Should violent felons be allowed to own guns?

Should violent felons be allowed to own guns?

  • Yes

    Votes: 88 33.2%

  • No.

    Votes: 177 66.8%
  • Total voters
    265
Status
Not open for further replies.
(Flamesuit on) It's believable; we No voters see real experience proves that violent felons often can never be reformed, yet society can't financially afford to house them forever. Plus, society is a little soft on crime because some in our republic think criminals don't deserve so much prison time for violent crime to begin with.

Who coined the phrase "they've paid their debt to society"? What debt? Their debt is to their victim or their dead victim's family and it can never be repaid. Their time in prison is no payment to society. Prison is separating them from society, not extracting payment.

I don't deny that self-defense and KBA are natural rights. I just argue that violent felons, meaning those who commit or attempt bodily injury to the innocent, are subhuman and deserve no legal recognition of any rights. Let them be victims of their own kind.
 
Last edited:
we No voters see real experience proves that violent felons often can never be reformed, yet society can't financially afford to house them forever.
Click to expand...

Let me spell it out.
If a man can't be "reformed", and trusted as a free man, don't continue to house him. K I L L H I M !

KILL, KILL, KILL.
Dead.
Perhaps if there were a provision for review of criminals prior to release?
And if they are "unreleaseable"(sp?), KILL THEM!
Creating a second class of citizen makes all of us less.

If only some citizens have a "right", it is no longer a right. It is a privilege.
Same with voting.
 
Well, I've given examples of people that should be allowed to own firearms. If you know the guy, it's hard to take issue with him having them.

I've showed that low-like crack smoking violent scum still get firearms when it's illegal.

Can anybody that voted "NO" actually show me somebody that they know personally that they are quite glad that they cannot legally obtain a firearm? Do you have ANY proof at all that they will not commit violent crime again because they can't purchase a firearm from an FFL?

Looks like it's mostly LEOs that are OK with this practice. Could one of them PLEASE cite an example? Have you ever had some lowlife scum admit that this "felons can't own guns" things has actually kept them from comitting a violent act?

I just want one example. Who's got it?
 
OK, I've got an acquantance who I can PROVE can never get a gun despite every effort. I'll provide the PROOF when you can PROVE that your acquaintance will never again commit a violent felony.

Anecodotal examples prove nothing, and neither does the distortion of the No response into the position that felons are unable to get guns.
 
Last edited:
No, they should not. Even if you argue that non-violent felonies should be exempt, the VIOLENT felons should in no way be allowed to possess the firearms.
 
I'm really disappointed with the "no's".

Has anyone's mind been changed by this thread?

Would anyone change their vote if we started an new poll?

Come on, if the felons bought their guns from an FFL at least the gun could be traced back to the felon if the gun were found at a crime scene.

Do you really believe violent felons care what the gun laws are?

There is no logic to the "no" position.

Of course, we would not have to have this debate if the violent felons were executed, quickly.
 
I've got it!

Why don't we have a new poll:

Should violent felons be allowed to live?
 
Do you really believe violent felons care what the gun laws are?
Click to expand...
Just because some people don't abide by the laws doesn't mean that you should do away with the law in question.
 
Just because some people don't abide by the laws doesn't mean that you should do away with the law in question.
Click to expand...

So it's ok to pass a law or maintain a law even if it has no effect on crime?
So even though the AWB only affects law abiding citizens, it's no reason to get rid of it?
Even though forbidding law abiding citizens to own full auto guns does not stop criminals from owning Uzis, we should leave the law on the books, and keep them out of the hands of responsible gun owners?
How about this?
Even though criminals will carry concealed illegally,states with no ccw allowance should not pass shall issue laws. Just because some people don't abide by the law doesn't mean you should do away with it.
C'mon, man.:barf:

It is illegal to kill, rob, and shoot people. The law should be the same for all.
Liberty and justice for ALL.
 
If he is deemed safe enough to release from incarceration, he should also be safe enough to keep and bear arms. If we're not comfortable with allowing him to have a gun, he should be kept in prison until we feel we can trust him.
Click to expand...
Unrealistic. That would be excessive punishment. You cannot have open-ended sentences like that. These guys never reform. Almost never.
 
If he is deemed safe enough to release from incarceration, he should also be safe enough to keep and bear arms. If we're not comfortable with allowing him to have a gun, he should be kept in prison until we feel we can trust him.
Click to expand...

Unrealistic. That would be excessive punishment. You cannot have open-ended sentences like that. These guys never reform. Almost never.
Click to expand...

It isn't punishment at that point. It is protection of the innocent. Much like comitting a mentally ill person to an asylum for life, because he is unsafe to be free.
It isn't a tough question, folks. Either you believe in the constitution, or you don't.
Either you believe in freedom, or you don't.
Either a man is a citizen, or he isn't.
 
Some argument strike me as a bit odd. In WW I, the sub-human, for us, was "The Hun". In WW II, "The Japs" or "The Nazis". This was official U.S. Government propaganda.

In this thread, the sub-human is "The Violent Felon". Is this not propaganda to justify regarding a human being as not really being such?

There's a lot of talk here on this board about how the Bill of Rights enumerates rights which are "natural" as in coming from some Creator. Now, there is general agreement that certain behaviors justify some restrictions, but do we restrict the right of somebody to defend his own life against some other person's violence?

That's why I earlier brought up the Texas law: Even a felon has the right of self-defense within his own home. On the street, he has no more rights than any other non-CHL person. If he "totes", he's subject to "Hello, warden."

Art
 
With rare exceptions, by the time a criiminal type commits a crime serious enough to warrant the "Felony" tag, and the forfieture of RKBA,they have long since demonstrated their inability to peacfully coexist in Society with normal law abiding citizens. So in answer to the question, my answer is not no but hell no, they should not have the right to own a gun since by virtue of their personal history of violence, they have s

Take care

Joe and Bobbie
 
With rare exceptions, by the time a criiminal type commits a crime serious enough to warrant the "Felony" tag, and the forfieture of RKBA,they have long since demonstrated their inability to peacfully coexist in Society with normal law abiding citizens.
Click to expand...

Again, I say it:
If they can not coexist, if they are not free men, why are they sharing the street with me?
Why are they not dead or in prison?

Does this mean that they can ride the same bus as your daughter, get off at the same stop, and follow her home, but if they could purchase a gun legally, that might push them over the edge?

What about private sales? Should we close that"loophole", as the anti's put it? After all, a felon might buy a gun, which could cause him to commit a heinous crime. We need to put a stop to this. For the children.:rolleyes:
 
With rare exceptions, by the time a criiminal type commits a crime serious enough to warrant the "Felony" tag, and the forfieture of RKBA,they have long since demonstrated their inability to peacfully coexist in Society with normal law abiding citizens.
Click to expand...

By the way, not true. By carrying my Leatherman in the car with me while picking my daughter up from school, I have comitted a "felony". How have I proven my inability to peacefully co exist?
By picking up my daughter at school with a lawfully purchased firearm in my trunk( just picked up at the gun shop), I commit a felony. Am I not peacfully co existing?
 
I voted "Yes."

If the vast majority of law abiding mentally stable adult citizens carried, and always had carried, instead of believing or assuming that the police would protect them, there would be many fewer convicted violent felons released to the streets and many fewer who would have chosen the life style. And maybe the whole death penalty/no death penalty debate would be moot.


Consider that: In this day and age we can actually generalize a life style choice as "violent felon."
 
As much as they screwed the pooch.....

with their aberrant behavior. "No FREE man shall be denied access to ARMS"
You are free or you are not. If you've paid your debt to society then it is paid. SHould your become a second class citizen upon release from prison?
 
If violent felons are treated as second-class citizens upon release, that increases recidivism. Chances are great that they will use guns (which they'll have no trouble getting) in more violent crimes.

If you don't treat felons with respect upon their release, you might as well send them to Australia, drown them in the ocean, or give them a lethal injection.
 
I say that they SHOULD be allowed to own firearms.

The prison sentence is supposedly repaying their "debt" to society so why not allow them to own firearms once their sentence is over?

Once a violent felon, always a violent felon? Maybe...but if that's so, then don't let them out of prison. If they are OK to walk the streets, then they should be OK to own a gun.

I have a convicted murderer in my employ. He still has to pay visits to his parole officer for a couple of years but I really couldn't ask for a better employee. He takes care of his wife and family in an admirable manner and is not really any different from anyone else...except that he pled guilty to a murder twenty or so years ago. There is even quite a bit of question as to whether he did it or not. He's not saying and is pretty bitter about the whole thing (of course). I would say that he should be able to own a firearm in a heartbeat.

There are plenty of others who are NOT convicted felons who really shouldn't have firearms...what about them?

Ah, well...

Here's a question for you guys:

The kids who did the Jonesboro school shootings were 11 and 13 years of age, respectively. Under AR law at that time, no one under the age of 14 could be tried as an adult, no matter how heinous the crime. The kids are currently locked up but will be released within a couple of years. They will only have a juvenile record, as far as I can ascertain. They should be able to buy firearms and have no infringements on their records. Is this a fair thing to do? It's all LEGAL...it's what THE LAW says...but is it right?:confused:
 
I voted "Yes" for the same reason as oldfart:

If he is deemed safe enough to release from incarceration, he should also be safe enough to keep and bear arms. If we're not comfortable with allowing him to have a gun, he should be kept in prison until we feel we can trust him.
Click to expand...
 
ok, now that we have determined that more than half of us are in favor of reasonable gun control....... I think that no able bodied man over six feet tall should be allowed to carry concealed. He should have the physical prowess to defend himself without a gun.

Does anyone else know of a reasonable category to prohibit?

Sorry all, I think ALL men should be armed. When everyone is armed there will be no more repeat offenders. The ones we have to fear are the first ones that will be shot or find a new way to live.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
  • Locked
Should non-violent felons be allowed to own firearms?
Replies
5
Views
660
Spats McGee
Spats McGee
T
  • Locked
Felons can't have guns.
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
4K
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
alsaqr
  • Locked
SCOTUS Declines Felon's Firearms Case
Replies
6
Views
739
alsaqr
alsaqr
P
  • Locked
Please don't hate me: Confessions from a 2nd Ammendment Hypocrite
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
Don Gwinn
D
Z
  • Locked
Can a Ex-Felon Own Black Powder Guns?
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
racenutz
R
Back
Top