"Felons, mentally ill, etc. should not have guns"

[dawg23]

But if you have your way (the way it is now) then you are preventing people from possession of a tool for their protection on their own property.

Its not the tool that would cause someone to trample on your rights. It is their use of the tool. Remember, guns do not cause crime. They are incapable of trampling on your rights without someone wielding them.

Didn't say the way it is now is "my way."

I said that the way it is happens to be the way it is.....and that some of it makes sense .............especially when it pertains to mentally deficient people walking around in public with lethal weapons.

If one of these brilliantly competent members wants to change it, go change it. But they accomplish nothing by posting whiny opinions on a gun board.

 

[SimonJester308]

Seems to me dawg23 you like the way things are. So long as the master lets you keep the crumbs swept off his table, to hell with some us field hands and our whiny opinions. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder might be considered a mental deficiency, I suppose you think its okay to take away the gun rights of combat veterans?

 

[Jimmy Dean]

 

[mcinfantry]

dawg, your feeding trolls. your arguing with a guy that carries backup guns and spare magazines, 2 knives, a 3 multitools.

his weapons are what makes him tough. the real world has escaped him....

 

[dawg23]

dawg, your feeding trolls. your arguing with a guy that carries backup guns and spare magazines, 2 knives, a 3 multitools.

his weapons are what makes him tough. the real world has escaped him....

And arguing with a convicted felon.

You're right - they are wiser than the rest of us when it comes to arming kooks, psychos, retards, child molesters and serial rapists.

Of course it provides entertainment for the emotional adolescents (aka Campus Leaders). But I still have to remind myself periodically about wrestling with pigs.

I'll leave this thread to them -- recognizing that none of their whining is going to change anything..........but they get to think they are altering society.

 

[LouisianaCarry]

dawg, your feeding trolls. your arguing with a guy that carries backup guns and spare magazines, 2 knives, a 3 multitools.

his weapons are what makes him tough. the real world has escaped him....

You don't know me and you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

 

[Swampy]

This thread is to much for me.

I will let the constitutional lawyers and the moral police argue it out. Tell me who wins. So I will know If it's alright to rob a convenience store on my way home.

 

[Garra]

Garra, not letting a child molestor work around children is not taking away his right to life, or his right to defend his life either.

Taking away a released criminals right to own is. You are taking away his right to defend his life, and the life of his loved ones via the most effective means. Just because he was once a criminal does not mean that he will never be a victim.

Rights can be taken away, and if someones past actions have warranted that s/he is not responsible enough to be trusted with those rights than they do not deserve them.

It was s/he right to not break the law and they decided to do so, so it is them, being held responsible for their own actions who choose to lose their right.

In this country we are born with certain God given rights, and we should fight to preserve them and cherish them, however if a person decides to act in a fashion untrustworthy of said rights, than that is the price they pay. I did not make the law, but I support this particular one.

And keep in mind, we are speaking more or less of a blanket type of law, I understand that not all crimes are equal, and if the legal system ever decides to invest the time and money it would take to handle each case, on a case by case basis I would most likely applaud such actions, as it is a shame for someone to voluntarily decide to give up their rights by breaking the law to get themselves into trouble in the first place.

However, that is out of my hands and I dont particularly feel it is an important enough of an issue to see my tax dollars go towards such a cost, when so many other more important matters need attention.

 

[penguin]

Here is my discussion on the subject: A person born with a mental handicap (not a pervasive developmental disorder) and diagnosed as such under current guidelines should not be allowed to own a weapon. There is an argument that we are taking away a right granted to them at birth from the Constitution. Firstly, let's look at what allows the the Constitution allows: the right to own guns (as decided recently). Now, since everyone has that right, how do we as a civilized country ensure that the welfare of society is protected from harm. Do we allow infants to purchase a handgun? No. Why? Because they do not have the mental faculties to make safe use of a dangerous weapon. Persons shown to be mentally handicapped have to meet certain criteria, one of which is intelligence. A certain level of intelligence is required to be able to safely make use of a firearm. Should you use this intelligence requirement as an exclusion from infants, toddlers and pre-teens from the purchase of weapons, why could you not apply that exact same principle towards mentally handicapped persons? Age is used in the law as a marker for intelligence or mental capacity. A person who reaches the age of 18 is viewed as being of sound enough mind to be able to purchase a long gun. The judgment has been that the average 18 year old has had enough life experience, education and mental capacity to purchase a dangerous weapon and use it according to the instructions. Now, take away the age requirement and look at it for the spirit of the law; a mental capacity developed enough to understand how to use the weapon and the consequences of use. If a person does not have the mental capacity (as already determined by the guidelines) then the age requirement is moot as the age requirement isn't about just reaching the age of majority, it's about what is connotated by reaching that age. A mentally handicapped person will not be able to understand those things and will not, by age alone, ever reach that mental state. There is no debate to that. As such, they would fall into a state of perpetual infant, toddler and pre-teen mental capacity. That capacity will always be a limiting factor. Now, an argument would be that they can vote and they can drink past a certain age and those two things can be just as dangerous as owning a gun. Yes and no. Voting can be very dangerous when looking at the totality, but even then a single individual act of voting will not be an instant dangerous act. Drinking. Yes, this is very dangerous. There should be stricter regulations on drinking-but I'm even torn on that. I had an aunt who was mentally handicapped. She almost drunk herself to death but died of AIDS before that. Why? Because she did not have the mental capacity to understand the consequences of her actions. She almost drunk herself to death a few times. She was kicked out of a few group homes. Do I think she should ever have been allowed to own a gun? No. The protection of society from the actions that she did not fully understand (the Secret Service investigated her for making a threat to the president when she was drunk one night-she claimed that she had an uncle killed in Iraq and owned a shotgun) is for the greater good. Had she been able to purchase a shotgun and then walked into a Dennys at 2am and killed 5 people, everyone would be asking 'why did you let a retard have a gun?'.


As for felons; crime has punishment. To say that once a criminal does his time his punishment has been served can be incorrect. You have halfway houses, probation, etc. The loss of a constitutional right is meant to be a deterrent to crime. I believe it should only be for violent felonies (rape, murder, child abuse, etc) and not for 'white collar crimes'. