Oregon Federal charges filed against Oregon "cop watcher"

[billdeserthills]

Absolutely. A felon may not have guns at all ever. Not even ammunition in fact. He's guilty and proved it for the cops.

Not to mess with your fake news, but as a two time ex felon myself, unless someone commits an actual federal felony, their rights can usually be fully restored, after waiting an appropriate amount of time first. I had to wait five years after my probation ended before I could restore my rights last time & for an extra fee I could have chosen to have my rights restoration along with my past crime history buried, so any future employers couldn't see it

 

[Goosebrown]

Not to mess with your fake news, but as a two time ex felon myself, unless someone commits an actual federal felony, their rights can usually be fully restored, after waiting an appropriate amount of time first. I had to wait five years after my probation ended before I could restore my rights last time & for an extra fee I could have chosen to have my rights restoration along with my past crime history buried, so any future employers couldn't see it

If and only if your rights are specifically restored which by federal law is allowed but is rare. There are certainly times when that is appropriate. In general though once a felon always a prohibited person.

 

[nwslopoke]

I don't know if running from police is a felony in this state. But when doing so is a bigger crime the the original offense I have no sympathy. I knew of an ex felon that had a Mexican gang actively after him back in California . It was said he had a gun. Sometimes you do what you gotta do, but you can't cry when caught.

 

[Alexx1401]

I am not really sure what constitutes possession in this sense. Does handing him a gun for 10 minutes constitute possession? Even if it belonged to someone else there at the time? If so how can two people be in possession of the same item at the same time?

I agree it was dumb, I agree he should not have the gun in his hands period. Just curious if a picture of him shooting a coworkers gun is enough to send him to prison.

That may be the one thing that makes this case hard or impossible to actually make stick. They would have to prove in court that he was doing this after the conviction. He was VERY stupid to put this on social media. It is amazing the stuff people put up that comes back to bite them.

 

[IronMonster]

What they did wrong, was commit the first felony. If they hadn't committed the first felony in processing the weapon would not be a crime.

As soon as you convicted of a felony, you lose your rights to handle guns.

It's simple and is been a felony since 1968

Here are a few examples of felony crimes. You believe these folks should no longer have the right to self-protection?

1. You flush your sister's marijuana down the toilet.



You share a bathroom with your sister and you find her stash of illegal weed. You don't want her to get in trouble, so you flush it down the toilet. Little did you know, she was under a police investigation for possession of marijuana that began days earlier. Thus, you have just committed obstruction of justice: "A criminal offense that involves interference, through words or actions, with the proper operations of a court or officers of the court."


Real example: In 2007, a church in Greenwich, Conn. called and retained lawyer Philip Russell after they discovered child pornography on their musical director's computer. According to the Wall Street Journal report, "Russell told the musical director to retain counsel because possession of child pornography was a federal crime. The employee resigned. The church turned the laptop over to Russell, who destroyed it. No one told the feds." Russell was charged with obstruction of justice, a charge that can carry up to 20 years of prison time. However, the judge cited Russell's years of good service as reason to only give him six months of home confinement, a fine of $25,000 and community service.


2. You receive an odd package.



Let's say you own a small business which imports fish from another country and then distributes it to restaurants. One day, you're expecting your usual shipment and it arrives, but not in cardboard boxes the way it usually does. This time, it's in plastic. It turns out that the originating country bans the shipment of fish in plastic. You've just violated a foreign law, or the Lacey Act. Under this act, it is unlawful to "import, export, sell, acquire or purchase fish, wildlife or plants that are taken, possessed, transported or sold: 1) in violation of U.S. or Indian law, or 2) in interstate or foreign commerce involving any fish, wildlife or plants taken, possessed or sold in violation of State or foreign law."


Real example: Robert Blandford, Diane Huang, David McNab and Abner Schoenwetter — three American seafood dealers and one Honduran lobster-fleet owner — had no prior records. Yet they were given hard time in 2001 for "importing lobster tails that were the wrong size and that were packaged in clear plastic bags rather than in cardboard boxes." The three men were sentenced to eight years; Huang, the mother of two young children, was sentenced to two.


3. You take a fake sick day.



Your best friend calls you on a Tuesday night and says he won two tickets to see your favorite baseball team play on Wednesday. The seats are incredible and you know this opportunity won't come again any time soon, so you decide to call in sick to work on Wednesday morning. You figure that, after all, it's something everyone does every now and then. You did not know, however, that you have just committed a "scheme or artifice to defraud" the company to their "intangible right to your "honest services" — arguably a federal crime.


