
 
If that person isn't locked up (whether it be in a prison or mental institute), then that tells me you believe they are safe for society.
Click to expand...

Or that they've willing signed a contract giving up many of their rights and agreeing to multiple restrictions in return for finishing the remainder of their sentence outside prison walls.

You intentionally and knowingly sign a contract that includes giving up your right to keep and bear arms in exchange for parole or probation, then embrace the suck.

The people who have completed their sentences, and have managed to spend five or ten years out of trouble, then I have no problem with restoring their rights.

As far as 'felony' goes, does anyone know the history of the term 'felony' in common law?

LawDog
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=felony&searchmode=none

1297, from O.Fr. felon "wicked person, traitor, rebel," from M.L. fellonem "evil-doer," of uncertain origin, perhaps from Frank. *fillo, *filljo "person who whips or beats, scourger" (cf. O.H.G. fillen "to whip"); or from L. fel "gall, poison," on the notion of "one full of bitterness." Another theory (advanced by Professor R. Atkinson of Dublin) traces it to L. fellare "to suck," which had an obscene secondary meaning in classical L. (well-known to readers of Martial and Catullus), which would make a felon etymologically a "cock-sucker." O.E.D. inclines toward the "gall" explanation, but finds Atkinson's "most plausible" of the others. Felony is c.1290.
Click to expand...

not much but it's a start
 
i consider this argument to be about the same as 'convicted sex offenders shouldnt have to be registered'.

i won't address the topic of drug offenses, since, in my opinion, they will always remain illegal no matter what.

the ratio of rehabilitated violent felons is probably as low as the ratio of rehabilitated sex offenders.
 
Actually, I think that we're barking up the wrong tree here. The thread is about Felons being able to own guns but if you read the 4473, it states Felonies AND:

Any crime with an imprisonment of over one year
Click to expand...

If you read your States laws, many misdeamenors fall into this catagory and therefore are inforceable via the ATF to "ban" that person from owning/buying firearms.

So, it's just not Felons that fall under this "law".

As for the initial thread, and I will not change my position, is that when your debt is paid, you have ALL Rights restored.

And I agree with LawDogs standard: ALL debt is paid, meaning all the time served (either in prison, probation, etc..) and all monies paid (fines, restatution(sp), etc..)

Wayne
 
While there are all sorts of legal reasons why felons should not have guns, I had to laugh at the title that proclaimed that free felons have a natural right to bear arms. Given that guns are not natural, there is no natural right

I fail to understand why those of you who argue that free felons should be allowed the right to keep and bear arms because of the constitution and yet you don't want felons to have arms when they are in prison. What were those words in the 2nd Amendment, "...shall not be infringed," and yet y'all seem fine with violating a felons supposed rights when he is in prison.

The way I see it, we all play by the same rules. The rules were in place before the folks committed their felonies. Part of the appear of felony laws is to preclude folks from committing crime because of the rammifications of the penal process such as loss of freedom, loss of the right to vote, loss of the right to keep and bear arms.

If the felons are dumb enough to risk their rights in breaking the law, then they are dumb enough to not be awarded back their rights on leaving prison. Part of the punishment process does extended beyond prison time.

Oh, and nobody ever claimed that people who get out of prison are safe to return to society. All that getting out means is that they have met part of their punishment requirements, the parts pertaining to time behind bars.

It is all quite simple. Don't do the crime and you won't suffer the consequences. That is a no brainer and yet folks fail to understand.
 
Don't do the crime and you won't suffer the consequences. That is a no brainer and yet folks fail to understand.
Click to expand...
Well, gee 00, I guess I've never seen it in that light before. Of course I understand now.

If .gov says so, it must be fair and right. Sometimes I wonder why anyone questions anything anymore; after all, the correct answers are right in front of us; usually spoon fed to us by teachers, talking heads and technocrats. Freedom is Slavery. ;)
Rich
 
The top 10 highest prison populations in the world:

1 United States of America 2,085,620
2 China 1,548,498
3 Russian Federation 763,054
4 Brazil 330,642
5 India 313,635
6 Ukraine 198,386
7 Mexico 191,890
8 South Africa 186,739
9 Thailand 168,264
10 Iran 133,658

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=510572

Must be just killing them by the Millions in China and Russia to have prison populations so much lower than our own, huh? ;)
Rich
 
Nope, Red.
They ALL deserve their sentences, plus a lifetime of Rights revocation (unless, of course, they have money or connections for Rights Restoration Appeal). I know, because the government that put 'em all there told me so. ;)
Rich
 
I wonder how many of those are in there for the most menial of nonviolent, victimless charges...
Click to expand...

Given that around here, your first non-violent felony is handled by Pre-trial Diversion, your second is dealt with by a Deferred Adjudication, your third by Probation...so on, so forth, ad infinitum, the chances of anyone around here going to the pen for the first non-violent, victimless felony is slim to none.

Fourth, fifth, sometimes sixth time someone gets caught, they might catch the chain to the pen.

I have a hard time feeling sorry for someone who gets busted with felony-weight dope/gets Diverted; gets busted for felony-weight dope again(2)/gets a Deferred case; gets busted for felony-weight dope again(3)/gets Shock Probation; gets busted for felony-weight dope again(4)/gets three years in TDC w/ 200 days credit -- home on parole in 12 weeks.

He had three chances that he decided to waste, he needs to suck it up.

LawDog
 
Rich,
You're comparing apples to palm trees. You can't compare any of those since none of them are governed by the same judicial system. What is the population percentage incarcerated? What is the percentage of people in those countries imprisoned for what we consider basic freedoms?

On a side note here is a personal experience of mine while going to flight school in Kremenchuk Ukraine. The water in Kremenchuk was cut off for 3 days because the majority of the people in the city (pop. 226,00) did not vote for the incumbent President. The people did nothing because they were afraid of being arrested. That is a true police state.

Sorry for dragging it off topic.
 
If that person isn't locked up (whether it be in a prison or mental institute), then that tells me you believe they are safe for society. Let them have a gun.

Maybe it'll at least make parole boards think twice before releasing people.
Click to expand...

Yep. Excellent points.


-azurefly
 
Individuals convicted of forceable felonies should never be able to possess, own or use any type of firearm for the duration of their natural life.

Other non violent felonies should be reviewed - after full restoration - criminal & civilly by said offender for the ownership or use of firearms. This could be done thru the court system.

12-34hom.
 
Let's face it, the days are pretty much over when any of us can defiantly claim, "I've nothing to hide." We all do, if only by virtue of the fact that we've no idea what all the laws are anymore....nor what our rights are in an encounter with Law Enforcement.
Click to expand...
+100000000000000, and I AM law enforcement!!! WTF is going on??!?!?!?
 
Individuals convicted of forceable felonies should never be able to possess, own or use any type of firearm for the duration of their natural life.
Click to expand...
Another request for a supporting arguement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top