Would you find it alarming?

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nittespanker

Moderator
Would you find it alarming if when a person was released from prison the former inmate was given a firearm for self defense?

If alarmed what steps would you take for keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals?

If not alarmed do you support the right to bear arms unconditionally? Simple yes answer would be appropriate for this opinion and no explanation needed.

The released inmate served their time. It doesn't matter what that crime was. They have paid their debt to society according to the court and are not on parole or probation.
 
Last edited:
I don't think your questions lend themselves to simple yes or no answers. For what crime was this hypothetical person convicted? How long did he spend in prison? The answers to these questions may well change my answers to yours.
 
Nittespanker said:
If alarmed what steps would you take for keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals?
Click to expand...
Released on parole, or released after having completed his sentence? (In other words, having "paid his debt to society" in full?) It appears to me that you regard someone who has completed his prison term as a criminal -- I don't really think the law regards him that way.

I am all in favor of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. I don't know that I'm willing to subscribe to the notion that someone who served a sentence for a non-violent felony should be considered a "criminal" after having served his prison term, and deprived of his right to defend himself.
 
Would you find it alarming if when a person was released from prison the former inmate was given a firearm for self defense?
Click to expand...

Yes I would. Prison is a place for serious offenders, people who pray on others. Arming them is probably not in the best interest of the people.
 
Spats McGee

I don't think your questions lend themselves to simple yes or no answers. For what crime was this hypothetical person convicted? How long did he spend in prison? The answers to these questions may well change my answers to yours.
Click to expand...

So don't give a yes or no answer. Feel free to explain your reasoning.
 
I thought my reasoning was clear from my questions, but I'll play: Whether I would be alarmed by an inmate being given a firearm would depend on the nature and severity of the offense.
 
In the current world? Violent people should not have legal access to firearms. Having been in prison doesn't make them nonviolent.

In the world as I think it should be? Violent people should not be let out, so the question is moot.
 
Whether I would be alarmed by an inmate being given a firearm would depend on the nature and severity of the offense.
Click to expand...
Ok so your in the it depends on what type crimes they committed to be sent to prison "camp"

Since its difficult to keep a person from obtaining a firearm from getting one how would you make it more difficult or keep the "other" criminals that you would be alarmed if they had a firearm from obtaining a firearm?
 
Recidivism being what it is we don't do that anymore. We don't give prisoners guns anymore and expect them to act as guards either. These are ideas that never worked particularly well in the old world and are recipes for disaster in the current one.
 
It would bother me if a convicted Felon, a severly mentally ill person and/or a person with a Bad Conduct Discharge from the military were allowed to own or possess a firearm.
 
Today, 06:02 PM #7
Brian Pfleuger
Staff

In the current world? Violent people should not have legal access to firearms. Having been in prison doesn't make them nonviolent.

In the world as I think it should be? Violent people should not be let out, so the question is moot.
Click to expand...

So if you get in a fight and hurt somebody but its ruled a felony you should be locked up forever? Don't you think that's harsh?
 
So far no one has given any ideas to how we can keep guns out of the hands of people who we think shouldn't have them.

I'm certain we could come up with a few good ideas if we try. What do you guys think?
 
More then half of the people in prison in the USA are their for non-violent crimes.
I would not feel very alarmed if a tax fraud guy had a shot gun or a grower of illegal flowers had a .22 rifle.
 
Won't play by your rules !!!

Simple yes answer would be appropriate for this opinion and no explanation needed.
Click to expand...

Yes, your point of departure and agenda troubles me but I also accept your 1A right to express it. .... ;)

Be Safe !!!
 
If the crime was one of violence - unprovoked assault, robbery with violence, break & enter (with occupants home), rape, murder, child abuse, etc. - dealing in hard drugs or illegal guns, or something which might come under the general umbrella of treason or terrorism, I would be extremely alarmed.

If it was a stupid and unlucky kid who got themselves arrested, charged and convicted because they belted someone else in the schoolyard at the height of a name-calling session which referenced his mother's honour & stuff like that, perhaps not so much.
 
Quote:
Yes, your point of departure and agenda troubles me but I also accept your 1A right to express it. ....

Be Safe !!!
Click to expand...

I have no agenda and I appreciate your honesty. Oh and you did play by the "rules" you gave an honest answer. Yes you support the 2nd amendment unconditionally. Thank you,there are no wrong answers here.
 
I don't really think we can keep weapons out of their hands. This does not bother me, as I generally do not favor prior restraint.

However, should they be caught committing another crime, and using a firearm in commission of said crime, I would have no heartache with mandatory imprisonment enhancements.

Hey, wait, we have those... they just don't seem to get used as often as they should.
 
It's illegal in MI for a convicted felon to be in possession of a fire arm, so if they had one I would call the cops. They lost that right when they committed their crime and were sentenced to prison.
 
If two major items were addressed, most of the concerns at hand would be largely alleviated.

1. Simplify the current laws. Notice just how exponentially thicker the rule book from the IRS gets every stinking year? Same thing.

2. Enforce the laws to begin with. If a convicted felon receives 15 years for armed robbery, then he/she receives 15 years. Not 10. Not 5..... FIFTEEN.

Would you find it alarming if when a person was released from prison the former inmate was given a firearm for self defense?
Click to expand...

Sorry to burst your bubble. Buts as Spats said, it makes all the difference in the world the reason why one serves time. Give us some specifics so we're not making more convoluted answers and we can give a more accurate assessment to your question.

If alarmed what steps would you take for keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals?
Click to expand...

If the convicted felon served the time given, then I believe steps should be taken to have his/her rights restored, generally speaking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top