National Federal Judge Rules Felons Aren’t Protected by Second Amendment

[ma96782]

Don't be so quick as to give the non-violent FELON a break. Some people just needs to spend their time inside.

BUT.....to tell you the truth.......I'm sometimes conflicted about gun ownership for the non-violent. Perhaps, making a ONE SIZE FITS ALL RULE.....isn't going to work.

BTW.....remind me again, "Why do Judges get paid so much?"

Aloha, Mark

 

[DunRanull]

I do not see where in the 2A does it say "the right of the People except felons/criminals to keep and bear arms"

Put in historical perspective. If the Colonies had lost the war against the Crown, the leaders of the Rebellion would have been tried and found guilty and sentenced to death by hanging for treason and high crimes. In accordance with the British Common Law, they were already "criminals, felons, traitors" and so the founders/Framers of the Bill of Rights clearly fully intended that the 2A is for all citizens of the US.. there have been a few cases where Judges found that non-citizens have the right to self defense, including 2A protections.. and in fact, it was generally accepted that once free, the convict gets full rights up until 1968.

The sentences meted out for treason back then in Britain were more along the lines of "Hung, Drawn, and Quartered"- see the Robert Emmett case as an example. Simple hanging would have been merciful and out of line with the courts of George 3rd...

 

[DunRanull]

Yes, welcome to Portland. It used to be a nice city, now it's gone to bubblegum due to all everything you've listed.

"Drugs" are a symptom of the total problem... in the name of freedom we've let our standards drop, as a society over-all. From ignoring a major politician's PLAGERISM and intellectual property theft and rewarding him with the presidency to slack enforcement of shoplifting and rioting laws... we've elected politicians who go easy on criminals and allow their own kin to take bribes and commit other crimes that would land the rest of us in jail for years... "One law for thee and another for me" has become the law of the land. There is no fear of God nor man among them, as they used to say...

 

[Yarome]

Don't be so quick as to give the non-violent FELON a break. Some people just needs to spend their time inside.

BUT.....to tell you the truth.......I'm sometimes conflicted about gun ownership for the non-violent. Perhaps, making a ONE SIZE FITS ALL RULE.....isn't going to work.

BTW.....remind me again, "Why do Judges get paid so much?"

That's one area under the 2A I think is more of the same "going light on crime" epidemic that is plaguing our society. Much like zero bail book and release policies. You do the crime, there are consequences. Not only to protect society, but also as a deterrent for those considering crime.

As it stands... every felon loses their 2A rights and there are simple processes in many states to not only have their firearm rights restored, but their actual felony expunged. (I don't believe every felon should have to live with that pox on their record for the rest of their lives over a momentary lax in judgement)

Rather than being a blanket "free reset" on their rights though, they should be required to take an active part to have their rights restored and judged on a case-by-case basis. That's part of "paying their debt to society". If their crime does not deserve the lifetime forfeiture of their 2A rights and being labelled a felon for all their days.... I think that's just great! Grant their petition and let them return to the ranks of full law abiding citizen... without stigmatism.

I understand the argument that it's denying an inalienable right, but I don't hear many people arguing about putting convicted criminals behind bars as a violation of their inalienable rights to freedom. Rights can be lost by an act of law, we know this, and it's necessary.

One thing I think is often ignored... they "chose" those consequences. They weren't randomly and unfairly thrust on them without cause. I think we also sometimes forget that many felons are convicted for much less than what they actually did... and that was only the time they actually got caught with enough evidence to convict. I believe that's why the case-by-case approach is also more desirable.

 

[RX-79G]

I understand the argument that it's denying an inalienable right, but I don't hear many people arguing about putting convicted criminals behind bars as a violation of their inalienable rights to freedom. Rights can be lost by an act of law, we know this, and it's necessary.

You are the last person to be judging how other people pursue the preservation of our 2A rights.


No shock.

 

[msgriff]

That's one area under the 2A I think is more of the same "going light on crime" epidemic that is plaguing our society. Much like zero bail book and release policies. You do the crime, there are consequences. Not only to protect society, but also as a deterrent for those considering crime.

...snip

During the 2020 leftist riots in Seattle, there were 2 murders involving the occupiers of the CHOP zone. One suspect was caught for one of the murders. He plead guilty and a couple days ago received a sweetheart deal of 14 years. If he doesn't commit any serious crimes while in prison, he will be eligible for parole in 7 years (or less). For murder. Not much of a deterrence, if you ask me.

 

[Yarome]

You are the last person to be judging how other people pursue the preservation of our 2A rights.


No shock.

I fully realize my pro 2A, tough on crime, pro freedom and anti regulation views butthurt your sensibilities....

No shock.

 

[Yarome]

During the 2020 leftist riots in Seattle, there were 2 murders involving the occupiers of the CHOP zone. One suspect was caught for one of the murders. He plead guilty and a couple days ago received a sweetheart deal of 14 years. If he doesn't commit any serious crimes while in prison, he will be eligible for parole in 7 years (or less). For murder. Not much of a deterrence, if you ask me.

I can't disagree. That's why I believe that going tougher on crime is preferable to taking the approach of.... "well, it doesn't seem to stop anyone anyway so we might as well just lighten/remove the penalties that already exist."

That example, I fully disagree with offering plea deals and sentences should be served in full. Time off for good behavior? Yes, but actively earned in terms of weeks or maybe months, with maximum time off earned limits. Not years and not "automatic" simply by not committing any additional crimes while incarcerated.