Real example: This statute was so vague that a few years ago, the Supreme Court ammended it to apply only to "bribes" or "kickbacks" that illegally influenced lawmakers. Regardless of Court's rewriting, Cato Institute policy analyst David Rittgers wrote that "little has changed" in how ambiguous the statute is. As Justice Scalia stated, it still criminalizes "a salaried employee's phoning in sick to go to a ball game."

4. You get lost in the woods.



You decide to take your motorbike for a ride in the woods, along the marked path where it's permitted. You didn't realize that a massive blizzard was coming and by the time there is a layer of snow covering the ground, you've lost track of the path. An officer finds you and charges you with having your motorbike in an area where it is not allowed, because you, unknowingly and without intent, have violated the Wilderness Act, which seeks to protect federally-designated areas of wilderness, partly by prohibiting motor vehicles.



Real example: In 1996 well-known automobile racer <broken link removed> was convicted of a federal crime and sentenced to six months in prison. Why? Because he got lost in a blizzard in Colorado for two days while snowmobiling, and was guilty of "unlawful operation of a snowmobile within a National Forest Wilderness Area."

5. You're a journalist with an anonymous source.



You're an eager young reporter who has been sent to Washington, D.C., to write an investigative piece pertaining to national security. A government employee who works in national security offers to give you inside information on the condition that he remains anonymous. You oblige and your editors publish the piece, unaware that you (arguably) violated provisions of the Espionage and Censorship Act. The act criminalizes the receiving and distribution of confidential national security information by private individuals under circumstances where the statute appears to cover only governmental officials. You've potentially just gone from a young, eager reporter to a convicted federal felon.


Real example: James Rosen is a news reporter for Fox. In 2009 he had several contacts with a State Department employee. The FBI, in order to obtain a search warrant to look at Rosen's phone records and email, claimed that Rosen had violated espionage laws. Judge Andrew Napolitano said, "This is the first time that the federal government has moved to this level of taking ordinary, reasonable, traditional, lawful reporter skills and claiming they constitute criminal behavior."


6. You email your family and friends to tell them not to use the services provided by your old company.



You used to work at a financial services company but you were unhappy at the job for a while and finally quit. While you were still employed there, though, you realized that the transactions were not completely secure. You had alerted your boss to the problem at the time, but he never followed up. After leaving the job, you email people to let them know that the company's system is not secure and a hacker could gain access to their financial information. Your intentions were pure, but a judge could argue that you violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse law, which outlaws anyone from sending information, with the intent to cause damage, to a protected computer. The law's definition of "damage" includes "impairment to integrity" of a system or data, a phrase vague enough to turn you from an innocent ex-employee to a convicted felon.


Real example: In 2000 Bret McDanel served 16 months in prison after he alerted customers of his old company, Tornado Development, about a software problem that was never fixed. He explained that the company's email system had a flaw that could allow an attacker to gain access to a user's email records. The prosecutors argued that McDanel had damaged Tornado's system. Wired called McDanel a "wrongly jailed security whistleblower."


7. You tell a park ranger that you cleaned up your picnic table.



You honestly did think that you cleaned up, completely unaware of the fact that your friend's plastic cup dropped on the ground. As you and your friends are leaving the park's picnic area, a park ranger asks if you've cleaned up after yourselves. You innocently answer, "Yes, sir." Unbelievably, it could be argued that you have just given false statements to a federal official, a federal felony. Any false statement made to a government official, even when it's in conversation and not under oath or in writing, can fall under a "false statement" charge.


Real example: In 2008 Emadeddin Z. Muntasser was sentenced in U.S. District Court to a year in prison for lying to an FBI agent when he denied traveling to Afghanistan years earlier. The transcript suggests that Muntasser was not purposefully trying to deceive interrogators, but rather had doubts about his original answer and felt he needed advice from legal counsel. The point here is that the wording of the very serious charge is open to interpretation at best.



Just some examples.... Of course, Adultery (cheating on your spouse) is a felony in many states as is oral sex....

So... If you ever got a BJ... You better turn in your guns as you are a felon who has just yet to get caught.

I don't have anything to say about this particular guy (in the first story) as I know nothing about him. But the idea that you can be barred your second amendment rights due to some non-violent crime (such as committing the heinous act of oral sex or cheating on your taxes or maybe talking your girlfriend's car after a fight and her calling it in as stolen) to me is unjust. If you have violent tendencies that's one thing, most felony charges are not for violent acts.

I know a guy first hand who lost his firearms rights due to tax evasion. To me that is a great example of why what we have today are privileges, not a right. It's not a right if it can be stripped away due to you failing to pay what the state says you owe for simply owning a chunk of dirt. Its just a privilege and the 2nd amendment is meaningless.

 

[IronMonster]

Just popped up on Google news this morning.

Obviously, this woman is not trustworthy enough to protect her family with a firearm.


Mother faces felony after putting recorder in child's bag - CNN

 

[Guymcdb]

What have they done wrong? Nothing but touch the "evil" object.

Um, he handled a firearm, and he's legally not supposed to. Seems pretty black and white. Just like convicted sexual predators aren't allowed to go hang out at Elementary schools. Or would you say.....All he did was drop in for a game of tether ball?

 

[308]

I thought the discussion was about a convicted car thief felon who stalks police and shoots firearms when it is illegal for him to do so?

But now we are talking about frivolity.

Perhaps this is why the shooter in TX was allowed to run amok...so as not to give the impression of unfairness to his sensibilities.

 

[etrain16]

Here are a few examples of felony crimes. You believe these folks should no longer have the right to self-protection?

1. You flush your sister's marijuana down the toilet.


View attachment 408801
You share a bathroom with your sister and you find her stash of illegal weed. You don't want her to get in trouble, so you flush it down the toilet. Little did you know, she was under a police investigation for possession of marijuana that began days earlier. Thus, you have just committed obstruction of justice: "A criminal offense that involves interference, through words or actions, with the proper operations of a court or officers of the court."


Real example: In 2007, a church in Greenwich, Conn. called and retained lawyer Philip Russell after they discovered child pornography on their musical director's computer. According to the Wall Street Journal report, "Russell told the musical director to retain counsel because possession of child pornography was a federal crime. The employee resigned. The church turned the laptop over to Russell, who destroyed it. No one told the feds." Russell was charged with obstruction of justice, a charge that can carry up to 20 years of prison time. However, the judge cited Russell's years of good service as reason to only give him six months of home confinement, a fine of $25,000 and community service.


2. You receive an odd package.


View attachment 408802
Let's say you own a small business which imports fish from another country and then distributes it to restaurants. One day, you're expecting your usual shipment and it arrives, but not in cardboard boxes the way it usually does. This time, it's in plastic. It turns out that the originating country bans the shipment of fish in plastic. You've just violated a foreign law, or the Lacey Act. Under this act, it is unlawful to "import, export, sell, acquire or purchase fish, wildlife or plants that are taken, possessed, transported or sold: 1) in violation of U.S. or Indian law, or 2) in interstate or foreign commerce involving any fish, wildlife or plants taken, possessed or sold in violation of State or foreign law."


Real example: Robert Blandford, Diane Huang, David McNab and Abner Schoenwetter — three American seafood dealers and one Honduran lobster-fleet owner — had no prior records. Yet they were given hard time in 2001 for "importing lobster tails that were the wrong size and that were packaged in clear plastic bags rather than in cardboard boxes." The three men were sentenced to eight years; Huang, the mother of two young children, was sentenced to two.


3. You take a fake sick day.


View attachment 408803
Your best friend calls you on a Tuesday night and says he won two tickets to see your favorite baseball team play on Wednesday. The seats are incredible and you know this opportunity won't come again any time soon, so you decide to call in sick to work on Wednesday morning. You figure that, after all, it's something everyone does every now and then. You did not know, however, that you have just committed a "scheme or artifice to defraud" the company to their "intangible right to your "honest services" — arguably a federal crime.


Real example: This statute was so vague that a few years ago, the Supreme Court ammended it to apply only to "bribes" or "kickbacks" that illegally influenced lawmakers. Regardless of Court's rewriting, Cato Institute policy analyst David Rittgers wrote that "little has changed" in how ambiguous the statute is. As Justice Scalia stated, it still criminalizes "a salaried employee's phoning in sick to go to a ball game."

