Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: IL Law Charges Felony for Flicking a Cigarette Butt = RKBA Revoked

  1. #1
    Regular Member cirrusly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    331

    IL Law Charges Felony for Flicking a Cigarette Butt = RKBA Revoked

    Already in effect as of January 1, 2014 anyone littering a cigarette butt may be charged with a misdemeanor for the first two offenses, and a felony charge for the third offense. I can't help but think, especially with Quinn's vow to decrease prison populations that this is a subtle, back-door effort at enacting gun control. And it may work too, as you know- under federal law, a convicted felon may not own any firearms.

    I am not a smoker, but obviously the charge does not match the "crime" on this...

    http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/il...that-butt.html
    I want to keep our founding fathers' visions and rights for this country pure. I implore you to do the same.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law, then we all can be legally disarmed merely by sufficiently lowering the bar of felony, as is being done to mere litterers. Progressive law is a slippery slope with an armed tyrant mob at bottom.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    El Paso County, Colorado
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law, then we all can be legally disarmed merely by sufficiently lowering the bar of felony, as is being done to mere litterers. Progressive law is a slippery slope with an armed tyrant mob at bottom.
    And this is why I do NOT support revoking RKBA for felons. People have this image of a "felon" as a knife wielding violent thug who maims and kills, not a guy who tossed three cigarette butts in the wrong place. Or smoked weed too many times. Or drained a swamp.

    I could maybe see such a measure if it were restricted to violent felons but I'd want to see the definition of "violent" and if it were satisfactory, encase it in carbonite so they can't change it down the road. (I'd hate to hear of people losing their rights because they "violently" lobbed cigarette butts.) Since neither of those will happen, I'd oppose even that.

    The next measure I'd find superficially appealing would be denying RKBA to felons while serving a sentence, but then I could see "lifetime parole" (or probation) sentences being handed down for cigarette litter. So my fallback would be "only while they are actually incarcerated."
    Last edited by SteveInCO; 01-03-2014 at 10:11 AM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    is there no honor among thieves? Let them have guns in prison (or coventry). Australia was well populated by transportees.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Well, you may as well defend yourself against outrageous laws .... hmmm, how can we do that?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    240
    I am in the camp of once you have paid your debt to society........

    Signature line.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Stafford, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by kurt555gs View Post
    I am in the camp of once you have paid your debt to society........

    Signature line.
    I'm in the camp of if you are so stupid that you didn't learn to not flick your cigarette butt after the first two times you were caught, tried, and convicted then you are probably too stupid to be trusted with a gun.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law, then we all can be legally disarmed merely by sufficiently lowering the bar of felony, as is being done to mere litterers. Progressive law is a slippery slope with an armed tyrant mob at bottom.
    Exactly.

    Quote Originally Posted by kurt555gs View Post
    I am in the camp of once you have paid your debt to society........

    Signature line.
    Yep. If we cannot trust a convict to be released to the general public with all human rights reinstated, said convict should not be released.

    Quote Originally Posted by jegoodin View Post
    I'm in the camp of if you are so stupid that you didn't learn to not flick your cigarette butt after the first two times you were caught, tried, and convicted then you are probably too stupid to be trusted with a gun.
    Really? So where do you draw the line? Jay walking? Speeding? Should being inconsiderate really be grounds for the loss of rights?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •