Ex-Felon Should they or shouldn't they?

B

Bushwhacker

New member
Okay I'm gonna ask for a opinion here:

Should someone that has been convicted of a felony have the right to still purchase a firearm?

After say ten years?

What about if they were convicted of a non-violent crime?



------------------
Tiro per divertimento, tiro per la sopravvivenza
 
D

DC

Moderator Emeritus
1) What was the felony?
2) If violent, what were the circumstances?

I would not blanketly say all ex-felons can not legally buy and own.
As well, violent crime is too broad. Example, in Calif its illegal to shoot and or kill a home breakin guy if you are not under immediate threat of death or injury...so, if its determined in court that the shoot wasn't good you aree now a violent felon.

I find it interesting that I, as a homeowner and the victim, am expected to have more calmness and presence of mind in an instant than the cops who routinely blow off tons of rounds at a criminal (or alleged criminal) in the same type of assessment situation

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
R

Rich Lucibella

Staff
Peronally, I feel we should reinstate their rights or keep 'em in jail. Of course, this will never happen.

However, prior to the 30's, felonscould own and carry firearms once they'd "paid their debt". So could everyone else
wink.gif
. As far as I'm concerned the gene pool had a far better chance of advancement under this philosophy.
Rich
 
G

GLV

Moderator
If a felon serves his/her whole sentence, and is discharged, I can see no reason for the felon to be probhibited from owning firearms.

He can become mayor of Washington D.C. can't he?

Any person that wants a gun, can get one. GLV
 
R

Rob Pincus

New member
I think that, under our current system, violent felons should be barred from owning firearms.

In a perfect system, where people actually paid a full debt to society.. no cable, no early release, etc... Then I agree with that all rights should be reinstated.
 
B

boing

New member
Put John's and DC's thoughts together with Rob's, and there you go, as perfect as can be hoped for.

Is it really appropriate to deny someone their constitutional rights for the rest of their lives for committing mail fraud?

First, make a violent felony live up to it's name.

Then make 'paying your debt to society' live up to it's name. If I've done my time, all of my time, and come out and still have to pay my due 'till I die, then I will never really be a citizen again. As long as I have to keep paying for it, I will always be a criminal.

-boing
 
S

striker3

New member
I also agree that if a criminal pays ALL of his sentence, then he is not a criminal anymore and should have his Full rights reinstated upon his release. But maybe the plan of the anti's is to create so many felonies oput there, that every citizen will become a felon. In that way they would(supposedly) have everyone disarmed.
 
B

boing

New member
That may in fact be the plan. Now a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, past or present, is sufficient to strip away someone's inherent rights. If those crimes are considered serious enough to warrant such restrictions, then they should be upgraded to bona fide violent felonies. Of course, that would mean that anyone convicted in the past of a domestic violence misdemeanor would still be able to possess weapons, and that doesn't disarm enough people quickly enough to satisfy the antis.

-boing

[This message has been edited by boing (edited June 10, 1999).]
 
L

Larry P.

New member
I guess I have to come down on the other side, here, as I think any convicted felon, of any age, (juveniles included) should lose his right to own a firearm forever. If I'm not mistaken, they also lose their right to vote forever. Why? Because they forfeited a group of their constitutional rights when they committed felonies. And many remain threats to society after release. I'd like to see that interpretation extend to ALL their Constitutional rights, including search and seizure, self-incrimination, etc.

I believe our crime problems, of all kinds, are caused in large part by criminals, and others seem to think they're caused by guns. The number of crimes committed by previously convicted felons is enormous, and when you get to really serious crimes (rape, murder, etc) the percentage gets even larger.

Some 50 million adult Americans choose to live out their lives without owning a firearm. If you commit any felony you have chosen voluntarily to join that group. And I include burglary, embezzlement, etc, non-violent crimes as well.

Now, the recent passage of this misdemeanor doodley is just that. If the crime is serious enough to require forfeiture of your right to own a firearm, then it is a felony. The "rationale" was that some such crimes (domestic abuse or whatever) were plea-bargained down to misdemeanors. Say what? If that's the problem, cease allowing that to happen. Setting a precedent which allows removal of a person's right to own a firearm for a misdemeanor leads right down the slippery slope to traffic tickets having the same result. "20 mph over? $500 fine and loss of your right to own a gun forever. Next case."

Larry P.
 
J

John/az2

New member
Larry,

Did you know that you can loose those rights in Arizona for the simple act of raising Gaming birds (Cock fighting birds)? It's a class 5 felony. How is this a violent felony?

Thus the question: Are we talking about REAL felonies, or PSUEDO felonies?

------------------
John/az

"Just because something is popular, does not make it right."

www.countdown9199.com
 
E

Ed Brunner

New member
Punishment of a crime is social retribution,no more,no less and society makes the call.
Its sort of like punishing your own child. It takes wisdom. The difference is that you are attempting to educate your child at a point where it is still possible.
With an adult you can pretty much forget the educational aspect and it becomes pure retribution.
The idea of prohibiting a convicted felon from owning a firearm as you well know is akin to weeing in the wind.


------------------
Better days to be,

Ed
 
B

Byron Quick

Staff In Memoriam
Maybe anyone who supports the felon ban should research the laws of his state of residence. You will probably discover that YOU are an unconvicted felon. For example, here in Georgia, anyone engaging in oral sex even if married to the other person has committed a felony and of course should not be allowed to own firearms. Don't laugh, there are several people serving twenty year sentences for this "crime" in Georgia.
2nd offense carrying concealed without permission is a felony.

I agree with Rich Lucibella as far as he goes. Personally, I would not imprison or restrict rights for any nonviolent crime (burglary is never a nonviolent crime). I believe that the laws regarding self defense need to be drastically broadened and the laws defining assault need to be drastically narrowed. Once that is accomplished, I would be a proponent of life without parole for a violent crime. My right to keep and bear arms derives from my right to life. If I have a right to life then it follows that I have a right to defend my life. If I have a right to defend my life then I have a right to own the tools necessary to defend my life.

We need to ponder the strategy of the protyranny lobby in this matter. They have gotten one misdemeanor over the bar on firearms ownership. There are rumblings from them now about doing the same for all misdemeanors. Jaywalking is a misdemeanor in Georgia. So is speeding, running a red light, or performing a rolling stop. What about mental disability? Any of you have a child on Ritalin? Lithium? Paxil? What do you want to bet that by the time they are adults that their medical history will be part of the federal database? Look at the number of children on these medications. I believe that an attempt will be made to bar each and every one of them from firearms ownership.

40% of the US Code has been enacted since 1970. Before you jump up and say felons should not own firearms, you had best make damn sure you are not one.
 
B

Bill Hebert

New member
A person who commits violence on another as the Kids who take guns into schools and shoot or kill others - at the point they commit the act - forfit their right to keep and bear arms forever. They should and MUST bear responsibility for their actions....including prison and restitution. Yes, I know this is "old fashioned", but I believe the person who commits a felony should have his rights removed or restricted until the victim is somehow "payed back" for the action (although things can never be returned to the pre-crime state.) I work with people who feel "I'm sorry" is the answer - I say that's a good start now you have some ammends to work out.
 
R

Rob Pincus

New member
Larry, I have to back Spartacus' point. How can you say such a unilateral "lose the right..forever" for crimes that are no more harmful to people than they are to the planet mars. "Crimes" such as making a mistake on a tax return could result in you never owning a firearm again? What sense does that make?
 
A

Abe Normal

New member
I think that all fellons that are released from prison after serving their FULL sentence (no time off for good behavior or early release) should be given a second chance at full citizenship. However upon a second a felony conviction their 2nd A. rights are gone for life as well as the right to serve in the military, gov.org and to vote.

Just my 2 cents worth.
Abe

------------------
For those that keep track of such things; 9,462 irradiated haggis.
 
J

JMC

New member
First, your question as posted is incorrect.

A person convicted of a felony does not become an Ex-Felon after serving their term, they are a convicted felon that has been incarcerated for a specific period of time for the crime committed.

That time being the full sentence or partial and released due to a far too liberal justice system made up of bleeding hearts that put people who commit crimes against their fellow man back on the streets for any number of, not reasons, but excuses.

A person convicted of a violent crime, especially one involving the use of a firearm, but not limited to a firearm, should loose their right to own a firearm for the rest of their life.

I also believe a person charged and convicted of domestic violence should not have the right to own a firearm.

I further believe a person convicted of a crime involving the illegal acquisition or disposition of a firearm, be it a legal type firearm or an illegal or prohibited firearm, should loose their right to own any type of firearm in the future.

This is not a time in our history as gun owners that we should be thinking of giving the right to own a firearm back to a person who once chose to ignore the laws set down for all of us to live by.

------------------
Jim

"Trust in GOD... but carry a GLOCK"
 
D

Dennis

Staff Emeritus
JMC,
I might agree with you more if:
- all laws were just (they aren't) or
- rehabilitation NEVER worked (sometimes it does).

I don't believe the law only punishes. In some cases, it "warehouses" the truly dangerous to keep them separate from society. In other cases it can even rehabilitate. In other cases, it punishes the wrong person, or it punishes arbitrarily and capriciously.

Yes, in some cases it punishes inadequately, but please remember, many of us are future felons.

I can not come up with a 100% rule to express my feelings. But I do believe that if we, here at TFL, were aware of every felony we have committed, or will commit as gun laws proliferate, then maybe we would take a more lenient point of view.
 
S

shortcut

New member
Speaking of felonies...

I heard on bit on the radio this afternoon about two 18 year olds buying a gun like one used in Littleton at a gun show. Was that a felony? They were provided with the money by an anti-gun group. Is that conspiracy to commit a felony?

Or did the 18 yr olds just pass the background check like most 18 yr olds would?

OTOH, I once found a fresh raptor claw while walking in the woods and called the local Fish & Game to help me identify the bird.

When he arrived, I was informed that posession of the bird foot was a felony. If he'd been having a really bad day or didn't like me for some reason I could have been stripped of right to self-protection.

No - there are too many possible felony charges out there for us to make any sense of.

I vote to let everyone have guns. The criminals (vs. convicted felons) do anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top