Felonies, rights to vote, automatic weapons, patriot act and other issues

[ka50]

I just plain don't get it.

If you're convicted felon, you cannot own firearms, cannot vote and basically deemed as scum of society.

I don't think it's right. Felonies are created by the government. Felonies that cause direct harm to other people's lifes or property I agree with. But in some states, simple fact of having/posessing a firearm is a felony! There are some other stupid felonies (growing hemp for example)... I believe a convicted felon should still have rights to vote, and unless his crime was of violent or destructive nature, he should still be allowed to carry a firearm.

Felonies are laws, created by the government. If a person is charged and convicted with one, he still might disagree with the government's opinion in the first place, thus he should still have a right to vote!

Now, automatic weapons...
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
A militia in forms of citizens should be allowed to have the same personal means of capability as armed government personel. That doesn't mean we should start selling tanks to private citizens, but MEANS to disable tanks should be legal. It's a shaky issue due to recent terrorist threat, however by denying citizens their rights to bear personal offensive and defensive arms is basically moving one step to govermnet tyrany over it's own people... and next thing we know "we the people" loses all it's meaning as rights are being stripped away one by one...

Patriot act needs to be flushed down the toilet, as it's one of the most redicilous peaces of legislature designed to promote police state and expand government power and influence.

I think libertarian party should make itself more clear and invest more money into advertising. http://lp.org/

While I don't agree with every single policy, I do think libertarian is the way to go.

Thoughts?

 

[Double Naught Spy]

What is not to get? The law is already in place. If you choose to break laws that constitute a felony, then you get to suffer the appropriate punishment including the associated rammifications. Until folks like yourself work to change the laws such that non-violent felonies not constituting loss of other rights, then the laws stand.

So I understand where you don't think the law is right, but if folks are stupid enough to commit crimes that are felonies, then they are stupid enough to be convicted and suffer all the relevant punishments and rammifications.

Felonies are laws, created by the government. If a person is charged and convicted with one, he still might disagree with the government's opinion in the first place, thus he should still have a right to vote!

***? Just how many folks out there convicted of felonies would you think agree the crime they committed should consitute a felony? Of felons don't agree with the law - they are felons!

So, in what states are their laws that stipulate having/possessing any gun constitutes a felony?

Regardless of how you and most gun folks interpret the 2nd Amendment, that is not how the legal system has interpreted it.

So please explain to me that if the rights to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, then why shouldn't citizens be allowed to own things like tanks, artillery, rockets, etc?

 

[fjolnirsson]

So please explain to me that if the rights to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, then why shouldn't citizens be allowed to own things like tanks, artillery, rockets, etc?

Well, I can't think of any valid reasons why they shouldn't be allowed to do so....
I think would be great fun to have an artillery shoot once in a while.

 

[Devonai]

I see it as a distinction between mala prohibita and mala in se laws. The former are laws against crimes that are only crimes because lawmakers decide they are, i.e. jaywalking, anti-trust legislation, et cetera. The latter are laws against crimes that are always and universally wrong, such as murder, rape, robbery, larceny, arson, et cetera.

If you've served your time for a mala prohibita felony, your rights should be immediately and completely restored.

Mala in se felonies that involve violence against humans should void a person's rights indefinitely, requiring a specific petition by the felon to have those rights restored. A judge in the appropriate jurisdiction would make the call. Other felonies should require some time to pass before rights are fully restored to ensure that recidivism isn't a problem. Just because you stole a car when you were 18 shouldn't prevent you from owning firearms or voting for the rest of your life, for example.

 

[RavenVT100]

So I understand where you don't think the law is right, but if folks are stupid enough to commit crimes that are felonies, then they are stupid enough to be convicted and suffer all the relevant punishments and rammifications.

Sounds great in theory, but the reality is of course quite a bit more complicated than you make it out to be.

Many jurisdictions, New Jersey is a great example, have laws that are cleverly designed to ensnare people into committing crimes. Most of the people who have been prosecuted and jailed under New Jersey's "assault weapon" statutes, in cases where the "AW" violation was the sole charge, did not know that they were doing anything wrong. Before the statute was clarified by the AG because it was found to be unconstitutionally vague, the state was nailing people left and right because it interpreted a vaguely worded law in its own favor, to the people's detriment.

This kind of thing happens all the time, and not just with gun control legislation. I certainly hope that the same doesn't happen to you, since as you say, you aren't "too stupid" to follow the law. I am sure with confidence such as yours that you are well versed on every aspect of the law, and would never inadvertantly make a mistake that puts you out of compliance with it.

 

[NCP24]

Some laws are unjust, especially when they are designed to dissolve constitutional rights.

 

[Zundfolge]

I see it as a distinction between mala prohibita and mala in se laws...If you've served your time for a mala prohibita felony, your rights should be immediately and completely restored.

+1

but then you read the Rand quote in my sig and you see what's REALLY going on.

 

[tulsamal]

Yes, the problem seems to be that more and more activities are felonies. I agree that a violent felony is quite a bit different than one where you just "did something wrong."

I have a personal tie to this. My father worked for the Civil Service for 35 years. (DoD civilian) They gave him a big retirement party where the commanding general of WPAFB came and said how many wonderful things my Dad had done for our country. The man has never had any kind of legal problems beyond 3-4 speeding tickets. He left the civil service and started working basically on the same job as a contractor. He makes more money but the government actually saves money since he's not a permanent employee anymore. He does that for one month and then is suspended over questions of how he got the contract for the job. It turns out he helped his boss write the job description while he was still a federal employee. He should have been totally out of the loop.

Now my Dad will tell you that he screwed up. He will tell you that he wishes more than anything that he could go back in time and change that behavior. He lost his job. He had to pay the government BACK the money they paid him for the month that he DID work for them. He had to pay around $100,000 in legal fees. He isn't allowed to work for any government contract for two years. He's on probation for two years. But the BIG thing for him was that the single count he had to plead guilty to was a felony. So he had to sell me all his guns for $1 and bring them all down to put in my safes. He can't vote or any of that stuff anymore.

He's a proud man and considers himself a productive and valuable citizen of this country. But he was convicted of a felony so he's now "less than a citizen." It is the stigma and shame of it all that he considers worse than anything else. IMO it was a waste of taxpayer dollars to even pursue him on this for two years. God knows how much it ended up costing everybody in salaries and manhours.

Gregg

 

[solareclipse]

Most felonies can be plead down to a misdemeanor with a decent attorney. Those who end up with a felony on their record probaby deserve it.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Thoughts?

My thought is that you're preaching to the choir here. Spend some time reading older threads and you'll find that many people agree with you, and these thoughts have all been expressed multiple times.

 

[RavenVT100]

Most felonies can be plead down to a misdemeanor with a decent attorney. Those who end up with a felony on their record probaby deserve it.

Except, of course, for those too poor to afford a decent attorney.

 

[Fletchette]

tulsamal,

I am sorry to hear this about your father. This is exactly the type of abuse of "felonies" I am against. Perhaps your father erred when helping to write the job description, but a reprimand and a fine should have been the consequence. Losing his ability to excersize his rights (vote, own guns, etc) is simply a result of a growing tyrannical government.

 

[WT]

I agree with solareclipse. One has to work extra hard to be convicted of a felony in my area. My local prosecutor can't be bothered with 3rd and 4th degree felony cases. He only goes after the 1st and 2nd degree cases, pleading everything else down to misdemeanors.

I have no sympathy for felons.

I also believe that a lot of stories about 'poor mistreated felons' leave out a lot of relevant information.

 

[Fletchette]

I agree with solareclipse. One has to work extra hard to be convicted of a felony in my area. My local prosecutor can't be bothered with 3rd and 4th degree felony cases. He only goes after the 1st and 2nd degree cases, pleading everything else down to misdemeanors.

I have no sympathy for felons.

I also believe that a lot of stories about 'poor mistreated felons' leave out a lot of relevant information.

So....why have 3rd or 4th degree felonies? Aren't you just saying that we have too many felony laws?

 

[brerrabbit]

Just my two cents,,,,

I personally consider the right to vote tied into taxation aka founding fathers and the declaration of independance. If a state or federal government deems you cannot vote, they lose the right to tax you. A government should lose more of their tax base when they consider them criminals. If nothing else, it would stop them from making knee jerk felony laws.

If you are a free citizen, not currently incarcerated, there should be absolutely no laws that affect you more than any other free citizen. If you feel you can't trust an ex felon with weapons or the right to vote, what the F#$% are you doing putting him/her out on the streets?

 

[WT]

We probably have too many felony laws. However, if the prosecutor doesn't charge people with them, then I guess it really doesn't matter.

 

[DRZinn]

However, if the prosecutor doesn't charge people with them, then I guess it really doesn't matter.

You're on damn dangerous ground there. It's a small step to enforcing them against some people but not against others.