Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Felon with a firearm

Exactly...

I got into a heated argument about blind people not being able to have guns... or partially blind people... or people that wear glasses... or people that someday might need to wear glasses... or people with a hearing loss not having 100% full senses to know what is going on around them... or people with a sprained ankle not being sufficiently able to retreat from an attack...

Exactly where would most of you draw the line?

The hitch in that logic is that the “deemers” continually and consistently deem all kinds of worthless schittbirds to be safe enough to walk around with the rest of us, knowing it’s unlikely they’ll ever run into them themselves. It’s another symptom of the Them and Us philosophy.

Non-violent felons? No problem.

You've identified why this debate usually implodes so quickly. Most who would say "no" to your question would say "yes" (and make memes) if you asked it about bicep guy.

I somewhat agree with you. I have a friend that got tangled up with the IRS and foolishly took a plea deal. I don't believe he defrauded the government at all but he wanted out of the trouble. Now he is a federal felon and cannot possess a firearm. As to "safe enough to walk among us", there are way too many (Rosenbaum for instance) that are turned loose that will never be "safe enough".

You make a good point. I might have a bit hasty with my reply. It is not a black & white issue. When the government moves the lines as to what constitutes a felony, it blurs the line.

That’s an indictment of a judicial system.

It has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment.

It is a black and white issue.

And how long before this goverment declares people speaking up against it are commiting treason? ( Jan. 6th.)

I mostly disagree with your position on felons in possession. I think that felons who have been convicted of a definded range of violent crimes and are subsequently convicted of the possession of a firearm should face mandatory termination, full stop, no exceptions. Felons who have been convicted of a definded range of non-violent crimes and are subsequently convicted of possessing a firearm should face a mandatory sentence of 10 year in prison without any opportunity for parole. I believe that so called "Straw Buyers", people who knowingly purchase firearms legally, but acting as an agent for a prohibited person, should also face mandatory 10 year prison sentence if convicted.

Felons, by their very nature, are rule breakers, not typical law abiding citizens. I can't see how banning convicted felons from possesing firearms is a disadvantage to anyone but them. Maybe felons have paid their debt to society, but that doesn't mean that every law abiding citizen is required to embrace them and give them a clean slate, not everyone deserves a second, third, forth, fifth, sixth, etc. chance when their record reflects who and what they are.

The recidivism rate for violent felons who are terminated is 0, while the rate for those who are released into society is over 60% according to prisonlegalnews.org.

Rosenbaum being free has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment.

^^^failure to think^^^

I see what you did there

I AGREE > it should be a public hanging for all killers and rape cases , it helps teach the young and others too not break the law of the land. , felony needs to be redefined . also in some cases the judge should give the defendent 2 options =# 1 prison or # 2 Army or Marines

In several states, a PFA restraint is enough to deprive you of your 2A Rights.
My ex did it purely out of spite.
7mm

I am a firm believer in this concept.

Then men that penned the Constitution didn’t let kid fugkers into society either.

It’s pretty black and white.

any ''domestic violence'' bust and your guns are gone. a man argues with his wife and he grabs her by the arm, she files a complaint, you got a feminist DA, and his gun rights are gone for good. know who was 'co president'' when this law was passed. Hillary.

just part of the liberal gun grab.

According to FBI stats on solved homicides, most homicides are intra-racial, about 90% of black homicide victims are killed by other black folks and about 90% of white homicide victims are killed by other white folks. If "insert racial/ethnic group name" lives mattered, the greatest decrease in "insert racial/ethnic group name" homicides would be achieved if we/they would stop killing people in our own racial/ethnic group.

I’m pretty sure the Framers believed that schittbirds would be hanged or locked up long and hard. For now, the rights protected by the 2nd aren’t absolute, subject to reasonable restrictions. Forbidding violent schittbirds from having guns is reasonable; just ask someone who’s wife or child been raped and murdered by one. Obviously it often doesn’t stop them from being armed, but it does allow them to be put away for a time where they can only rape and murder other schittbirds.

Are you a Judge ? If not it would be a good line of work for you.