Maybe you watch to many movies. Of course there are violent criminals but what are they one millionith of one percent of the population. We have more people in jail then any other country including the ones we bombed to "free" the people. All these preaching fire and brimstone calling for execution for a crime with a gun would be the first to use every excuse and legal trick to get one of their kids out of trouble. I don't care if Charles Manson is allowed to have a gun as long as everyone else was. What we he do with it knowing mostly every one else had one?
Who should be denied the right to own guns?
- Thread starter Kynoch
- Start date
- Status
JN01
Member
Well the solution is simple then. All violent crimes have to carry a life sentence with the possibility of parole. Then find people who can flawlessly determine when (or if) the criminal is trustworthy enough for release. You will likely have to use a lot more tax dollars for prison construction/operation also.
It would be nice if it could work that way, but in real life, that will never happen- it would be deemed cruel and unusual punishment (and probably racist as well). Violent criminals are released, commit new crimes, and are re-incarcerated again and again-because that is who and what they are. People sometimes change, but usually, they don't.
Rehabilitation programs are largely ineffective because the criminals DON'T WANT to be rehabilitated.
Do laws prohibiting violent felons from legally possessing guns prevent them from getting one? Of course not. However, if you have a guy who has been locked up 5 times for armed robbery and, for whatever reason, is found to be in possession of a pistol, it is grounds to put a predator back where he belongs (in prison). To believe that someone like that has only honorable intentions is naive.
No one should have their rights restricted without due process. If they are convicted of committing an offense, then having their rights curtailed is part of the punishment whether it is in prison or post release sanctions- they did it to themselves.
Do legal restrictions on guns affect an ex-cons ability to defend himself? Perhaps, but frankly, in the case of most violent offenders, I don't care. However, the current blanket prohibitions on ALL felonies and some misdemeanors is too broad, and there should be a REASONABLE process in place for restoration of rights.
Outlaw Man
Member
Only those currently incarcerated through due process or those currently residing in a mental health facility.
If you're a danger to the public with a firearm, you're a danger to the public without one. If you're safe to return to society, all rights should be restored immediately.
Of course, this also necessitates changes to our legal system...
If you're a danger to the public with a firearm, you're a danger to the public without one. If you're safe to return to society, all rights should be restored immediately.
Of course, this also necessitates changes to our legal system...
Pizzapinochle
member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2013
- Messages
- 570
Using emoticon in place of saying something.
:banghead:
Blind people? Because I am sure this guy just is a real threat to society, what with him enjoying marksmanship and all....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1Q5v7kaQaI
This guy too...
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/the-sideshow/blind-gunslinger-hits-more-80-percent-targets-211129297.html
Wouldn't want him enjoying his time with the local gun club.
And there is no way a blind person could use a gun in self-defense, right? Sure, they can play guitar and piano beautifully, repair cars, and work as engineers, but they probably couldn't manage the highly complex task of recognizing they are being attacked, pulling a gun and taking a contact shot against an attacker.
***Hops off my horse named Sarcasm***
Individuals with disabilities are more heavily victimized than nearly any other population in the world and they are well aware of this fact.
http://www.hadley.edu/ShowCourseDetail.asp?courseid=EIL-911#
Glad you would see it fit to take away one more tool for their defense or enjoyment.
Fact: Americas prison and justice system is weak. Though we have the most prisons and prisoners.
We are in a society that is bound by justice.*
As much as I hate to say it, justice is hog tied and held in bondage by human and civil rights and is bought and sold for wealth. Justice isn't fair and that's a fact we must face.
Our prisons are cake compared to China or the Middle east in it's entirety.
In America, prisoners control the prisons. They have rights, lawyers, friends, tvs, commisary, family visits, continued education, books and other perks of freedom.*
In say Syria for example, you are beaten by the guards almost hourly. You eat moldy and rotten food and drink dirty water. There is no comfort no luxury. You can be in restraints for weeks at a time. There are no toilets, no HVAC. There are rats and roaches and disease. You are treated like an animal and your bed is floor, right next to where you use the bathroom. If you die nobody cares. Your family isn't getting a windfall lawsuit for your death. No appeals, no bail, no house arrest and no "buying your way out of this one". If you are sentenced to death, you will die within 2 or 3 weeks. No 18+ year wait, no filing a million appeals with your lawyer. No communications.
Another thing also is the people, say you raped somebodies daughter overseas. If the police catch you that's bad, but if the family or village catch you it's worse. A BRUTAL public execution is in your future and possibly for every male in your family. No arrests nothing, why would the police arrest people that just got rid of a rapist in town?
Punishment in it's truest definition.
Other countries ignore certain human and civil rights and miraculously their rate of recidivism is very low.
I'm all for human and civil rights. I'm not for prisoner rights. The millions of people going through this revolving door penal system is ridiculous. Maybe if people saw prison and crime as more than "3 hots and a cot" in a one star motel, maybe they would be compelled not to do crime in the first place.
We are in a society that is bound by justice.*
As much as I hate to say it, justice is hog tied and held in bondage by human and civil rights and is bought and sold for wealth. Justice isn't fair and that's a fact we must face.
Our prisons are cake compared to China or the Middle east in it's entirety.
In America, prisoners control the prisons. They have rights, lawyers, friends, tvs, commisary, family visits, continued education, books and other perks of freedom.*
In say Syria for example, you are beaten by the guards almost hourly. You eat moldy and rotten food and drink dirty water. There is no comfort no luxury. You can be in restraints for weeks at a time. There are no toilets, no HVAC. There are rats and roaches and disease. You are treated like an animal and your bed is floor, right next to where you use the bathroom. If you die nobody cares. Your family isn't getting a windfall lawsuit for your death. No appeals, no bail, no house arrest and no "buying your way out of this one". If you are sentenced to death, you will die within 2 or 3 weeks. No 18+ year wait, no filing a million appeals with your lawyer. No communications.
Another thing also is the people, say you raped somebodies daughter overseas. If the police catch you that's bad, but if the family or village catch you it's worse. A BRUTAL public execution is in your future and possibly for every male in your family. No arrests nothing, why would the police arrest people that just got rid of a rapist in town?
Punishment in it's truest definition.
Other countries ignore certain human and civil rights and miraculously their rate of recidivism is very low.
I'm all for human and civil rights. I'm not for prisoner rights. The millions of people going through this revolving door penal system is ridiculous. Maybe if people saw prison and crime as more than "3 hots and a cot" in a one star motel, maybe they would be compelled not to do crime in the first place.
Mike1234567
member
While I don't completely disagree... there must be a balance that makes incarceration absolutely miserable... which the USA all-too-often fails to do. We don't need to feed our prisoners tainted food and water nor beat them to accomplish that. But we sure as hell need to stop babying them!!
sigh...
IMHO, there are 3 classes of criminals:
1. Those who can be rehabilitated quickly, committed no violence, and need to avoid the criminal justice system and especially prison at all costs. Diversion is the name of the game. These are the people who can be or are contributing members of society, but somehow screwed up. Get them treatment or community service or whatever, but get them back to work and paying taxes again.
2. Those who can be rehabilitated, but it will take substantially more time to do so and/or committed violence in their crime(s). These people need some measure of punitive control, but often we neglect the fact that we *also* need to try to rehabilitate these people; teach them a trade or at least get them a GED. This is probably the largest section of the prison population. This is also why we have such a high recidivism rate in the US; we make it extremely difficult to live life after prison without turning back to crime.
3. Those who simply cannot be rehabilitated and/or their crimes are too heinous. This is the category reserved for serial killers, serial rapists, mass shooters, etc. The people simply need to be segregated away from society.
Now a couple of misnomers, again, IMHO:
-prison is not a strong deterrent to committing crimes, neither is the death penalty. And this isn't because our prisons aren't strict enough or we don't execute enough people or they get too many appeals; the fact is that most people who commit crimes believe they won't be caught, therefore consequences of actually being caught don't register to them. Also, many first-time criminals have no idea of the actual laws and sentences.
-sex offenders are not all creepy pedophiles. You can be classified a sex offender if you commit statutory rape, particularly in states without so-called "Romeo and Juliet" laws.
-felons are not all violent criminals, or even criminals at all. For example, in Texas, if you flee the police in a motor vehicle, it is felony evading. But this is definitely a matter of subjectivity; you could not see the police trying to pull you over or you keep driving to a safe spot to pull over; an over-zealous LEO and prosecutor could slap you with a felony. Don't think it hasn't happened to perfectly law-abiding people.
Getting back to the topic: I only checked two boxes, mentally defective and fugitives. Mental illness is too wide-ranging a classification, as is felon, considering how many non-violent crimes are classified as felonies.
again, all just my humble opinion.
IMHO, there are 3 classes of criminals:
1. Those who can be rehabilitated quickly, committed no violence, and need to avoid the criminal justice system and especially prison at all costs. Diversion is the name of the game. These are the people who can be or are contributing members of society, but somehow screwed up. Get them treatment or community service or whatever, but get them back to work and paying taxes again.
2. Those who can be rehabilitated, but it will take substantially more time to do so and/or committed violence in their crime(s). These people need some measure of punitive control, but often we neglect the fact that we *also* need to try to rehabilitate these people; teach them a trade or at least get them a GED. This is probably the largest section of the prison population. This is also why we have such a high recidivism rate in the US; we make it extremely difficult to live life after prison without turning back to crime.
3. Those who simply cannot be rehabilitated and/or their crimes are too heinous. This is the category reserved for serial killers, serial rapists, mass shooters, etc. The people simply need to be segregated away from society.
Now a couple of misnomers, again, IMHO:
-prison is not a strong deterrent to committing crimes, neither is the death penalty. And this isn't because our prisons aren't strict enough or we don't execute enough people or they get too many appeals; the fact is that most people who commit crimes believe they won't be caught, therefore consequences of actually being caught don't register to them. Also, many first-time criminals have no idea of the actual laws and sentences.
-sex offenders are not all creepy pedophiles. You can be classified a sex offender if you commit statutory rape, particularly in states without so-called "Romeo and Juliet" laws.
-felons are not all violent criminals, or even criminals at all. For example, in Texas, if you flee the police in a motor vehicle, it is felony evading. But this is definitely a matter of subjectivity; you could not see the police trying to pull you over or you keep driving to a safe spot to pull over; an over-zealous LEO and prosecutor could slap you with a felony. Don't think it hasn't happened to perfectly law-abiding people.
Getting back to the topic: I only checked two boxes, mentally defective and fugitives. Mental illness is too wide-ranging a classification, as is felon, considering how many non-violent crimes are classified as felonies.
again, all just my humble opinion.
morcey2
Member
Arkansas Paul
Member
But it doesn't reduce the crime rate in general. Don't get me wrong, I'm not getting on a bandwagon opposing the death penalty. As much as it takes to get it in this country, I certainly don't have any sympathy for the ones they're executing. Screw them.
It isn't so much a deterrent as it is a form of retribution. And I'm okay with that.
But it does not stop people from committing heinous crimes. To think that, one would have to assume that criminals stop and thing about the risk vs. reward of their actions. They don't consider such things.
Well, tuj you're right, there are varying levels of crime and punishment.
The diversion is ok. The term diversion when used in a legal sense is usually precluded by "youth". These programs try to nip it in the bud. Making punk kids wash cop cars and pick up litter. That's a great program for a vandal or theif, not a home invader or "gang member".
Those who can be rehabilitated....can't. You're a violent felon, you go to prison and get educated, wonderful. They have seen the door but can't get in. We have a problem with unemployed and homeless veterans in this country who can't get jobs. So if these vets can't get jobs, how would a convicted violent felon get a job, "rehabilitated" or not. The fact is they are shut down after background check.
No job plus no money and no incentive equals a defeated person who will probably go right back to the old ways.
No not all sex offenders are pedophiles. Nor do all pedophiles go to prison for their crimes.
Here's a partial insight to how some pedophiles "do the time".
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://...oQFjAF&usg=AFQjCNFDZCMj6JEmmPJP6TZbb_JoRCwu7A
The diversion is ok. The term diversion when used in a legal sense is usually precluded by "youth". These programs try to nip it in the bud. Making punk kids wash cop cars and pick up litter. That's a great program for a vandal or theif, not a home invader or "gang member".
Those who can be rehabilitated....can't. You're a violent felon, you go to prison and get educated, wonderful. They have seen the door but can't get in. We have a problem with unemployed and homeless veterans in this country who can't get jobs. So if these vets can't get jobs, how would a convicted violent felon get a job, "rehabilitated" or not. The fact is they are shut down after background check.
No job plus no money and no incentive equals a defeated person who will probably go right back to the old ways.
No not all sex offenders are pedophiles. Nor do all pedophiles go to prison for their crimes.
Here's a partial insight to how some pedophiles "do the time".
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://...oQFjAF&usg=AFQjCNFDZCMj6JEmmPJP6TZbb_JoRCwu7A
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Theory is great, but it is not reality. Even the founding fathers transcended the constitution. All sorts of laws transcend the constitution.
easyg
Member
So a blind man should not be able to own a handgun to defend himself with.
Consider this....
A criminal breaks in to a blind man's home in the middle of the night.
He quickly discovers that the house is completely dark, as there are no light-bulbs in any of the fixtures, as the blind man needs no lights.
And the criminal didn't have the foresight to bring a flashlight along.
Who really has the advantage if a shootout occurs, the criminal or the blind home owner?
What about "husband beaters"?
Don't be sexist, it goes both ways.
blarby
Member
My my, what a tangled web we weave with our logic.
No wonder the anti's have been so successful, at least they find a rally, and flock to it.
Sorta ill, in a way.
I know that we're not all on the same page, but it makes me wonder if threads like this one aren't just a great troll on the lot of us.
Certainly pulls out the paint and brushes, and we all get all colored up !
No wonder the anti's have been so successful, at least they find a rally, and flock to it.
Sorta ill, in a way.
I know that we're not all on the same page, but it makes me wonder if threads like this one aren't just a great troll on the lot of us.
Certainly pulls out the paint and brushes, and we all get all colored up !
Kynoch
member
Amen to all. Some simply don't grasp this and it's sad...
Sam Cade
Member
Do ya think that we might be doing something wrong if we are incarcerating our fellow citizens at a rate five to ten times that of other Western democratic nations?
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/08/economist-explains-8The Economist said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate
Sam Cade
Member
I'm honestly a little flabbergasted that nearly 20% of the respondents to the poll would be happy to see my 2nd amendments rights stripped for a fistfight 15 years ago.
leadcounsel
member
It is shocking...
I call it the 'holier than thou' syndrome of Americans.
:banghead:
Then again, I truthfully think that despite all of the education available a significant segment of society cannot think 1 day into the future and cannot critically think.
20% want us to surrender gun rights for a "misdemeanor violent incident" - go to family law courthouses and watch as men and women are convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence for things like throwing a pile of laundry at their significant other, or taking the phone from the significant other during an argument, or grabbing the wrist of a significant other. I had a client once convicted of DV and got hit with Lautenberg. His offense? He pushed his wife AFTER SHE threw plates at him and came at him swinging. I didn't represent him on that issue, but later when the military tried to end his career due to Lautenberg. For essentially pushing his wife while defending himself!!
20% think that if you smoked pot you shouldn't own a gun!
20% think that if you went to get mental health help you shouldn't own a gun!
Gosh, we're our own worst enemies if a solid percentage of us wants to hand them over...
Soon, we'll need 5 references of good character and a totally spotless record as a child and adult to even consider owning a gun, and then be wait-listed for a year while we are supervised...
Last edited:
A friend of mine moved to New York and he said in order to get or have a handgun that reference letters had to be written approving his character by his neighbors. Does anyone know if this is actually true?
It is almost like that right now in some states!
In some counties in New Jersey three character references are needed, including an employer reference.
In NY State some counties requires four references and up to a year wait.
.
jcwit
member
Do ya think that we might be doing something wrong if we are incarcerating our fellow citizens at a rate five to ten times that of other Western democratic nations?
No! I think the other countries need to get on board.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
LOL, its not about you or the number of years. Can't say that most would be "happy" about the idea either. Just because folks feel that something needs or should be done doesn't mean that they are happy about it. I wasn't one of the 20%, but had it been a violent felony 15 years ago, I would have been.
I am actually more shocked by the 15% who think rights should never be stripped. For the life of me, I don't see how you can keep armed people in jail or prison.
LOL, leadcounsel, that isn't what the poll stipulated and you know it. Twisting the wording around to misrepresent the wording and to couch it into a more emotional argument does not actually address the issue.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
That's funny, right there! And sure does bring up a very good point. If more than one percent of your adult population "needs" to be locked up for the things they do, and have their 2nd Amendment rights stripped among others? Maybe the standards of what constitutes good (lawful) conduct need to be better aligned with how people actually conduct themselves.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
