• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Should a felon's gun rights be restored...ever???

D

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

Of course this has never been discussed here on OCDO.

If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law then we can all be legally disarmed by sufficiently lowering the bar of 'felony', as has been done for domestic abusers and victims of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
 
rodbender

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
imported post

Most criminals are back inside a courtroom or prisoninside of a year of release. If they can go as much as 5 yearsafter release or supervised parole or probation without another conviction, they should have their gun rights restored automatically.
 
compmanio365

compmanio365

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
2,013
Location
Pierce County, Washington, USA
imported post

Why 5 years? If they are so dangerous that they are not to be trusted to own a gun, why were they released from jail? Nobody ever answers this simple question, because there is no good answer to it. If a man has served his sentence and paid his debt to society for his crimes, he should be a free man when he walks out the door of the jail. Speaking of being practical, no law regarding felons and guns has ever stopped those who intent to reoffend and are intent on staying criminals from getting a gun anyways. All these laws do is punish and put the lives at risk for those who have paid their debt to society and are trying to start over. Stop treating free men like criminals and they might not start acting like criminals again........the ones that would do so anyways, despite any and all laws to the contrary have very little problem finding a way to arm themselves and start committing crimes again.
 
A

AWDstylez

Banned
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
2,785
Location
, Connecticut, USA
imported post

compmanio365 wrote:
Why 5 years? If they are so dangerous that they are not to be trusted to own a gun, why were they released from jail? Nobody ever answers this simple question, because there is no good answer to it. If a man has served his sentence and paid his debt to society for his crimes, he should be a free man when he walks out the door of the jail.
Click to expand...


Even though the victim may never be so lucky. Sure thing. I'll get right on that.



What needs to be changed is the definition of a felony, not the treatment of felons.
 
D

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

compmanio365 wrote:
Why 5 years? If they are so dangerous that they are not to be trusted to own a gun, why were they released from jail? Nobody ever answers this simple question, because there is no good answer to it. If a man has served his sentence and paid his debt to society for his crimes, he should be a free man when he walks out the door of the jail. Speaking of being practical, no law regarding felons and guns has ever stopped those who intent to reoffend and are intent on staying criminals from getting a gun anyways. All these laws do is punish and put the lives at risk for those who have paid their debt to society and are trying to start over. Stop treating free men like criminals and they might not start acting like criminals again........the ones that would do so anyways, despite any and all laws to the contrary have very little problem finding a way to arm themselves and start committing crimes again.
Click to expand...

Well, I picked that because it's the time span that Mr. Britt waited in North Carolina.
 
D

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

Hef wrote:
I've posted my thoughts in the comments section of the article under "Dave Robertson".
Click to expand...

Saw them. Many thanks for contributing to what I'm already being told is a very worthwhile discussion / debate.

I think perhaps I've hit a bit of a raw nerve with the question. Now we'll see where it goes.
 
rodbender

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
imported post

My mistake for not saying "violent" felons. I wanted to clarify my position some.

I feel that violent criminals need to prove themselves. They have exrercised non retraint in the past and must show society that they can be law abiding citizens. I do, however, think that they should be allowed to have a firearm in their place of residence as soon as they are released from incarceration. It is not proper to not allow a person to defend themselves in their domicile.
 
Batousaii

Batousaii

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
1,226
Location
Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
imported post

AWDstylez wrote:
compmanio365 wrote:
.... he should be a free man when he walks out the door of the jail.
Click to expand...

What needs to be changed is the definition of a felony, not the treatment of felons.
Click to expand...


I am going to Agree with Styles here <dodges tomatoes> I personally think that we have way to many convoluted laws, and it's all to casual to be a felon these days. My friend and I were discussing this very subject this morning.... interesting.

- My personal feelings are incredibly harsh, and i know most wont agree. I feel we need to reduce the amount of laws on the books. Laws should be easy to understand by the common man, eliminating the need for lawyers in most cases. Becoming a "Felon" should be an incredibly serious matter, more liken to life in prison, or death penalty. With less laws, it should be much harder to break laws or become an actual criminal. Punishments need to be much more in-line and on par with the actual offence. We need to observe intent, and meditation of the crime as well.... Extremely violent, or heinous criminals need to be dispatched and eliminated via death sentence or life of hard labor depending on severity of crime, but they should not be released ever - period. Lesser offenses need to dealt with in the light of "non-criminal" and consequences more linear with the offence. Becoming a felon should be attune to being a home invader or a murder / rapist, none of which should see the topsoil ever again.