4. You get lost in the woods.


View attachment 408804
You decide to take your motorbike for a ride in the woods, along the marked path where it's permitted. You didn't realize that a massive blizzard was coming and by the time there is a layer of snow covering the ground, you've lost track of the path. An officer finds you and charges you with having your motorbike in an area where it is not allowed, because you, unknowingly and without intent, have violated the Wilderness Act, which seeks to protect federally-designated areas of wilderness, partly by prohibiting motor vehicles.



Real example: In 1996 well-known automobile racer <broken link removed> was convicted of a federal crime and sentenced to six months in prison. Why? Because he got lost in a blizzard in Colorado for two days while snowmobiling, and was guilty of "unlawful operation of a snowmobile within a National Forest Wilderness Area."

5. You're a journalist with an anonymous source.


View attachment 408805
You're an eager young reporter who has been sent to Washington, D.C., to write an investigative piece pertaining to national security. A government employee who works in national security offers to give you inside information on the condition that he remains anonymous. You oblige and your editors publish the piece, unaware that you (arguably) violated provisions of the Espionage and Censorship Act. The act criminalizes the receiving and distribution of confidential national security information by private individuals under circumstances where the statute appears to cover only governmental officials. You've potentially just gone from a young, eager reporter to a convicted federal felon.


Real example: James Rosen is a news reporter for Fox. In 2009 he had several contacts with a State Department employee. The FBI, in order to obtain a search warrant to look at Rosen's phone records and email, claimed that Rosen had violated espionage laws. Judge Andrew Napolitano said, "This is the first time that the federal government has moved to this level of taking ordinary, reasonable, traditional, lawful reporter skills and claiming they constitute criminal behavior."


6. You email your family and friends to tell them not to use the services provided by your old company.


View attachment 408806
You used to work at a financial services company but you were unhappy at the job for a while and finally quit. While you were still employed there, though, you realized that the transactions were not completely secure. You had alerted your boss to the problem at the time, but he never followed up. After leaving the job, you email people to let them know that the company's system is not secure and a hacker could gain access to their financial information. Your intentions were pure, but a judge could argue that you violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse law, which outlaws anyone from sending information, with the intent to cause damage, to a protected computer. The law's definition of "damage" includes "impairment to integrity" of a system or data, a phrase vague enough to turn you from an innocent ex-employee to a convicted felon.


Real example: In 2000 Bret McDanel served 16 months in prison after he alerted customers of his old company, Tornado Development, about a software problem that was never fixed. He explained that the company's email system had a flaw that could allow an attacker to gain access to a user's email records. The prosecutors argued that McDanel had damaged Tornado's system. Wired called McDanel a "wrongly jailed security whistleblower."


7. You tell a park ranger that you cleaned up your picnic table.


View attachment 408807
You honestly did think that you cleaned up, completely unaware of the fact that your friend's plastic cup dropped on the ground. As you and your friends are leaving the park's picnic area, a park ranger asks if you've cleaned up after yourselves. You innocently answer, "Yes, sir." Unbelievably, it could be argued that you have just given false statements to a federal official, a federal felony. Any false statement made to a government official, even when it's in conversation and not under oath or in writing, can fall under a "false statement" charge.


Real example: In 2008 Emadeddin Z. Muntasser was sentenced in U.S. District Court to a year in prison for lying to an FBI agent when he denied traveling to Afghanistan years earlier. The transcript suggests that Muntasser was not purposefully trying to deceive interrogators, but rather had doubts about his original answer and felt he needed advice from legal counsel. The point here is that the wording of the very serious charge is open to interpretation at best.



Just some examples.... Of course, Adultery (cheating on your spouse) is a felony in many states as is oral sex....

So... If you ever got a BJ... You better turn in your guns as you are a felon who has just yet to get caught.

I don't have anything to say about this particular guy (in the first story) as I know nothing about him. But the idea that you can be barred your second amendment rights due to some non-violent crime (such as committing the heinous act of oral sex or cheating on your taxes or maybe talking your girlfriend's car after a fight and her calling it in as stolen) to me is unjust. If you have violent tendencies that's one thing, most felony charges are not for violent acts.

I know a guy first hand who lost his firearms rights due to tax evasion. To me that is a great example of why what we have today are privileges, not a right. It's not a right if it can be stripped away due to you failing to pay what the state says you owe for simply owning a chunk of dirt. Its just a privilege and the 2nd amendment is meaningless.

Unless he didn't know he was a convicted felon, and didn't know he was prohibited from using firearms, I don't see how these examples of unintended law breaking apply to this story.

Fact is, he did know he was a felon, who consciously chose to steal a car. He didn't accidentally or unintentionally steal a car. Which means, unless the law is changed, he should have stayed away from those guns. Like the law or not, it's still the law, until someone finds a way to get it changed.

 

[IronMonster]

Um, he handled a firearm, and he's legally not supposed to. Seems pretty black and white. Just like convicted sexual predators aren't allowed to go hang out at Elementary schools. Or would you say.....All he did was drop in for a game of tether ball?

Kind of like arresting someone for thinking about doing something wrong? Pre-crime?

Again you have to make the assumption that a gun itself is evil if you are going to make it illegal for someone to simply touch one.

 

[Goosebrown]

How very contrived.

Yes. A felony should bar you from gun ownership, use and possession.

That is the law and you can try and change it but I doubt you'll get far.

If you get your rights restored, I'm ok with that but betting that I am fine if you lose your gun rights and your voting rights for that matter.

Want rights? Don't commit crimes.

 

[Guymcdb]

Kind of like arresting someone for thinking about doing something wrong? Pre-crime?

Again you have to make the assumption that a gun itself is evil if you are going to make it illegal for someone to simply touch one.

It's only illegal to "simply touch it" if you are barred legally to do so because of previous convictions.

 

[IronMonster]

I have said at least twice I was not talking about this guy and that I have no comment on him. But this thread took a "screw him, he is a felon" turn and thus my comments.

The fact is what "felon" means when it comes to firearms rights is there is something written down somewhere that says you cant own a gun. A Judge can decide to reverse that in many cases. So the idea that its the person is evil and should have no rights to me does not hold water.

I was once a prohibited person, I lost my rights. For years I could not own a gun due to stupid behavior as a kid. The governor pardoned me, I now have a spotless record and own dozens of guns. What changed? A piece of paper with a fancy seal and some words. The day before I got my pardon and the day after I was the same person yet the day before I could have went to prison for getting my picture taken while holding my co-workers gun.

I value my rights, I fought very hard for years and spent tens of thousands of dollars to get them back. By any measure I am an upstanding member of my community. I am a business owner, Fireman and EMT and volunteer regularly with several community organizations.

The libertarian in me thinks that the states ability to label someone as good or bad is dangerous. The person might be good or bad, but giving the state the power to decry which is a scary thing.

And for a third time..... I don't know anything about this guy, and neither do you. You have one story which may or may not paint an accurate picture. And by this one story most of you seem pretty sure that he should spend time in prison for getting his picture taken with a gun knowing nothing else. I find that a bit draconian and scary. Again the gun is not evil, Holding one thus should not be a crime. I don't want to live in a place that the state can take away your freedom simply because someone comes up with a picture of you holding a "prohibited" item. Why is holding the thing a crime? because the state says so. There has been no crime other than disobeying the state. The state does not like you holding things so they put you in a cage. Pretty Orwellian in my opinion.

 

[No_Regerts]

So here is my issue with this. We are going to put a guy in prison for touching a gun. Not using a gun in a crime, not threatening someone with a gun. For the crime of popping off a few rounds of a co-workers gun at a social gathering. I think this falls into the narrative that guns, not people are evil. A gun is so dangerous that simply touching one is grounds to imprison someone who otherwise committed no crime.

I have no comment on the guy, he may be a great guy who made a stupid mistake or he could be a criminal dirtbag and I really don't care. I think it's a dangerous precedent and path to say "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.... Unless we say so and then we will put you in prison for holding one for a few minutes" I don't like it. It should not be a felony crime for someone to simply handle a firearm in my opinion. What have they done wrong? Nothing but touch the "evil" object.

I see what you're saying in principle. My issue as a gun enthusiast is this falls under "if we'd just enforce the laws we already have..."

What worries me is I doubt anyone there knew he was a felon. Who knows how savvy they are on gun laws. Is this innocent fun or is he grooming somone for a future purchase?

 

[11Charlie]

I have to agree that this guy is an idiot in every sense of the word. I see where Iron is coming from but in this instance if they can prove that the video was taken after his felony charges then he deserves what he gets.

 

[etrain16]

I have said at least twice I was not talking about this guy and that I have no comment on him. But this thread took a "screw him, he is a felon" turn and thus my comments.

The fact is what "felon" means when it comes to firearms rights is there is something written down somewhere that says you cant own a gun. A Judge can decide to reverse that in many cases. So the idea that its the person is evil and should have no rights to me does not hold water.

I was once a prohibited person, I lost my rights. For years I could not own a gun due to stupid behavior as a kid. The governor pardoned me, I now have a spotless record and own dozens of guns. What changed? A piece of paper with a fancy seal and some words. The day before I got my pardon and the day after I was the same person yet the day before I could have went to prison for getting my picture taken while holding my co-workers gun.

I value my rights, I fought very hard for years and spent tens of thousands of dollars to get them back. By any measure I am an upstanding member of my community. I am a business owner, Fireman and EMT and volunteer regularly with several community organizations.

The libertarian in me thinks that the states ability to label someone as good or bad is dangerous. The person might be good or bad, but giving the state the power to decry which is a scary thing.

And for a third time..... I don't know anything about this guy, and neither do you. You have one story which may or may not paint an accurate picture. And by this one story most of you seem pretty sure that he should spend time in prison for getting his picture taken with a gun knowing nothing else. I find that a bit draconian and scary. Again the gun is not evil, Holding one thus should not be a crime. I don't want to live in a place that the state can take away your freedom simply because someone comes up with a picture of you holding a "prohibited" item. Why is holding the thing a crime? because the state says so. There has been no crime other than disobeying the state. The state does not like you holding things so they put you in a cage. Pretty Orwellian in my opinion.

I think part of the reason the thread went as it did is because your OP links the story but gives no other info. I thought it was there to comment on his particular case, not whether or not felons should be allowed to have their gun rights restored. Perhaps add a comment about that to your OP to clarify your intent on posting the article?

As for the restoration of rights to felons, I'm for it, under certain circumstances. For example, I look at violent vs non-violent felons differently. Violent felons probably shouldn't have their gun rights restored, especially if they are repeat offenders.

But let's say it's a non-violent felony. For example, some years ago, a good friend of mine got in a bad place a stole some money from his employer. Due to the amount, it was a felony. The guy was honestly one of the kindest, funniest and non-violent people you could ever meet. But he lost his gun rights over $1,500. Do I think that's fair? Not really. And he should have been given the chance to have those rights restored, which he never did.

I'm a believer in second chances, but also in following the law. If you want your rights restored, there should be a reasonable path to do so under the law, again, for non-violent felons.

 

[Goosebrown]

If we want to go with "enforce the laws we already have" this is what it looks like.

All felons should be barred from gun possession as long as that is the law.

IN EVERY CASE

 

[Mikej]

So here is my issue with this. We are going to put a guy in prison for touching a gun. Not using a gun in a crime, not threatening someone with a gun. For the crime of popping off a few rounds of a co-workers gun at a social gathering. I think this falls into the narrative that guns, not people are evil. A gun is so dangerous that simply touching one is grounds to imprison someone who otherwise committed no crime.

I have no comment on the guy, he may be a great guy who made a stupid mistake or he could be a criminal dirtbag and I really don't care. I think it's a dangerous precedent and path to say "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.... Unless we say so and then we will put you in prison for holding one for a few minutes" I don't like it. It should not be a felony crime for someone to simply handle a firearm in my opinion. What have they done wrong? Nothing but touch the "evil" object.

I understand and agree with a felon not being allowed to own or use a fire arm. But the above quote also makes me ask "what's next?" Seems they have an awful lot of laws that bring felonies for relatively minor and victimless crimes?

Fact is, he did know he was a felon, who consciously chose to steal a car.

That may very well be true, OR, the article stated that he was busted for "Possession of a stolen vehicle". Maybe he was unaware the that the car he was driving was stolen?

 

[billdeserthills]

If and only if your rights are specifically restored which by federal law is allowed but is rare. There are certainly times when that is appropriate. In general though once a felon always a prohibited person.

Sorry but if what you say is true it is only because too many felons believe it. In my state as long as I don't kill anyone I will be able to have my rights restored 5 years after I complete my sentence. I have met meth makers who have had their rights restored--
Just don't think you can reverse domestic violence charges cause smacking a b1tch is
quite serious nowadays

 

[billdeserthills]

If we want to go with "enforce the laws we already have" this is what it looks like.

All felons should be barred from gun possession as long as that is the law.

IN EVERY CASE

Well that isn't the law, perhaps you should take your dark agenda to congress, since making up BS all by yourself isn't changing the way things work