- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Another Federal Circuit Court Finds Convicted Felons Can Own Guns After Discharge
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:19 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:19 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
OK. What should it be?
More importantly, why is that a reason to attack the Constitution?
Like I mentioned up above, my issue isn't necessarily the restoration of rights. My issue is that we, as a society, refuse to completely remove violent offenders from society. If violent offenders were completely locked away for life, the restoration of rights wouldn't even be an issue.
1
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:21 pm to Ten Bears
quote:
Like I mentioned up above, my issue isn't necessarily the restoration of rights. My issue is that we, as a society, refuse to completely remove violent offenders from society. If violent offenders were completely locked away for life, the restoration of rights wouldn't even be an issue.
OK, so lock them all up for life for every violent crime? That's your solution, correct? No chance for rehabilitation or redemption?
Either way, you haven't addressed my question of why this is a reason to attack the Constitution...
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:22 pm to bhtigerfan
quote:
They’ve already proven that they can’t be trusted to not illegal shoot someone. You seriously don’t have a problem with violent convicted criminals walking around with firearms?
If prisons do indeed re-habilitate why can they not be trusted? If prisons do not, why have prisons?
Better yet, if a person is convicted of a violent crime, in other words is violent, why is that person allowed to remain in society, whether in or out of prison.
Yep, we will let the "violent" guy out and he will have no way to protect himself, family, or liberty. That will show him!!
Besides, Duarte is probably not the example we would want to use when arguing for restoration of 2A rights for convicted felons, but if it works and puts us a step or few in the right direction, then so be it!
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:26 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
OK, so lock them all up for life for every violent crime? That's your solution, correct? No chance for rehabilitation or redemption?
Absolutely, sorry, life sucks for those with poor impulse control.
quote:
Either way, you haven't addressed my question of why this is a reason to attack the Constitution...
So, let's say California, in its ultimate desire to create a more perfect liberal utopia, passes a law that says a person who is convicted attempted murder should only serve a year in prison. You're OK with that person being able to own a gun after serving that one-year sentence?
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:29 pm to Ten Bears
quote:
Absolutely, sorry, life sucks for those with poor impulse control.
Right, because the Second Amendment is an afterthought for you.
quote:
So, let's say California, in its ultimate desire to create a more perfect liberal utopia, passes a law that says a person who is convicted attempted murder should only serve a year in prison. You're OK with that person being able to own a gun after serving that one-year sentence?
Yes.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:29 pm to Ten Bears
yes
I also would not live in your hypothetical California that has a 1 year sentence for murder.
I also would not live in your hypothetical California that has a 1 year sentence for murder.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:33 pm to BuckyCheese
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:41 pm to BuckyCheese
When the 2nd was Ratified, there was No Provisions for Removing A Right. Why? Because Violent Felons usually were Executed, or Imprisoned for life. Other Felonies, only suspended the Right until the Convicted paid their debt to Society. Basically, while they were Imprisoned.
All that has changed in the 231 years since the Bill of Rights was Ratified, is that the Criminal Code became more complex (and screwed up). So the Pendulum of Consequences of Criminal Acts has swung from the extreme punishment side to am Ultra Liberal Progressive Folly, and what should be the punishment for violence against persons/society is a flipping Joke.
Now, the Left is more concerned about the Criminal’s Rights than their Victims.
All that has changed in the 231 years since the Bill of Rights was Ratified, is that the Criminal Code became more complex (and screwed up). So the Pendulum of Consequences of Criminal Acts has swung from the extreme punishment side to am Ultra Liberal Progressive Folly, and what should be the punishment for violence against persons/society is a flipping Joke.
Now, the Left is more concerned about the Criminal’s Rights than their Victims.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:45 pm to shinerfan
quote:
Well, they're not going to release you from probation or parole while you still owe money s
False
They will release you, then withhold your tax returns, if the person actually works.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:50 pm to CR4090
quote:
So would this do away with the background checks when buying a gun?
A person does not worry about a background check when that person wishes to commit a crime.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 3:56 pm to Timeoday
Understood. But I have a family member who in his 20s did some dumb bank fraud shite. He served a year in state jail. So now almost 20 years later, he can't legally buy a gun.
So I'm curious about what it means for guys like him.
So I'm curious about what it means for guys like him.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 4:02 pm to CR4090
quote:
Understood. But I have a family member who in his 20s did some dumb bank fraud shite. He served a year in state jail. So now almost 20 years later, he can't legally buy a gun.
So I'm curious about what it means for guys like him.
I don't think anyone is arguing against the restoration of rights for non-violent crimes.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 4:04 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:
Yes.
The US vs. Rahimi case is the one to watch. Zackey Rahimi, a convicted drug dealer, is an unsympathetic defendant in the case mischaracterized as being about domestic violence and the possession of guns. It actually focuses on due process of law.
5th Circuit panel correctly ruled that constitutional rights cannot be taken away based on restraining orders. At least four Supreme Court judges support hearing the case.
It is exactly the kind of case that gave rise to the cliche that hard cases make bad law. I pray that something happens to moot this case before it is heard. Why might you ask?
I believe it is setting up the legalization of red flag laws which Kavenaugh noted that he wanted in his Bruen ruling note. If they do that, it voids all 10 amendments until it’s overturned which could take 100 years.
I pray I am very very wrong!!
This post was edited on 5/16/24 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 5/16/24 at 6:13 pm to Timeoday
I can see it MAYBE for violent criminals as part of their sentence but not just a blanket for all felons. Unconstitutional and just some DA BS language.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 6:16 pm to RealDawg
quote:
I can see it MAYBE for violent criminals as part of their sentence but not just a blanket for all felons.
I think it makes the most sense for DV convictions but I work closely with felons and am aware that if a felon wants to possess a firearm, they easily can/ will.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 6:21 pm to Timeoday
Thank God felons can own firearms. Our republic is safe.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 6:50 pm to Timeoday
The case before Supremes isn’t a good one. There are plenty that should get chosen to delete this practice. Often, this law is just used to stack charges or void probation.
Posted on 5/16/24 at 6:51 pm to Timeoday
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/16/24 at 6:52 pm
Posted on 5/17/24 at 5:55 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:No dumbass, I’m anti-arming low impulse control, violent assholes.
So another die hard conservative that is ok with infringing the 2A?
Put it this way, a criminal shoots you in the spine during a robbery attempt. You, by the grace of God and fantastic surgeons save your arse, but now you’re a paraplegic for the rest of your life.
a-hole criminal gets 15 years in the penitentiary, or maybe less. He gets out, are you okay with this murderous a-hole walking around carrying a loaded pistol legally?
Are you fricking serious? You think prison rehabilitates these assholes? No, they’re likely to kill or injure someone again.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 5:57 pm to 4cubbies
quote:So we should make it legal and easier for them?
but I work closely with felons and am aware that if a felon wants to possess a firearm, they easily can/ will.
Are you fricking retarded?
Page 5 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News