1. Bikerdoc's passing and how you can help

    As many of you know, bikerdoc- AKA Al Spiniello- is no longer with us. There are always extra expenses when someone passes. If you would like to contribute to support his family, please do so here: Bikerdoc GoFundMe page.

    (Note - this notice can be dismissed by clicking on the X in the upper right corner.)
    Dismiss Notice

Who should be denied the right to own guns?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Kynoch, Apr 5, 2014.

?

Who do you think should be denied the right (perm./temp.) to own guns?

Poll closed Jul 4, 2014.
  1. All convicted felons

    104 vote(s)
    25.9%
  2. Convicted violent felons

    275 vote(s)
    68.6%
  3. Those convicted of a misdemeanor violent crime

    86 vote(s)
    21.4%
  4. Those subject to a violence-related restraining order

    152 vote(s)
    37.9%
  5. Those adjudicated to be suffering from specific mental illnesses

    216 vote(s)
    53.9%
  6. Those adjudicated to be mentally defective

    224 vote(s)
    55.9%
  7. Those adjudicated to be controlled substance users

    136 vote(s)
    33.9%
  8. Those reported by psychiatrists to be suffering from mental deficiency/specific illnesses

    127 vote(s)
    31.7%
  9. Non US citizens and those lacking lawful permanent residency status

    219 vote(s)
    54.6%
  10. Those dishonorably discharged from the US Armed Forces

    101 vote(s)
    25.2%
  11. Fugitives from justice

    243 vote(s)
    60.6%
  12. Absolutely no one

    58 vote(s)
    14.5%
Multiple votes are allowed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. pockets

    pockets Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,134
    Location:
    in my own little world
    First, they would have to locate a pay phone to break into.........that could take awhile.

    This was an entertaining read, but I am out of popcorn.

    .
     
  2. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    11,181
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
    I don't recall the 2nd Amendment saying anything specifically about US citizens. The right extends not just to US citizens, but to everybody covered by the law, although they apparently did not feel that such rights extended to numerous people and had no problem with keeping guns away from slaves and the like.

    The founding fathers then passed the Militia Acts making ownership a legal responsibility, thereby making the 2nd no longer a right.
     
  3. Arkansas Paul

    Arkansas Paul Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    8,853
    Location:
    Central Arkansas
    This is a topic that will no doubt have many opinions even among we extremely pro 2A supporters.

    I voted violent felons. That is the only one I checked on the list.
    The list of felonies is downright laughable at times. I believe if the crime did not involve violence you shouldn't be prohibited.

    That being said, I'm not naive enough to think that making it illegal for them to possess firearms will actually stop them from possessing them. They are already convicted felons. They have proven that they don't give a hoot about the law or following it.
    To me, it just gives us something else to tack some more time on when they are caught committing a crime with a firearm. Go ahead and tack on possession of a firearm by prohibited persons to the list of new charges. I'm cool with that for violent felons.

    Many are not okay with that, and I'll not debate the topic. I'm just giving my opinion.
     
  4. jcwit

    jcwit member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,011
    Location:
    Great state of Indiana
    Man, with the opinions expressed here I'm glad members here are not the ones governing this nation, and NO I'm not a liberal.

    But Common Sense needs to prevail.
     
  5. ConstitutionCowboy

    ConstitutionCowboy member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    No law transcends the Constitution.

    Woody
     
  6. ConstitutionCowboy

    ConstitutionCowboy member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Common sense demands that violent criminals must be separated from society by institutionalizing, imprisoning, or executing.

    Woody
     
  7. gym

    gym member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,901
    Get some more popcorn, Pockets, pay phones was an example of what they did In the 70's, which was the time frame I was discussing, and just an instance of what they steal.
    Anything that's not tied down. Including removing the heads off of parking meters, with pipe cutters, to stealing the US mail from drop boxes, "it's full of credit cards, and cash pay from many company's and relatives. You must live in a tree with the Keebler elves.
    You need to learn more about crazy violent criminals other that what you see on TV. Hennery Hill had a poker game in Bayside every Wed afternoon, If you knew the right people and had 5 grand in your pocket, you could have come and met them. They had plenty of popcorn for you.
    Most people who have opinions on violent crime are like the politicians who have opinions on gun control, they know little about it, but are willing to sit in judgment of something far beyond what they can understand. These aren't high school kids out for mischief, they are stone cold killers who would put a bullet in the back of someone's head, just because they were told to.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2014
  8. blarby

    blarby Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Messages:
    5,202
    Location:
    Calapooia Oregon
    Still done in areas where they use those.....what do they call them..... Coins !

