Should a convicted felon ever get their gun rights back?

[Ted]

Thanks for link, Ted. Somehow, I missed that thread when it was originally posted. Some interesting discussion in it as well.



So, am I to conclude that since we (meaning you and I as I cannot include others without their specific aqquiesence) believe NFA '34 and GCA '68 to be without Constitutional Authority, that Felons who have served the sentences handed down and have been released without restriction regain their 2nd Amendment protections under said Constitution?

(Note: this has been my position from the onset of this discussion)

Unfortunately, no.

As states are sovereign and such matters fall within their jurisprudence, said respective states should be the final determiner when matters of criminal sentencing is concerned....provided it passes muster of 8A.

 

[Stschil]

Unfortunately, no.

As states are sovereign and such matters fall within their jurisprudence, said respective states should be the final determiner when matters of criminal sentencing is concerned....provided it passes muster of 8A.

Ah, but under 14A, States lost their soverienty with regard to National Law.
I do understand that no SCOTUS opinion has yet to encompass 2A with respect to the 14th, but it has been flirted with in several occasions. Following that line of thought, the Supremacy Clause has been used to place Federal over State Law on numerous occasions, the minority being acts that affect RTKBA.
In addition, only one or two States (Hawaii being the only one I know of for sure) failed to mirror RTKBA in their individual Constitutions.

Prior to 1968, very few States had legal prohibitions with regard to Felons and firearms and those that did exist included avenues of repatriation for those that had completed their sentences.

 

[Ted]

Ah, but under 14A, States lost their soverienty with regard to National Law.
I do understand that no SCOTUS opinion has yet to encompass 2A with respect to the 14th, but it has been flirted with in several occasions. Following that line of thought, the Supremacy Clause has been used to place Federal over State Law on numerous occasions, the minority being acts that affect RTKBA.
In addition, only one or two States (Hawaii being the only one I know of for sure) failed to mirror RTKBA in their individual Constitutions.

Prior to 1968, very few States had legal prohibitions with regard to Felons and firearms and those that did exist included avenues of repatriation for those that had completed their sentences.

I don't believe that 14A legitimately replaced 10A, and that the supremacy clause can and should only be applied as strict construction as originally intended, as opposed to the elasticity advocated under the Necessary and Proper Clause. Twisting the application of the original intent may be legal, but it is unlawful.....Thanks to Roscoe Pound and the Progressive movement for this little tidbit of our legal heritage.

There are actually more than a couple of states without constitutional language for RKBA, but Hawaii isn't one of them. IIRC, Iowa; California; NJ; NY; Minnesota; and Maryland are the only states without provision. Notice that Iowa and Minnesota have much more liberal (if you'll excuse the descriptor) gun laws, than Illinois and Massachusetts who do have such state constitutional provisions.

I find it heartwarming that many states had few prohibitions with regard to felons and firearms prior to 1968, though it doesn't exclude the states under the letter of the law.

 

[richardraw316]

Yep. Here it is: https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...reign_citizens_continue_12_year_standoff.html

I understand that the English colonists residing in America were considered criminal. Though then again, the English definition of criminal was rather loose.....much like being labeled a terrorist if one has a week's quantity of food in one's home, or a firearm, and more than a box of ammunition.....etc.

I too believe both the NFA and GCA to be unconstitutional, under 10A and 14A.

Furthermore, the 1968 GCA is a near mirror reflection of the the 1938 German (Nazi) Weapons Act. Given the atrocities that the German law was used to propagate, it sickens me that the 1968 law was even considered to become law.

so is the definition of a felon.
Let me take off my tin foil hat for a moment, is there a chance that state and government lower the standard for what is a felony, less and less people can get a handgun.
to me it sounds like government taking power from the people. of course this is nothing new. i just find it kind of funny, we are all here on this forum to defend in a manner the rights of americans, but some have no problem with right being taken from others, as long as it not theirs.
i am not talking about violent crimes that hurt others. when you intentionally cause physical harm to someone, maybe your punishment should include never carrying a handgun again, but still may keep say a long gun in your home. as long as it stays there.
non violent felons should get there rights back after their punishment concludes. and all of us should be fighting for that.

 

[7.62]

Depends on if I had to live and work near them.

 

[Ted]

so is the definition of a felon.
Let me take off my tin foil hat for a moment, is there a chance that state and government lower the standard for what is a felony, less and less people can get a handgun.
to me it sounds like government taking power from the people. of course this is nothing new. i just find it kind of funny, we are all here on this forum to defend in a manner the rights of americans, but some have no problem with right being taken from others, as long as it not theirs.
i am not talking about violent crimes that hurt others. when you intentionally cause physical harm to someone, maybe your punishment should include never carrying a handgun again, but still may keep say a long gun in your home. as long as it stays there.
non violent felons should get there rights back after their punishment concludes. and all of us should be fighting for that.

I'll be the first to admit that the legislative process in the 50 respective bodies for determination of a felony, to be rather arbitrary in more than a few instances. Though one has to remember that each state is indeed sovereign, and as such, has different values of the seriousness of each defined crime. What applies in Alaska, isn't so much here in Indiana.

Indiana has put in place a method to removing firearms disabilities, just as many other states have done with society's serious crimes. Of course if it would make you feel better, a felon could just be tacked with another 5 years imprisonment, than having to wait those 5 years.

I'm also not necessarily buying into just any felon with a history of a violent crime, can be trusted to keep their firearm at home. Considering the demonstration of a basic respect for others, or that of the law, it would be unwise to believe that some silly law would necessarily deter them from taking their long arm to the 7-11 cashier for a cash withdrawal....or use it upon their neighbor.......or their own family.

 

[Stschil]

I'll be the first to admit that the legislative process in the 50 respective bodies for determination of a felony, to be rather arbitrary in more than a few instances. Though one has to remember that each state is indeed sovereign, and as such, has different values of the seriousness of each defined crime. What applies in Alaska, isn't so much here in Indiana.

Indiana has put in place a method to removing firearms disabilities, just as many other states have done with society's serious crimes. Of course if it would make you feel better, a felon could just be tacked with another 5 years imprisonment, than having to wait those 5 years.

I'm also not necessarily buying into just any felon with a history of a violent crime, can be trusted to keep their firearm at home. Considering the demonstration of a basic respect for others, or that of the law, it would be unwise to believe that some silly law would necessarily deter them from taking their long arm to the 7-11 cashier for a cash withdrawal....or use it upon their neighbor.......or their own family.

Which brings us back around to what I and others have said all along, if they cannot be trusted by society with a firearm, they shouldn't be trusted IN society. The ambiguous nature of our so called justice system doesn't solve crime, in fact, it nothing can. It will always exist. But, if punishments were actually commensurate to the crime, ie: Kill someone=Death to the killer, people who have half a brain will start to think through their actions before they undertake them.

 

[thumperdogg]

Which brings us back around to what I and others have said all along, if they cannot be trusted by society with a firearm, they shouldn't be trusted IN society. The ambiguous nature of our so called justice system doesn't solve crime, in fact, it nothing can. It will always exist. But, if punishments were actually commensurate to the crime, ie: Kill someone=Death to the killer, people who have half a brain will start to think through their actions before they undertake them.

Well said!!!

 

[sepe]

A person that cannot be trusted on the street with a gun, should not be trusted on the street.

There are a lot of people that I don't trust to own guns that have never convicted of any crimes. I won't try to get their rights stripped because I don't trust them. I just don't want to be around them.

 

[Ted]

Which brings us back around to what I and others have said all along, if they cannot be trusted by society with a firearm, they shouldn't be trusted IN society. The ambiguous nature of our so called justice system doesn't solve crime, in fact, it nothing can. It will always exist. But, if punishments were actually commensurate to the crime, ie: Kill someone=Death to the killer, people who have half a brain will start to think through their actions before they undertake them.

Well said!!!

How would one be incarcerated after completion of sentence....provided the sentence wasn't death?

 

[thumperdogg]

How would one be incarcerated after completion of sentence....provided the sentence wasn't death?

Sounds like a riddle...

 

[Ted]

Sounds like a riddle...

Or the Military Commission Act.

Though that was struck down by SCOTUS.

 

[Stschil]

How would one be incarcerated after completion of sentence....provided the sentence wasn't death?

Im not saying that. Im saying Fix the system. It's obvious that the social experiment hasn't worked. Prison should be prison, a place where no one wants to be. Sift through all the BS laws and sentancing guidelines and make some sense of them. Make punishment pay society back instead of drain it. I'm a big believer in hard labor and work camps. Prisons should sustain themselves as much as possible. No more cable TV, no more creature comforts, etc.

Make a 25 year sentance be 25 years, make Life equal Life. Make every violent crime 30 to life and make it difficult for the prisoner earn the chance to reenter society. Requirements such as HS diplomas, competency in a trade, etc. Then actually prepare them for re-entry.

Just some of my ramblngs...

 

[remauto1187]

Looks like I AM THIS TOPIC...so i get to chime in.

1990--I was just about to turn 19 and i was with another kid that decided it would be a good idea to steal from a Dept. Store. I knew what he was up to but DID NOT stop him nor did i steal anything. But i was dumb enough to have some of the stolen items in my bedroom. In Illinois anything over $150 is retail theft Class 3 felony. The total of merchandise that he stole was $186. Long story short...Had a public defender that was a complete moron and a states' attorney that was trying to make a name for himself and was insisting that i was a hardened criminal and was asking for 3 years in prison even though i had zero priors! Judge wasnt buying it so i ended up with 1yr probation and he said if he saw me in there again i was going to prison. I believed every word he said that day...and i kept my butt out of trouble. Served no jail time, completed my probation in 1991 and enlisted in the US NAVY in 10/94 and completed honorably a4yr active duty enlistment in 10/98. In 1995 i went through the Illinois State Police appeals process to get my FOID card and was successful. Had a C&R FFL twice. (all this was with a felony on my record). In 2006 I filled out paperwork for a Illinois Governors' pardon and expungement order and received an answer 12/11. It was granted and just received the last of the paperwork a couple weeks ago confirming that the Illinois State Police did their part of removing me from their system and the FBI's as well.
So i am living proof that not every "FELON" is dangerous or doesnt deserve another chance. Sure a murderer (Illegally) or rapist deserves to rot in prison....but not every "Felon" is a hardened criminal that will "just do it again".
I've been working for a Federal Agency since 2006 so...i guess that old wives tale that you will never get a decent job with a felony isnt so true afterall. I have a security clearance.

 

[NYFelon]

I was going to make a separate thread, but I quite honestly didn't know where to put it. So I'll just stick it here, as it seems just as practical a place. The wife and I were having a discussion spurred on by a NY Times article a friend of ours linked to on FB. So, for pure poop and laughter I decided to do a little research and use my stunningly honed ability to count.

Get a load of this. There are a grand total of 638 criminal offenses on the books in The People's Democratic Republic of New York. Of these:

446 are Felonies
147 are Class A Misdemeanors
45 are Class B Misdemeanors

This makes for 254 more Felonies than Misdemeanors on the books in this state.

Does this sound appropriate to anyone at all? Especially considering that several of the laws share the exact same language. What's that saying about no way to rule just men?

Have a look for yourself if you'd like.

New York Crimes by Offense Level - New York Penal Law

Of course There are your inherent felonies, or Malum in se laws, but so many of these laws don't transgress the rights of any individual at all. They violate only some arbitrary boundary set by the state.

 

[Ted]

I was going to make a separate thread, but I quite honestly didn't know where to put it. So I'll just stick it here, as it seems just as practical a place. The wife and I were having a discussion spurred on by a NY Times article a friend of ours linked to on FB. So, for pure poop and laughter I decided to do a little research and use my stunningly honed ability to count.

Get a load of this. There are a grand total of 638 criminal offenses on the books in The People's Democratic Republic of New York. Of these:

446 are Felonies
147 are Class A Misdemeanors
45 are Class B Misdemeanors

This makes for 254 more Felonies than Misdemeanors on the books in this state.

Does this sound appropriate to anyone at all? Especially considering that several of the laws share the exact same language. What's that saying about no way to rule just men?

Have a look for yourself if you'd like.

New York Crimes by Offense Level - New York Penal Law

Of course There are your inherent felonies, or Malum in se laws, but so many of these laws don't transgress the rights of any individual at all. They violate only some arbitrary boundary set by the state.

So whats keeping you there?

 

[NYFelon]

Personal matters at the moment.

 

[Ted]

Personal matters at the moment.

Wrap them up and move out of that rotting cesspool.

 

[NYFelon]

Wrap them up and move out of that rotting cesspool.

That sir, is the plan. It is in place, and in action. It's not so easy as just throwing some socks in a bandana, tying it to a stick, tossing a loaf of bread in my pocket and walking away. Would that it were.

 

[Woodrow]

Criminal and clergy stood shoulder to shoulder and put powder to ball to create this nation. The 2nd says nothing about felons. In fact, I think it says something to the contrary...something about rights not being infringed, and limiting the government's ability to do so...

I don't really remember though, it has all gotten a little fuzzy in the last few years...