Poll: Felons and Firearms

[ghanderson10]

Maybe the better question would be this: What should be classified a felony?

The driving and catslaughter infractions should be either a. re-classed or given their own new type of criminal charge

 

[PhysicsGuy]

Maybe the better question would be this: What should be classified a felony?

The driving and catslaughter infractions should be either a. re-classed or given their own new type of criminal charge

I think pretty much all states have a alphabetical or numeric level of felony classification just like misdemeanors. So you could say something like people with A - C felonies should not have firearms period, just an example.

 

[Doc In UPlace]

Depends on what the Felony was for. Violent felons, no.


Maybe 10 years of good behavior in the real world, then a judicial review for other ones-

 

[tionico]

these last few responses are spot on the mark. Trouble is, too many policiticians who no longer (if they ever did) work in the real world, have taken to putting in legislation designed to put more people behind bars for longer...... on the premise that running a "numbers" game will impress their constituents and make them believe they are actually DOING something about violent crime. The even sadder reality is, though, that a few millions behind bars in the US oughtn't to be there.... and the violent crimes against persons rates continue to escalate. Oh, but the NUMBERS look so good, lookit how many we've put away........

 

[ghanderson10]

Let's all go the way of Texas and start executing those who deserve it again.

How 'bout no life in prison? If I'm bad enough to be put behind bars for the rest of my life, then it's probably not worth wasting taxpayer's money to keep me alive for the next twenty to forty years. Harsh truth, but exactly that.

IMHO, If you deserve life in prison, you deserve the death penalty.


If I rape and kill a girl, I'm not just some poor sap that made a wittle boo-boo and needs therapy...

 

[Sawdust]

IMHO, If you deserve life in prison, you deserve the death penalty.


If I rape and kill a girl, I'm not just some poor sap that made a wittle boo-boo and needs therapy...

I'll vote for that.

 

[Doc In UPlace]

The number of people who have been exonerated off of death row due to DNA testing which was not available when they were originally tried has made me rethink my former attitude about the death penalty.

How many actually innocent people is it OK to execute? We have seen that it's possible for innocent people to get convicted. And sentenced.

I don't have a problem with capital punishment, it's the problem that exists with convicting the right person with the certainty such a grave consequence should demand.

I've been both on juries and on the witness stand and some of the folks that get seated in juries is sometimes scary. They look like the bus station in Boise at 2am sometimes.

 

[BlvdKing]

I agree with a lot of others that it really depends on what th felony was for

 

[Zhivago]

I want to modify my vote:

Mandatory execution for violent felons and the rest can have guns after serving time and finishing parole, but they can only buy Glocks as punishment.

 

[Keane]

I want to modify my vote:

Mandatory execution for violent felons and the rest can have guns after serving time and finishing parole, but they can only buy Glocks as punishment.

Pretty sure thats a direct violation of the 8th amendment

 

[Zhivago]

Pretty sure thats a direct violation of the 8th amendment

Cruel and unusual is very subjective terminology.

 

[swoop]

The number of people who have been exonerated off of death row due to DNA testing which was not available when they were originally tried has made me rethink my former attitude about the death penalty.

How many actually innocent people is it OK to execute? We have seen that it's possible for innocent people to get convicted. And sentenced.

I don't have a problem with capital punishment, it's the problem that exists with convicting the right person with the certainty such a grave consequence should demand.

I've been both on juries and on the witness stand and some of the folks that get seated in juries is sometimes scary. They look like the bus station in Boise at 2am sometimes.

Hey, look at the jury on the first OJ. trial, couldn't have been to bright.

 

[SimonJester308]

I say NO NO and NO
I am sure that the deadly weapon crime rate is much higher amongst convicted felons than it is everyday people, and with all the anti gun bills, felons with guns would just add fuel to the fire.

Add fuel to what fire? The law in Oregon allows for the AUTOMATIC restoration of a convicted felons firearms rights after 15 years. A convicted felon could have them restored sooner if they were to petition the court. This so called fuel has been laying around for quite some time, why havent you heard about this? Ignorance of the law? Im not picking on you, Im just using your post as an example that we all need to be aware of firearms laws, even if we feel they would never apply to us, because in the blink of an eye you could become a felon, and not even mean it.

 

[needs2hunt]

so no guns for felons!!!

once an offender, always an offender... sorry its just the way i feel...

 

[Zhivago]

Add fuel to what fire? The law in Oregon allows for the AUTOMATIC restoration of a convicted felons firearms rights after 15 years. A convicted felon could have them restored sooner if they were to petition the court. This so called fuel has been laying around for quite some time, why havent you heard about this? Ignorance of the law? Im not picking on you, Im just using your post as an example that we all need to be aware of firearms laws, even if we feel they would never apply to us, because in the blink of an eye you could become a felon, and not even mean it.

The fact that you could unintentionally become a felon is, in SOME cases, a testament to how broken our legal system is, just like every other facet of the government. However, most people are making the distinction that VIOLENT felons should have no recourse to have their rights restored.

 

[ghanderson10]

Again, if I can sum up what I said in my last post, you might as well chop off their hands and feet while you're at it. Agreed, even if they've paid for their transgressions, a weapon in the hands of a (formerly) violent criminal would be scary, but if they still got bad bones in their body, they will find something with which to destroy, be it a baseball bat, a knife, or a stolen gun

 

[Rackir]

I think the laws should be changed. Note, not removed, just changed.

A basic maxim of our legal system is that people can reform. The notion of removing rights from individuals indefinitlly runs counter to that maxim. If we do not believe that people can reform, why ever let them out? If we do believe they can reform, then they should have the option to have full rights restored.

In addition to the ethical dichotmy in our current policy, is it's all too often felt unintentional side effects. Sure, the rule is in place to minimize the harm violent criminals can wreck upon a populace. However most felons are not violent criminals. Most are in place due to drug possesion and other assorted non-violent crimes. So what is the point in removing from these people the right to protect themselvs?

An example; I know a man who over 60 years ago was involved in a burglery. The extent of his involvement was that one of his buddies asked him to come pick him up one night. This man went and picked up his buddy (he had to sneak off base to do it), and on thier way back to base were arrested. His buddy it turns out had just broken into a market and absconded with some amount of cash. The man of this story was hit with an accesory charge. Now thanks to the patriot act, his military records have been unseald and he can no longer purchase a firearm.

The above story was related to me when my father informed me that I had to go buy the new trap gun he had been eyeballing.

Is the man in question a violent threat to society? Well, despite my bias on the subject, I'd have to say no, he probablly isnt. So is there any reason for him to not own a firearm?

Thats just one example, but I'm sure we can all see how easilly this can happen to anyone. A great many of us (maybe even most) have most liklly commited a felony at some point in the past, the only difference between us and those incarcerated for thier action is that we diddnt get caught. So if that applies to you, ask yourself, are you a threat to society?

I say attach an additional sentance to crimes, the length of the additional sentance can be determined through threat level and recidivisim rate. The additional sentance consists of suspension of rights, voting, purchasing firearms, etc. Upon completetion of that sentance with no firther infractions, and full rights are restored.

 

[SimonJester308]

so no guns for felons!!!

once an offender, always an offender... sorry its just the way i feel...

And Im sorry washington state law disagrees with you, but its nice to see someone here take sides with Sarah Brady

 

[chainsaw]

I have a buddy that got a duii when he was driving while suspended,that apparentely is a felony.What I don't understand is,he has his driver licence now but he still cannot own firearms.That kind of felony shouldn't be a felony at all.Has nothing to do with guns,drugs,etc.

 

[SimonJester308]

Its easy for politicians to give lip service to getting tough on crime, but there is no money to be made in solutions. Having a way for offenders become 100% citizens again is a solution. Most people who have posted an opinion dont even know the law. Of course violent, and repeat offenders dont qualify for firearms restoration, but that doesnt prevent people from having an uninformed opinion, I too have been guilty of that, comes with membership in the human race. But I sure would like for people to actually read the laws before sounding off about it, and posting a poll about something that already exists.