imported post
I posted this in the subject to an article here http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum66/29636.html
and thought I would throw it out here for comments.
I have been reading messages on this site for sometime now. This is the first time I have posted.
When I read this part of this article I thought I would comment on it:
'Benton also recommended checking with local law enforcement agencies to determine eligibility for "open carry." Felons, even if they have served their time, may not carry. The same is true for people convicted of domestic violence.'
This subject made me think, how does one lose one of his constitutional rights from being convicted of a certain class of criminal act?
Now, I know the relational behind laws like this, that someone who has shown a propensity for criminal behavior should be restricted from possessing the means to assist in that behavior. However, I think there are constitutional means to achieve the same ends. Like added years to a sentence for current or future criminal convictions.
I mean, think about it, would anyone stand-by and allow the government to say a man losses his first amendment right because he has a felony or domestic violence conviction. Or, how about his fourth amendment right, or his fifth, or sixth, or eighth?
So, why the easy acceptance of the loss of the second amendment?
Well just my thoughts on the subject.
Morgan
I posted this in the subject to an article here http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum66/29636.html
and thought I would throw it out here for comments.
I have been reading messages on this site for sometime now. This is the first time I have posted.
When I read this part of this article I thought I would comment on it:
'Benton also recommended checking with local law enforcement agencies to determine eligibility for "open carry." Felons, even if they have served their time, may not carry. The same is true for people convicted of domestic violence.'
This subject made me think, how does one lose one of his constitutional rights from being convicted of a certain class of criminal act?
Now, I know the relational behind laws like this, that someone who has shown a propensity for criminal behavior should be restricted from possessing the means to assist in that behavior. However, I think there are constitutional means to achieve the same ends. Like added years to a sentence for current or future criminal convictions.
I mean, think about it, would anyone stand-by and allow the government to say a man losses his first amendment right because he has a felony or domestic violence conviction. Or, how about his fourth amendment right, or his fifth, or sixth, or eighth?
So, why the easy acceptance of the loss of the second amendment?
Well just my thoughts on the subject.
Morgan