    Yet another liberty being robbed from us : Coins. I can't redeem a friggin stub, at least here.
     
  9. AmericanPieGirl40

    AmericanPieGirl40 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Washington State
    I think this is a hard question to answer. Due to the fact that people are related to or know someone that has been involved with the law etc. Those people need to throw their biased opinions out the window. Break it down and simplify the real list of humans that should not own guns. If this could be done, it would help solve the debates etc. All we can really do is pray that people make the right choices.
     
  10. gym

    gym member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,901
    That would serve no purpose, since if you go into any maximum security prison, including Federal, "which some think is a country club", not. You will find the same level of violent felons in any of them from Lake Placid to Atlanta to Fishkill or Rikers. You have to be a psyco in order to survive there. Here are just the prisons in NY,http://www.insideprison.com/state_federal_prisons_by_state.asp?state=NY,
    Do you really think that there is money to build more There are about 60 in NY alone. Do you want to go interview all of these maniacs and decide who should get out and move next door to you. Because that's where they are going, Right in your town.
    Maybe reality will set in and you will see just how many people are in prison and how impossible it would be to interview all of the millions, to decide who should have a gun.
    I swear some people live on another planet. Stay home and thank your lucky stars that these guys and gals are behind bars and not near your family's. This liberal nonsense will get people killed. Take a ride to your local state facility and ask for a tour, then come back and tell me you want to give them back guns.
     
  11. Mike1234567

    Mike1234567 member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,084
    Location:
    Alamo City
    As I stated earlier, I didn't vote at all. There are simply too many unknowns and variables involved. Plus many people actually do improve during/after paying for their crimes and with maturity, etc., not to mention all the unjust convictions due to poor investigatory methods and false witnessing. There are infinite degrees of most of the choices given so I don't feel comfortable making those choices.

    I'm definitely pro 2A but I do recognize that some folks should never be allowed to own any type of weapon. However, as others pointed out, "laws" don't pertain to those who won't follow them. I guess all we can really hope for is that the evil people who intend to cause innocent others harm will eventually be removed from the gene pool by those who have the skills and courage to defend themselves and others.
     
  12. ilbob

    ilbob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,505
    Location:
    Illinois
    everyone but me. then I can be in charge. :)
     
  13. mavracer

    mavracer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,636
    Location:
    wichita
    If somebudy can't be trusted with a gun, why would you let them loose in society.
    I'm all for making any crime with a deadly weapon a capitol offense.
    Think about this for a second, if speeding was a capitol offence how fast would you drive?
     
  14. barnbwt

    barnbwt member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    7,340
    And when moving out of a slow lane, look in your dang mirrors. And bikers, stop tailgating me; my car stops faster in an emergency and I really don't want to kill you.

    As far as Dodge City shootouts and wild west fears; the antis make the same claim when any form of carry is passed, and it never bears out. The arms were restricted in the first place to reduce crime, failed, and now they claim removing them will increase violence. People fall in line when there are real consequences present, and if not, suffer said consequences. Many potential victims having guns & being able to use them is one such potential consequence. We'll never advance as a people if we keep convincing ourselves we must be domesticated rather than civilized (the adjective, not the verb ;))

    TCB
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2014
  15. Onward Allusion

    Onward Allusion Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,401
    Location:
    Illinois
    Not just cost. Y'all have any idea how many people would be locked up for having a "mental illness"??? Good gawd, we would need more prisons that we currently have just to lock up folks with mental illnesses!
     
  16. Sol

    Sol Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    899
    Gym, there are nice prisons belive it or not. Martha Stewart and Bernie Madoff don't go to common mans prison and if they do they are shipped to another wing that doesn't mingle with general population. Furthermore crack wasn't invented till the late 80's. Also, there is plenty of money to build more prisons. Instead if doing it with tax dollars, they are privately built and staffed. The tax payer just foots the bill to house, feed, administrate etc. etc.

    Hmm private prison kickstarter anyone?

    Back to the topic though. Who should be prohibited from owning guns? Well, didn't "We the People" already decide this? It's majorly flawed but it works.

    All felons prohibited? Sure. Some may argue "Armed Bank Robber vs. White collar Fraudster" to me there is no difference. Bank robber gets $10k, nobody hurt, money recovered, and if it's not recovered so what? FDIC is there for a reason. Robber gets 15-20.

    White collar guy, steals 10 million plus. Unarmed nobody hurt. Not the case though. FDIC doesn't insure this loss. People realize that their investment is bunk. Life savings gone. What are you going to tell your spouse? Some people know what to tell their spouse and leave it in a nice suicide note...

    Violent felons? Absolutley should be disqualified. Even though they will get a gun soon after release.

    Mental illness? Heck no. If you have been diagnosed with a psychosis you're a no-go.
    A psychosis is a major mental illness, what seperates a psychosis from a nuerosis is THE INABILITY TO DISTINGUISH FANTASY FROM REALITY. At present there are no cures and the treatments are bunk, a tranquilizer just slows the person down or puts them to sleep.

    Nuerosis? This one is difficult. The guy whom washes his hands fifty times a day should still have their rights. Bi-polar disorder, formerly reffered to as "manic depression" should be prohibited for some time due to the mania that accompanies it. Certain conditions could restore rights but with afflictions like mental disorderers it's hard to gauge.

    It's not bacterial or viral "trigger". If you know the lake has sewage you don't swim in it for fear of typhoid, dysentery or e.coli. With a mental disease, anything could be a trigger.

    Non-residents? No, where do those guns go before you go back? Also I believe if your not a citizen you don't enjoy full rights as if you are a citizen.

    Druggies? Very muddy waters. Been caught with crack or heroin? No go.
    Pot? You should still retain your rights. You on a prescription for an opiate painkiller? Still have a right. ABUSE or a continual prescription of an opiate painkiller? No, you are a junky and can thank your doctor for it.

    Argue what you will. What's the difference between a 20 year old heroin addict withdrawling from some horse and 60 year old guy dopesick from not getting his prescription filled? Scientifically, nothing, but society says it's acceptable for one but not the other.
     
  17. amprecon

    amprecon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,535
    Location:
    TN
    I voted absolutely no one. Why? Because it is not the government's place to deny rights.
    It is the responsibility of the family and communties to police their own, not any government or government agency or entity.
    Find an excuse popular enough, and all rights will be forfeited.
    As a supposed "free people" why on earth would we empower any government to have any control over any of our Rights, even in the slightest, no leeway, no forfeiture, for whatever reason. Once it begins, it will not be stopped.
     
  18. jcwit

    jcwit member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,011
    Location:
    Great state of Indiana
    Very well thought out.
     
  19. zxcvbob

    zxcvbob Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Messages:
    5,061
    Location:
    S.E. Minnesota
    It makes be sad that "Absolutely no one" has so few votes.
     
  20. DHJenkins

    DHJenkins Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,022
    Location:
    South Texas
    First of all, when I said "blind people, prisoners and wife beaters" I meant "blind", not "partially sighted" or those who have limited vision - you know, like how it's defined in the dictionary.

    Secondly, I specifically said "wife beaters" not "those convicted of spousal abuse".

    Third, the blind are "lumped in" with the other two because they're one of the 3 groups I don't think need firearms.

    Forgive me for speaking plainly, and if you were offended by my comments, try not spinning them into some percieved slight that you can create an argument out of.
     
  21. happygeek

    happygeek Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,528
    Location:
    OCONUS
    IMHO it's because the poll was made by an OP who is so much smarter than us reductionist rubes who just can't dig into the issue :rolleyes:

    I didn't vote because the poll is flawed. I still stand by:

     
  22. Sol

    Sol Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    899
    America HAD places for the mentally ill. Sanitariums and asylums were once a popular sight in America. Some still exist but not in the numbers they used to.

    Many were known for their deplorable conditions and inhumane treatment of people. Many were fine, and treated people well.

    Most these places didn't recieve a majority of funding through tax payers and in fact the money largely came from the Church.
     
  23. 45_auto

    45_auto Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,168
    Location:
    Southern Louisiana
    How do you tell them apart?
     
  24. NoVA Shooter

    NoVA Shooter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    178
    Why do we always focus on treating a symptom of the problem instead of the problem itself?

    And therein lies the true problem. People convicted of felonies having guns is not the problem; people convicted of felonies who are not kept in prison while they still pose a threat to society is. Fix that and any issue about ex-cons having weapons goes away. I'm not saying it's an easy fix or that there won't be growing pains, but since when is life a walk in the park? As a society, we have lost our gumption to make the hard choices. Sadly, we've become a society that believes the path to go down should be the easiest and most convenient.
     
  25. Mike1234567

    Mike1234567 member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,084
    Location:
    Alamo City
    If we're ALL armed and ready to defend ourselves/families and each other then, in most cases, good will prevail. Lawmen and law-women just need to "logically" turn their heads... unless the lawless jackasses begin to take over and they need to intervene. And if those law-persons fail to step up or are overly stupid then fire them.

    Is that right? Maybe not... but I'm okay with it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice