reformed felons have right to self defense?

K

KALIFORNIST

New member
Here is my question.should a person who has had a felony conviction at a very young age due to youth/stupitidty get a chance to have the means to protect themselves and their family later in life?I am not talking about multiple carrer felons that were doing violent crimes and such but of someone who maybe got a low felony drug conviction at age 18 and cleaned up his act.I know several guys that I consider very good sound people that both have a felony from when they were 18.1 was for drugs(I believe pot)he had more then he should have had on him and that was that.the other was drinking with some guys and got a vandalism charge.the people he was with broke some windows out of abondoned building or something.He didnt partake but he was with them and the driver of the car that was spotted.both did a little county time and successfully completed probation without issue.neither owns guns or care to for that matter but It got me thinking as to how I would feel If I were in their situation as I do like guns and believe in protecting whats mine and related to me.
While I am not a big fan of drugs or breaking things I remember being 18 and doing things that might of got me in a little more trouble then I would care for,like a fist fight or two were maybe a jaw or nose was broken(I get my share of beatings at that age too so please excuse me if I sound like I am trying to be a tough guy.I assure you I am not, just an example).
If this is in wrong spot I apologize but id like some input.
 
Most states have a process to restore civil rights.

If a felon has led an exemplary life, and has stayed out of trouble, he can petition a court to restore his civil rights, including the right to own arms.
 
+1 on what Dfariswheel said.

But I'll add that it's no easy task to get all of the paperwork done.
It's a slow process by design, intended to weed out those worthy of getting their rights back. It usually helps to have local cops, city councilmen, etc. signing a petition in support. And if a person shows a history of volunteer community work that's usually a plus too.
 
Personaly, I don't like how you have to "prove" that you are a good person, even 20 years after you served your time. If you have to have it, it should be like probation. I think 10 years from release would be a good start. If you can go 10 years free with the rest of society and not get in trouble then I think that is enough.
 
you may be able to get your state record expunged, but you still have the Federal law over that states that you can't even be near a pistol. rifle ect unless it is carried by a police officer..
also I think Clinton took away the money that was funding Federal cases to exounge records.
ck out black powder-muzzle loaders laws in your state.they may be legal for felons. they are not considered firearms by the federal government and many states.
Expunction
Theoretically, federal law allows persons convicted of felonies in a federal United States district court to apply to have their record expunged after a certain period of time with a clean record. However, the U.S. Congress has refused to fund the federal agency mandated with handling the applications of convicted felons to have their record expunged. This means that, in practice, federal felons cannot have their records expunged.

For state law convictions, expunction is determined by the law of the state. Some states do not allow this, regardless of the offense, resulting in class of people permanently lacking many legitimate opportunities. These people can have extreme difficulty finding a job or even a place to live, regardless of qualifications or references, which can result in their return to a life of crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felons

http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/FederalGunLaws.aspx?ID=60
 
Personally, I'm all for letting even non-reformed violent felons have the right to self defense after release, no matter what there crime was.
Once their time is served,,,the slate should be wiped clean.

Anything less,, IMNSHO,, is "cruel and unusual".
 
I know this sounds crazy...but first make sure the conviction

WAS a felony. Most first time drug offenses, even manufacturing and intent to distribute have been downgraded to a Misdemeanor.

A person could actually have been convicted of what was a felony years ago and it is now a misdemenor... the law and feds will recognize the current rating of the conviction over the past.
 
Good point blume357, the term "felony" has been watered down to the point that you now have to ask what they acutaly DID and get details to figure out if they are really a bad person or a victim of bad laws.
 
Right, if a person is so dangerous that they can't take their sons hunting, then they should still be in the slammer. I have no sympathy for sex offenders, drug dealers,pimps and violent people, but some of the punishments today do not fit the crime. everyone is a ex something except a felon, once a felon, always a felon.
I was reading the local paper and seen where a 21yo guy just got a felony DWI because he had a DWI a couple yrs ago. I guess it made more scence to lock him up away from his family and let the tax payers support everyone for the next few yrs, instead of taking his licence for everything except work, food shopping, maybe school activities. Or they could have put him on house arrest nights and weekends except when going to treatment-AA or what ever they have. Now when he gets out, he'll not get a job because of the felony, (even people with no record can't find work here),. his family will no doubt spend yrs on welfare and he'll have nothing to do but drink and bum around.
 
"I was reading the local paper and seen where a 21yo guy just got a felony DWI because he had a DWI a couple yrs ago........and he'll have nothing to do but drink and bum around."
Click to expand...

Sounds like he was doing that already. 2 DWIs in 2 years. The guy is a slow learner, and SHOULD be in the slammer after the second one, IMO.
 
reformed felons have right to self defense?
Click to expand...

(Right to self defense) is not equal to (right to own firearms).