IE., Earned for exemplary efforts in work programs, academic performance while incarcerated, betterment program completions, etc.

 

[Yarome]

My perspectives might be a bit different though. Coming from a country that has incredibly low crime rates and largely attributable to actual fear of the legal system. Convictions are swift, extremely harsh, no "fu-fu" plea deals and cushy accommodations. Prison conditions are miserable, scary as all H.E. double hockey sticks and you will serve out your time.

Many call them human rights violations, but you can't deny.... the system works!!

 

[BAJ475]

...

Tall that to somebody who has a pistol brace or a 14" barrel with what they thought was a soldered/pinned flash hider that wasn't soldered or pinned, just thread locked. Or a person with a 20 round mag in OR or WA that the state says has no serial # and you don't have a receipt before Dec 8th 2022.

I think that you win that debate!

 

[BAJ475]

Nope. Wrong. Remains to be seen in court. The law states that the person in possession of the mag has to prove they possessed it before the cutoff date. Read the laws (both the initiative and 348).

But the prosecution has to prove each element of any offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Just shows how F up some states are.

 

[Member 84438]

The problem I see with a blanket ban of felons owning firearms is that not all felonies are crimes of violence. Historically speaking, old Common Law doctrine was that felonies were generally capital offenses (with some exceptions). Now-a-days it seems that everything is a felony. It seems we've strayed from the legal tradition that felonies were the most severe crimes. I'd rather the one-time felon convicted of check fraud own a gun than the person with anger issues who has a litany of misdemeanor convictions for assault and harassment.

 

[Yarome]

The problem I see with a blanket ban of felons owning firearms is that not all felonies are crimes of violence. Historically speaking, old Common Law doctrine was that felonies were generally capital offenses (with some exceptions). Now-a-days it seems that everything is a felony. It seems we've strayed from the legal tradition that felonies were the most severe crimes. I'd rather the one-time felon convicted of check fraud own a gun than the person with anger issues who has a litany of misdemeanor convictions for assault and harassment.

I agree with most of that, but am still against any blanket policies restoring 2A rights and believe they should only be restored on a case-by-case basis. There are many cases of clearly bad actors with extensive histories with LE... but... actually only received a conviction on a non violent offense. Or... pled down a more serious offense that might qualify them to have their 2A rights restored under a blanket policy, but clearly remain a high risk threat to society.

What I would like to see too is not just the restoration of 2A rights for those who deserve it, but also having their felony convictions downgraded from their records once their debt to society has been paid in full (including successful completion of parole and any court ordered restitution paid in full).

There are many that simply made a one time bad choice and shouldn't have to live out the remainder of their days with the stigmatism of a felony on their record... greatly inhibiting their ability to provide for themselves and their families.... among other things.

 

[BAJ475]

The problem I see with a blanket ban of felons owning firearms is that not all felonies are crimes of violence. Historically speaking, old Common Law doctrine was that felonies were generally capital offenses (with some exceptions). Now-a-days it seems that everything is a felony. It seems we've strayed from the legal tradition that felonies were the most severe crimes. I'd rather the one-time felon convicted of check fraud own a gun than the person with anger issues who has a litany of misdemeanor convictions for assault and harassment.

I agree, but you are trying to be logical and are missing the fact the the goal is to disarm us so that we can be enslaved. In other words, the libtrads are targeting what they believe are the easy targets first but there can be no doubt about their ultimate goal.

 

[BAJ475]

I agree with most of that, but am still against any blanket policies restoring 2A rights and believe they should only be restored on a case-by-case basis. There are many cases of clearly bad actors with extensive histories with LE... but... actually only received a conviction on a non violent offense. Or... pled down a more serious offense that might qualify them to have their 2A rights restored under a blanket policy, but clearly remain a high risk threat to society.

What I would like to see too is not just the restoration of 2A rights for those who deserve it, but also having their felony convictions downgraded from their records once their debt to society has been paid in full (including successful completion of parole and any court ordered restitution paid in full).

There are many that simply made a one time bad choice and shouldn't have to live out the remainder of their days with the stigmatism of a felony on their record... greatly inhibiting their ability to provide for themselves and their families.... among other things.

While I do not disagree with your views, do you have a practical solution that you would like to propose?

 

[Yarome]

While I do not disagree with your views, do you have a practical solution that you would like to propose?

Sure! Many states already have a legal process for those with a felony conviction to have it expunged... and subsequently... their 2A rights are restored. I think it's just a matter of expanding, standardizing and simplifying those processes in all states. There is nothing automatic about it though.

The ball is 100% in the individuals court to initiate and follow through with petitioning the court to review their case and grant an expungement. IMHO though, I believe that is as it should be. It's the individual that chose to mess up their own life and it should be the individuals responsibility to set themselves right within society.

If it's not important enough for them to go through the process then it shouldn't be on the legal system so simply grant them a "freebie". I have a family member that went through that years ago (OR). It was not particularly expensive, difficult, and never even had to appear in court... although it did take a few months for his petition to be reviewed and approved by a judge.... and it did take some time for the judges order to filter through all the various law enforcement agencies on up to the federal level.

He has passed BGC's and purchased many firearms over the years without a single hitch or even a delay for further review.

 

[ma96782]

RE : The Non Violent Felon

Aloha, Mark