What crimes should disqualify gun ownership ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yep, means if you and your brother are having a little fight, happens everyday to brothers, trust me. Or if your pissed off girl/boyfriend, friend, neighbor, attacks you, and you defend yourself, and get charged with assault, or anything like that, no guns for you! That means the next time it happens(being attacked, not fighting with your brother :)) and they come at you with a knife, or even a gun, you are screwed! Many gun laws have these sort of cracks in them. Like the mental patient one(s). A lot of veterans were/are treated at mental institutes because of Agent Orange exposure, and things along the lines(shell shock?). I am not to firm on what kinds of things, I haven’t really had a thorough run through of what kinds of things. Guns laws should be written by gun owners, and the NRA, then we might have some good ones, very detailed ones that are exact, and don’t leave anything out. Or don't include things that shouldn’t be there.
 
None. Period.
If you are not in jail, you should retain all your rights of citizenship. Nothing in my constitution about "unless you are a felon or unless you are a citizen or any other 'unless'. If someone can't be trusted with a gun then we have to put them down or away like any other mad dog.
I am amazed by the number of elitist answers that could be quotes of Teddy Kennedy. A lot of "I should have one but that kind over there shouldn't be allowed to!" of course, put so much more politely, with moral justifications.
I say again, read the 2nd! There are no qualifications in that right.
(Drat! Edited twice and still can't type 'that' right!)
------------------
Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club
68-70

[This message has been edited by TexasVet (edited August 09, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by TexasVet (edited August 09, 2000).]
 
Successfull suicides :)

Texas that is what I have said before, not as hard line as you. but along the same lines.

Rat, I got you beat, I'm typing this within a 1000 feet of TWO schools!

[This message has been edited by oberkommando (edited August 09, 2000).]
 
You have answered the question Dennis. The problem I have isn't with you but the repeat offenders that cycle thru the system time after time until they are bold enough or stupid enough to do something and get caught that puts them away for good. In the mean time they cause untold suffering to society in general. My usual flippant reply of kill them all let God sort them out is an oversimplification to say the least. Do you want the career criminal to have the right to own a firearm when he gets out so that he can rob someone else a lot easier than he would have done without, i.e. if he's caught with a gun he goes back to jail. I agree with you that not everyone that has commited a crime needs to be treated this way, however there are some that do. MWT
 
I believe that if you are disqualified from one Right, then you should be disqualified from all Rights, not just a select few. I also believe that if you do a crime, you should go to jail for your entire sentence, not just a few months or years and then get out on parole. Once you're out then you should get all of your Rights back, not just a few.

This whole thing is not about who should or shouldn't own guns. This whole thing is to disqualify as many people as possible so they can't own guns. The anti's and the government could give a rats a$$ if you break the law or not, they just don't want ANYONE to own or buy guns. They then make it harder or add more disqualifications to the list. First it was felonies, then it was "violent" misdemeaners, then non-violent crimes. They added "mental" disqualifications but then didn't define "mental". Soon it will be a disqualification if you've broke ANY laws or if you're the type of person that MAY break a law or COULD break the law.

People make mistakes. Some learn, some don't. Those who don't should be in jail until they do. With all the "Laws" on the books, both federal and State, everyone breaks the law at some point in life. Most are laws that are still on the books but went out in the 1800's. Some are laws so vague that, no matter how hard you try, you still end up breaking it. Some are so stupid, you break it because it because it's human nature or is unConstitutional.

Who should be disqualified from owning arms or even being protected under the BoR's? I can think of only one group... the politicians!

USP45usp
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top