The antis do have a point that inner city drug-related, gang-related, illegal-alien-related crimes are committed by thuggish hot-headed ex-cons. They typically get their guns by means of:
1) straw purchases made by newly initiated gang members with no criminal history (yet)
2) burglary of law abiding gun owners' homes.

Most felons who feel a need for self defense tools have the following options:
1) baseball bats
2) crowbars
3) knives
4) other tools and weapons
5) martial arts / self defense courses
6) black powder weapons

Felons have the right to self defense. They just don't have the right to modern cartridged firearms.

I'm glad that I can pack more firepower than they are allowed. A muzzleloading side-by-side shotgun coupled with a 1858 remington .44 clone makes an effective home defense platform for folks that can't have an 870 and a Glock. They can hunt with a Hawkens .50 caliber muzzleloading rifle just fine.
 
Non violent, non gun related felonies, yes they should be able to regain thier civil rights after time served. Unless they were dealing meth...then they need to be dragged out and hanged in public.
 
My rant:

I've always been of the opinion that America is "advanced citizenship," and that not every single person in the world OUGHT to be granted the rights inherent in being a citizen of America. In my opinion, if you refuse to live your life within the laws of America, so much so that you have become a convicted felon, it's not such a grave injustice to deny someone the protection of American citizenship. (Don't play by the rules, don't get the rewards!)

So, I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with denying convicted felons the right to own firearms, vote, etc. That's part of the decision you make when you decide to commit a felony.

My pet peeve is entitlement. I HATE it when people think they are "entitled" to things, just because they are ALIVE. If you work hard to be a good citizen, then you have EARNED the rights of citizenship. If you're not a good citizen, then you shouldn't be rewarded... Either way, America (and the Constitution therein) isn't (or at least, shouldn't be) free.

Sorry if that makes me a bad person....
 
I think when you get out of prison you're punishment should be over. PERIOD. I don't care if you are a three time burglar or whatever. If you are not doing jail time, your RTKBA should be restored along with all other rights. If your crime was so horrible then you shouldn't be out of jail to begin with.

The idea of restricting gun ownership (with the state or national government deciding who qualifies for what) in the name of crime prevention is not a good thing (with all the good intentions attached to it notwithstanding). If a criminal is caught committing a crime, he should be held accountable for the crime, not because he was caught with a gun.
 
I was reading the local paper and seen where a 21yo guy just got a felony DWI because he had a DWI a couple yrs ago. I guess it made more scence to lock him up away from his family and let the tax payers support everyone for the next few yrs, instead of taking his licence for everything except work, food shopping, maybe school activities. Or they could have put him on house arrest nights and weekends except when going to treatment-AA or what ever they have. Now when he gets out, he'll not get a job because of the felony, (even people with no record can't find work here),. his family will no doubt spend yrs on welfare and he'll have nothing to do but drink and bum around.
Click to expand...

Taking people's licenses away who get DUIs often doesn't work. They still drive outside going to work/school/etc., and often manage to do so again while intoxicated. Also, even if they do follow such restrictions (or at least not drive drunk for a while) as soon as they're lifted they all too often drink and drive again.

Drinking and driving is nothing short of attempted homicide. You may not have an specific victim in mind, but you certainly don't care if you manage to kill anybody. It's little different than pointing your gun in a random direction in a neighborhood and just squeezing a couple off. Most people don't get caught on their first time, and with this guy we're talking about a second documented time. How many times has he completely disregarded the lives of others for his own convenience without getting caught?

I'm of the opinion that if a first arrest for DUI doesn't cure somebody of the habit, nothing will.[/tangent]

I think when you get out of prison you're punishment should be over. PERIOD. I don't care if you are a three time burglar or whatever. If you are not doing jail time, your RTKBA should be restored along with all other rights. If your crime was so horrible then you shouldn't be out of jail to begin with.
Click to expand...

I don't think full rights should be restored unless you've completed your probation/parole as well. A ten year sentence should be just that; ten years. Maybe we're nice enough to let you serve part of it outside prison under certain restrictions, but you should still be punished in some way for ten full years.

The day that parole is completed, though, he should be a free man. Let him buy as many guns as he wants, vote, etc.
 
If a guy has paid his dues because of being stupid at young age and has cleaned his act up and is a productive citizen he should be able to get his rights restored.

Have to check with your state laws.
 
Doug.38PR

"I don't care if you are a three time burglar or whatever. If you are not doing jail time, your RTKBA should be restored along with all other rights. If your crime was so horrible then you shouldn't be out of jail to begin with."
Click to expand...

Therein lies the problem. In my state of Washington, people who have committed manslaughter or murder serve relatively short prison sentences. Do you actually want an ex-felon who has murdered another person living next to you, and owning guns?

I DON'T !!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top