• 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.

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

cirrusly

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
291
Location
North Dakota
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/illinoisreview/2013/12/get-ready-to-stop-flicking-that-butt.html
 

SteveInCO

Regular Member
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
299
Location
El Paso County, Colorado
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:

kurt555gs

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
234
Location
, ,
I am in the camp of once you have paid your debt to society........

Signature line.
 

jegoodin

Newbie
Joined
Jul 9, 2006
Messages
337
Location
Stafford, Virginia, USA
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.
 

jrj_51

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Messages
62
Location
Michigan
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.

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.

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?
 
Top