Started By
Message

Mississippi District Court Judge with an interesting opinion re: felon in possession laws

Posted on 6/28/23 at 8:46 pm
Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
80208 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 8:46 pm
It’s 77 pages but it’s worth a read:

LINK
Posted by ksayetiger
Centenary Gents
Member since Jul 2007
68287 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 8:51 pm to
It's about a felon owning a gun, he served the sentence and the gun is in his home.

Boozie is so lazy.
This post was edited on 6/28/23 at 8:52 pm
Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
80208 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 8:55 pm to
I understand your aversion to reading actual opinions.
Posted by BengalOnTheBay
Member since Aug 2022
3855 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:17 pm to
A felon should not permanently lose his/her 2nd amendment rights, even if a "violent" crime is committed. If the individual remains so dangerous that they cannot be trusted with a gun, then they should remain incarcerated.
This post was edited on 6/28/23 at 9:18 pm
Posted by TittleMeThis
Member since Jun 2023
127 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:20 pm to
I understand the spirit of what you're saying, but once a felon serves his sentence, we can't give the government the power to extend it because the felon is still dangerous. Slippery slope
Posted by C
Houston
Member since Dec 2007
27819 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:21 pm to
quote:

should not permanently lose his/her 2nd amendment rights, even if a "violent" crime is committed. If the individual remains so dangerous that they cannot be trusted with a gun, then they should remain incarcerated.


You can lose your rights. I’m ok with laws that restrict people as punishment beyond a jail sentence.
Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
80208 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:23 pm to
quote:

A felon should not permanently lose his/her 2nd amendment rights, even if a "violent" crime is committed. If the individual remains so dangerous that they cannot be trusted with a gun, then they should remain incarcerated.


That’s a perfectly reasonable position to take.

But post-Bruen, you’re going to have to find multiple historical examples of same to back it up. And they all need to be from the era of the Founders.
Posted by BengalOnTheBay
Member since Aug 2022
3855 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:33 pm to
quote:

I understand the spirit of what you're saying, but once a felon serves his sentence, we can't give the government the power to extend it because the felon is still dangerous.


Of course, I wouldn't suggest otherwise. The 2nd point of my statement was aimed at sentencing. If "we" (as a society) believe Joe Smith is too dangerous to own a gun 40 years after he committed involuntary manslaughter when he was 17, then the sentencing should be changed. But "we" don't believe that, which is why he only served 5 years in prison. No reason he shouldn't get his 2nd amendment rights after his prison term is over.
Posted by Dex Morgan
Member since Nov 2022
1331 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:35 pm to
You're as dumb as the liberals with their gun free zones. A prior felon with the intention of commiting a crime with a firearm is not going to care about any law. Once you've served your debt to society, all rights should be restored.
This post was edited on 6/28/23 at 9:36 pm
Posted by BengalOnTheBay
Member since Aug 2022
3855 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:40 pm to
quote:

You can lose your rights.


How? Rights come from God, not the government.

quote:

I’m ok with laws that restrict people as punishment beyond a jail sentence.


So, if a "loss of rights" is part of the sentence for certain crimes, I think "we" (again, society as a whole) need to be a lot more upfront about that being a punishment for a crime rather than something that is seemingly "tossed in" after the fact.
Posted by Jeff Boomhauer
Arlen, TX
Member since Jun 2016
3552 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:41 pm to
quote:

You can lose your rights.


Then they’re not rights, only privileges
Posted by MasterDigger
Member since Nov 2019
2135 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 9:50 pm to
quote:

he served the sentence and the gun is in his home
Did he serve the sentence in its entirety or was he released early?

If released on parole/probation, the loss of rights should extend to meet the full sentence.
Posted by RealDawg
Dawgville
Member since Nov 2012
9375 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 10:32 pm to
They take away your ability to vote as well. Which is worse?
Posted by keakar
Member since Jan 2017
29991 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 10:59 pm to
quote:

A felon should not permanently lose his/her 2nd amendment rights,


this^^^^^^^^^^, this is the core of what i think "shall not be infringed upon" is all about

once a person in jail is released, and finished with their probation, that should be the end of any restriction of their rights.

period, end of story.

revoking the 2nd amendment right, should never go beyond the penalty time imposed on the criminal for their offence. i see no rational justification it should be for life if a man is free
This post was edited on 6/28/23 at 11:01 pm
Posted by BuckyCheese
Member since Jan 2015
49133 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:07 pm to
quote:

They take away your ability to vote as well. Which is worse?



In WI you get the right to vote back after serving your sentence.
Posted by TSLG
Member since Mar 2014
6724 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:15 pm to
quote:

we can't give the government the power to extend it because the felon is still dangerous. Slippery slope


What about being strict with parole and probation violations?
Posted by idlewatcher
County Jail
Member since Jan 2012
79032 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:16 pm to
quote:

Once you've served your debt to society, all rights should be restored.


Do you even high recidivism bro?
Posted by Riverside
Member since Jul 2022
2315 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:19 pm to
Carlton Reeves. Stopped reading there.
Posted by Timeoday
Easter Island
Member since Aug 2020
8568 posts
Posted on 6/28/23 at 11:42 pm to
Outstanding!!

quote:

Heller instead reassured us that “there will be time enough to
expound upon the historical justifications for the exceptions
we have mentioned if and when those exceptions come before
us.” 554 U.S. at 635. After Bruen, that time has arrived.


Yep, it appears we are there.
Posted by Dex Morgan
Member since Nov 2022
1331 posts
Posted on 6/29/23 at 3:56 am to
quote:

Do you even high recidivism bro?


So, you want to base punishment on a potential future crime? frick off with your liberal thought-crime bullshite.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram