should felons be able to purchase weapons??

[wetidlerjr]

If a felon is deemed fit to be released, then his/her rights should be restored...The fact that WAY, WAY too many scumbags get released from prison/jail when they should be spending the rest of their life behind bars is a different topic of discussion...

Fit as decided by law or in your opinion ?

 

[yotewacker]

No, they should not have a firearm,
My Opinion.

If you believe in god, Then you believe in Heaven and hell. If you believe in hell, then you believe in the devil. Thus if you read the bible, then you know that the devil was an angel in Heaven who could not see good. The devil saw evil and did wrongful things whenever he could. So God created hell and threw the devil into it for eternity. So even God knows an evil person cannot be rehabilitated. So this is why we have a place called hell.
So my question is?
Why does our government think that a slap on this wrist with a little jail time is going to cure an evil person when God tried with no success.
No life in prison. Anything over 5 years is automatic, you get done to you what you did to another. Thus and eye for an eye.

 

[kspa57]

Nope, if they want a weapon they'll find a way to get it, regardless of the laws in place. If a person desides to make a wrong desision they pay for it and no weapons is part of it. If they're life's are in danger then there is police, fbi, and other agencies to help them with that problem. I got my car stolen and when the police found it thre was a gun in the car, it wasn't mine either. Later on when they found the theif, they found out he had a criminal record(he cannot have a weapon). So if they want it they'll get it, other then that there is no need for them to have one. They give their right away when they commit the crime.

 

[christman]

FELON shouldn't own guns, vote, work for the government or state

Yet, you still expect them to pay taxes at their new jobs?

 

[christman]

Nope, If a person desides to make a wrong desision they pay for it and no weapons is part of it. If they're life's are in danger then there is police, fbi, and other agencies to help them with that problem.

Nice, not what people on here normally preach when talking about guns and needing the cops. I guess the "police are only minutes away" only applies to privileged citizens.

I agree with whomever said above that there are so many felonies now, there needs to be some reform as to who can and cannot legally own a gun after they serve their time.

 

[christman]

Nope, If a person desides to make a wrong desision they pay for it and no weapons is part of it. If they're life's are in danger then there is police, fbi, and other agencies to help them with that problem.

Nice, not what people on here normally preach when talking about guns and needing the cops.

Telling people who you voted for after an election is a class D felony. I wonder how many of us have done that.

 

[kevinj110]

It doesn't say anywhere in the 2nd that you can't have them if you are in jail either! Maybe we should let inmates have them for personal protection.

Wow this quote is really reminiscent of some of the anti gun crowd. I think the whole problem with your statement is when you are incarcerated your rights are suspended but once your debt has been paid they are returned and you are released.

 

[Benny]

Fit as decided by law or in your opinion ?

By law of course...The only problem is that a large percentage of them should never see the light of day again.

It's not like once they are out they can't illegally acquire one anyway.

 

[gunowner930]

No, they should not have a firearm,
My Opinion.

If you believe in god, Then you believe in Heaven and hell. If you believe in hell, then you believe in the devil. Thus if you read the bible, then you know that the devil was an angel in Heaven who could not see good. The devil saw evil and did wrongful things whenever he could. So God created hell and threw the devil into it for eternity. So even God knows an evil person cannot be rehabilitated. So this is why we have a place called hell.
So my question is?
Why does our government think that a slap on this wrist with a little jail time is going to cure an evil person when God tried with no success.
No life in prison. Anything over 5 years is automatic, you get done to you what you did to another. Thus and eye for an eye.

Not every felon is an evil person. There are many nonviolent crimes that are felonies. Even felons that do commit violent crimes change sometimes. A good friend of mine got in all sorts of trouble when he was 18. Prison changed his life. He's been clean for 7 years now. He has two jobs and is supporting a family, but no guns since he is a felon. I believe that once you've done your time, ALL rights should be restored.

 

[Regionnus Rattis]

If a felon has paid his/her debt to society (sometimes quite easily if a good defense attorney was there to plea bargain) and released, are they not a felon then?

Society/legislation would need to enact tough laws for different felonies that cannot be plea-bargained down. If a person was convicted of armed robbery, murder, assault, etc., they need to do some really "hard time" before they see the outside again, if ever. Given that, everyone should be able to carry without a license, in order to defend his/her life.

On the flip-side, there are those circumstances in which a person has wrongfully been convicted. It would still happen unfortunately.

 

[DeadeyeChrista'sdad]

My two cents. We classify way too many things as felonies. "Vote for me!! I'll REALLY get tough on crime!" Then senator Blowhard has an intern write some bill raising the standard sentence for smoking pot from 18 months to 5 or 10 years. "See! See what I've done to PROTECT you!?!" If I want any protection, it'll be from Senator Blowhard's HAND in my pocket.
I know you've all seen the history channel's thing on the first penitentiary, which was in Arizona. Back then you got 5 years for bank robbery. That was the longest sentence they gave. 5 years in a 4X8 cell with a bed, blanket and a bible. No TV, no "social hour" in the yard OR in the showers, no weight room or law library. A 4x8 room for 5 years. They had a 5% recidivism rate. Would YOU want to go back to a 4X8 room for 5 years?
As far as the protective order, the threshold of evidence is WAY too low. I know. Whilst seeking "help" (meaning free stuff) from the local "womens' organization", my soon to have been ex-wife was told that if she wouldn't at least say that she was "afraid of me" that they couldn't help her. She did, and the next thing I knew, I was served with a "protective order" which kicked me OUT of my own house, her name had NEVER been on it, disallowed me from coming within 100 yards of my OWN children, and FORCED me to divest myself of any and ALL firearms. I knew NOTHING of this protective order before it was served, and only managed to get her to drop it, (So I could take the youngest deer hunting that fall, we did well.) By threatening to put her on the stand at our next hearing and making a federal case out of it, so to speak. My rights simply went away. Land of the free my backside.

 

[42769vette]

No, they should not have a firearm,
My Opinion.

If you believe in god, Then you believe in Heaven and hell. If you believe in hell, then you believe in the devil. Thus if you read the bible, then you know that the devil was an angel in Heaven who could not see good. The devil saw evil and did wrongful things whenever he could. So God created hell and threw the devil into it for eternity. So even God knows an evil person cannot be rehabilitated. So this is why we have a place called hell.
So my question is?
Why does our government think that a slap on this wrist with a little jail time is going to cure an evil person when God tried with no success.
No life in prison. Anything over 5 years is automatic, you get done to you what you did to another. Thus and eye for an eye.

murder, rapist = evil

dui= mistake

 

[yotewacker]

murder, rapist = evil

dui= mistake

I was speaking of violent felony. such as third degree battery. Not the kid who bought cigarettes for a minor. Which is a felony.

Thanks for helping me correct my thoughts

 

[panderson]

I dont see a problem with giving a felon back his gun ownership rights. I do think there should be a waiting period though or that they have to register them. Maybe a 2-4 years wait so that they can prove they will continue to be an upstanding person from here on out. People who want guns are going to obtain them legally or not so better to obtain them from a gun shop owner vs. the streets.

 

[wetidlerjr]

By law of course...The only problem is that a large percentage of them should never see the light of day again.

It's not like once they are out they can't illegally acquire one anyway.

I thought that was what you meant. Thanks !

 

[rnmcguire]

I'm a little confused by the Felon law. Is it not possible for any convicted felon to own any kind of firearm? I was a recruiter and at certain times we could run waivers on people with felonies and allow them to join the Army. If they can carry a weapon in the military, how can they not own their own? This didn't apply to any Lautenburg convictions though(Domestic Battery). Lautenburg covictions will get you discharged and barred from entry as well. I don't feel that all Felons should be grouped together. There are plenty of crimes that are deemed felonies that aren't violent in nature.

 

[j706]

NO! Felons should not be able to own a firearm. If you don't like the penalty's don't do the crime.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Some of them should be allowed to own them LEGALLY.
The other ones who should not own them LEAGLLY will however own them ILLEGALLY.
Might as well restore some rights to those that have proven them self to society to be an upstanding person

 

[Bill of Rights]

The only way I would support giving felons their rights back is if all laws we have in place today restricting the law abiding are appealed. Do away with all LTCH/CWP have constitutional carry in all 50 states with no restrictions on where or who can carry. Until that happens felons will just have to wait, don't do the crime if ya can't do the time.

No that's part of the penalty of doing the crime

Maybe they should think about some liberties before they CHOOSE to do the crime!

No way, they should not have that right , they gave it up when they committed the crime.

I'm amazed here. So many of you feel that because some rectal-headgear called this or that act a "felony", the person who did whatever it is should lose some of his God-given rights for the rest of his life?! I know a gentleman who had his livestock get out of his property a few times. He always paid for any damage they did and repaired his fence, but they'd get out again. A neighbor decided to file some kind of charges (I heard the story third-hand, but I do know the gentleman involved... please forgive if the details are not exact.) The gentleman I know filed a guilty plea, only to have an old law dredged up and lo and behold, he found himself a convicted felon. After a long period of time, he finally managed to get his record cleared. Note that there was no violent action, no intent to do any harm to anyone, no damages left uncompensated... but according to some here, this man should be barred for life from being able to defend himself or his family or his livestock.

Yeah, that makes sense. Not good sense, but it makes sense.

I think that brings up a valid point - not all convicted felons are violent offenders.

Why should non-violent offenders be barred from owning firearms?

Bingo.

Felons are felons.

When you commit a felony, you give up your rights... permanently.

I really hope you're never accused and wrongly found guilty of any of the stupid things our society calls "felonies".

This very common argument is slippery. By that logic, we'd legalize a LOT of things. Cocaine? Sure, because the criminals will get it anyway. Heroin? Yep. Stealing cars? Sure, the criminals will do it anyway. Anyway... Now I realize that in some of my examples, the act in question is 'bad' and has a victim (like stealing cars) where in gun ownership the act in question (merely owning a gun) is not, but that's certainly not the case for all of them.

I guess if I could, I'd give gun ownership back to non-violent offenders who are COMPLETELY free and clear (free of parole/probation/etc, too). For violent offenders, sorry, I'm not there. The argument that they'll get them anyway doesn't hold water for me, and you could argue that it demonstrates the disregard for the law that got them into trouble in the first place.

What's wrong with decriminalizing substances? Those who use them would quickly find themselves removed from the gene pool and decrease the surplus population, or would learn moderation. Acts that involve harm to others, including loss of property (i.e. theft) would still be acts punishable by law. Clearly, obviously, assaults both sexual and otherwise would be included in this category. If you only harm yourself, why should the law be involved in punishing this act?

Blessings,
Bill

 

[rnmcguire]

So a guy that gets convicted of 2 DUI's within 5 years is a convicted Felon and therefore can never own a firearm? Sounds like BS to me. Just an excuse to infringe on the liberty's of US citizens. I'm not condoning drinking and driving but it has absolutely nothing to do with gun ownership.