- So, in that light, Should Felons have their gun right restored ??? Sure, toss it in the coffin with em.

Just my thoughts, harsh as they may be.

P.S. This is a subject that understandably still has allot of "open ends" and (for me at least) is still in the contemplating stage. As always, i am open to retort or debate, and will consider all polite words of wisdom.


:cool:Bat
 
D

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

AWDstylez wrote:
What needs to be changed is the definition of a felony, not the treatment of felons.
Click to expand...
The definition is not consistent across jurisdictions. In SC felony is defined by the punishment for a crime. A murder is a felony only by virtue of its conviction requiring more than 365 days of incarceration.

Further, in SC the privilege of jury duty is removed by mere liability for felony punishment. I was in a jury pool. During qualification the judge went to great lengths to explain 'felon' in SC law. Then he asked all potential felons to come to the bench. I counted 80 out of the 100 person pool that spoke to the judge, few returned to their seats. I was empaneled even though I admitted extreme conservative principles, politics and practices.
 
D

DMWyatt

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
66
Location
Celina, OH, ,
imported post

The more I think about it, the more truth there is to the fact that a dead offender doesn't repeat. Now you could make the case for loitering, but I presume that the state will pay to clean up the bodies rather than suffer a health code violation. :lol:
 
A

AWDstylez

Banned
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
2,785
Location
, Connecticut, USA
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
AWDstylez wrote:
What needs to be changed is the definition of a felony, not the treatment of felons.
Click to expand...
The definition is not consistent across jurisdictions. In SC felony is defined by the punishment for a crime. A murder is a felony only by virtue of its conviction requiring more than 365 days of incarceration.

Further, in SC the privilege of jury duty is removed by mere liability for felony punishment. I was in a jury pool. During qualification the judge went to great lengths to explain 'felon' in SC law. Then he asked all potential felons to come to the bench. I counted 80 out of the 100 person pool that spoke to the judge, few returned to their seats. I was empaneled even though I admitted extreme conservative principles, politics and practices.
Click to expand...

Further emphasizing the stupidity of the current laws.
 
C

Carnivore

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
970
Location
ParkHills, Missouri, USA
imported post

Country: United States of America
State: Missouri

how can a person who has been found guilty of a drug related felony get his right to own a gun back?
AnswerYou may as a first step call the clerk of the court that was involved to see if it is possible to have it sealed, expunged, cleared etc., or if an exception may be granted to you The clerk will normally know, and will often help direct you if it is indeed possible.






Felony murderDefinition
: a murder that occurs in the commission of a serious felony (as burglary or sexual battery)
compare misdemeanor-manslaughter at manslaughter
Felony murder is usu. considered first-degree murder. Felony murder does not require specific intent to kill, and an accessory to the felony may also be charged with the murder






FelonyDefinition - Noun
: a crime that has a greater punishment imposed by statute than that imposed on a misdemeanor
specif
: a federal crime for which the punishment may be death or imprisonment for more than a year
see also attainder treason
Originally in English law a felony was a crime for which the perpetrator would suffer forfeiture of all real and personal property as well as whatever sentence was imposed. Under U.S. law, there is no forfeiture of all of the felon's property (real or personal) and such forfeiture is not part of the definition of a felony. For certain crimes, however (as for a conviction under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act or a narcotics law), specific property, such as that used in or gained by the crime, is subject to forfeiture. Every state has its own statutory definition of a felony. Most are in line with the federal definition of a felony as a crime which carries a sentence of imprisonment for more than one year or the death penalty (where applicable). Other states, like Louisiana, define a felony as a crime which carries a sentence of death or imprisonment at hard labor

http://www.law.missouri.edu/lawreview/docs/74-2/Hanna.pdf



There's hundreds upon hundreds of results, the question I have is which one of the types of offenders would you rent a room in the loft of your home to?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top