Gun Control Compromise

[boogerhook]

How about enforcing the disarmament of criminals? Statistics have it that a large number of shootings are committed by career criminals with prior records and who are banned from possessing guns. Inner city police know their usual suspects, but are barred from frisking them due to the 4th Amendment. If we could pass legislation that removes felons' rights to such privacy, we could collect a lot of illegally owned guns and potentially change the statistics in our favor. It's not an absurd idea as felons already lost their 2A rights, and this would only serve to enforce it. The warrant-less searches could waive the plain view doctrine, in that any other finds, such as drugs or other contraband could not be used as evidence or probable cause for other charges. What do you think?

Read More

 

[Goosebrown]

It would effect mostly blacks so it would be dead on arrival.

 

[slimmer13]

How about keeping dangerous people locked up instead of further encroaching on the rights of people who have worked within the system.

If they can not be trusted with a gun (or a car or gasoline), they shouldn't walk free. If you paid your debt to society, you should be all square and have a clean slate.

Frankly crap like this is the reason we have career criminals. It creates a second class and stigma that keeps them from ever getting decent employment etc.

Work on changing the system.

 

[drs]

The system works just like it is supposed to. Strife = control = $$$

 

[Stomper]

How about enforcing the disarmament of criminals? Statistics have it that a large number of shootings are committed by career criminals with prior records and who are banned from possessing guns. Inner city police know their usual suspects, but are barred from frisking them due to the 4th Amendment. If we could pass legislation that removes felons' rights to such privacy, we could collect a lot of illegally owned guns and potentially change the statistics in our favor. It's not an absurd idea as felons already lost their 2A rights, and this would only serve to enforce it. The warrant-less searches could waive the plain view doctrine, in that any other finds, such as drugs or other contraband could not be used as evidence or probable cause for other charges. What do you think?

While I share your frustration, keep in mind that there are so MANY absurdly obscure laws on the books that it's been surmised that EVERY citizen commits an average of three felonies PER DAY.

Anyone at anytime can be made into a felon if TPTB turn their full ire upon an individual. We're all individuals, and the DOJ has tens of thousands of lawyers chewing away in the name of "justice".



One should consider THAT while contemplating eschewing Liberty for "safety".

 

[Nocaster]

How about enforcing the disarmament of criminals? Statistics have it that a large number of shootings are committed by career criminals with prior records and who are banned from possessing guns. Inner city police know their usual suspects, but are barred from frisking them due to the 4th Amendment. If we could pass legislation that removes felons' rights to such privacy, we could collect a lot of illegally owned guns and potentially change the statistics in our favor. It's not an absurd idea as felons already lost their 2A rights, and this would only serve to enforce it. The warrant-less searches could waive the plain view doctrine, in that any other finds, such as drugs or other contraband could not be used as evidence or probable cause for other charges. What do you think?

I am of the opinion that if you are are free to walk around the streets, you should enjoy all of your rights protected by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. With your proposal, I don't see a way of ensuring non-felons rights to be free from unreasonable search are protected. Don't mean to attack you, just stating my opinion.

 

[boogerhook]

I am of the opinion that if you are are free to walk around the streets, you should enjoy all of your rights protected by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. With your proposal, I don't see a way of ensuring non-felons rights to be free from unreasonable search are protected. Don't mean to attack you, just stating my opinion.

I have held the same opinion, so I fully understand. But somehow we are at capacity with our jails/prisons, so we let them out early... and they repeat. I would still prefer partial disarmament (felons only) over full disarmament.

 

[CamoDeafie]

How much of the prison "overpopulation" is from mandatory sentencing of nonviolent crimes? Also, how much of the Prison system is privately owned nowadays ?

I am a believer that a man does his time, he goes back into society, full rights restored...on the other hand...releasing violent criminals early, or not going ahead and putting them to hard labor (chain gangs)... or sending them to a new penal colony somewhere (I have a recommendation for that...... California? )
well its easy to see why early release is not going well...but the powers that be, do not care one bit of career criminals and some such, they only care about controlling a population of law abiding citizens.

Bear in mind that many of our founding fathers would be considered felons and criminals by the Crown.... and just because its a long standing government does not mean it is okay to blindly follow the government rules.... I daresay that the time for another revolution, another reset, or another uprising is coming very soon, regardless of who heads up the government.

Best way in my opinion to control the "black market" is to free up the white market of legal firearms, and do away with the ATF and the entirety of gun control laws.... See where that goes. This also go as far as allowing citizens and corporations to acquire the same level of weaponry afforded to the Military proper, and possibly would mean a better method of developing new things....

a parallel here; if the Pentagon/government had strict control of cell phone designs and usage, and restricted cellular networks only to the Military, we would not have all the apps, all the cool stuff, all this rapid improvement of phones..... likewise, if the Pentagon exercised a strict control on computers and such, we also would not have had computers far more advanced than what sent people to the Moon....

I daresay making it possible for corporations and citizens to acquire the same level of stuff, would mean a much streamlined process of developing advanced technology and probably better products for the Professional Military.... and we citizens would also be a force to reckon with for any Cartel or gang or foreign invaders to deal with...

 

[boogerhook]

the "reset" part could certainly come in political form

 

[Stomper]

Politics is just another form of (barely veiled) aggression, and violence.

 

[Hawaiian]

If our prisons were not ghetto style country clubs for the gang bangers, they might not want to go back. Send them to a prison in China or North Korea and see how they like it. Oh, excuse me for not being politically correct.

 

[Diamondback]

The French used to have a nice little tropical island resort for the truly incorrigible that we should take a look at the concept of...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil's_Island

 

[Nocaster]

Most felonies are non violent crimes, meaning no violence or threat of violence was involved. What does disarming a non violent criminal accomplish? It probably accomplishes some well intentioned goals, but I don't think the end justifies the means. Let's say Joe Felon embezzled $40,000.00 from his employer and served some time as a result. After he has completed his sentence, why should he not have the right to defend himself and his family from violent attack? How about if his driving license was suspended (non DUI) and he got caught driving a whole bunch of times until it became a felony? Prostitution? Mail fraud? The list is endless. All of these should be illegal, but lifelong disarmament? I dont think so.

I do agree that the criminal justice system is broken, but I don't think the answer is to give government more power to be intrusive.

 

[Nocaster]

I have held the same opinion, so I fully understand. But somehow we are at capacity with our jails/prisons

War on drugs

 

[boogerhook]

Ok, let's try this:
Option 1 - we keep bad guys locked up. Felons who did their time get all their constitutional rights back. (that's my preference)
Option 2 - bad guys get released and continue being a threat (that's what we have). They do not get their full rights back and we disarm them as we can. This will protect us from being disarmed altogether.

 

[2A2Dend]

A song played too many times.
Fallacy
The system is corrupt.
Monetary gain trumps everything sensible

 

[PaulB47]

How about enforcing the disarmament of criminals?

Are you sure you want to advocate for gun control? Because that is what you are doing.

Keep in mind the vast number of people who are "felons" due to violation of BS "mala prohibita" laws. Wasn't that long ago that running moonshine was a felony.

If a felon has a right to life, he has a right to defend that life. It's that simple. Besides, possession is a "crime" that harms no one. People should be prosecuted for intentionally harming others, not because they own something. Not the least because of the potential for police corruption (planting drugs, or guns, or whatever else is prohibited).

As to overcrowded jails, the remedy for that is getting rid of BS laws, not thinking of ways to throw more innocent people in prison.

How about enforcing the disarmament of people who advocate disarming others?

 

[boogerhook]

I am advocating getting our murder rate down, in addition to the obvious benefit, in part also so that antis loose some "wind in their sails". I admit, not everyone in prison, belongs in prison. I also stated earlier that I'd prefer restoration of all rights after one has paid their debt to society, however that's not how it is right now. My concern are violent offenders that get out of prison too early and then re-offend, as in "recidivism".

 

[Boboclown]

My concern are violent offenders that get out of prison too early and then re-offend, as in "recidivism".

Not being PC or anything, but how difficult is it for someone who got out of prison to get a job vs. how easy is it for them to just commit another crime to get a roof over their head? Not always the case, but its something to consider.

There are also felonies that shouldn't keep you from owning a gun to begin with. But that's up to personal opinion I suppose.

 

[OutlawHoss]

In my view, as long as those in power who define 'criminal', 'felon,' even 'violence,' and are the people who wielded the very same modalities to attain their power, they have no right to deny any freedom from anyone: freedom defined is freedom denied.

"There is a fact, and it is that tyranny is an evil
more violent than all the evils which could result
from our independence. That is why each of us should
seek to belong to ourselves, in order that human
tribulations (if we must still have them) might not
be the result of a shameful mistake, and that the
vicious should always be disgraceful in our eyes,
for [authority, in its glorified memes] is an imaginary torch, so fatal to humanity that he guides it in paths contrary to its happiness and renders society guilty before the criminal that it punishes!" -Felix P . . . The Philosophy of Defiance 1854
​

And so, in response to the original question: No. No more compromise.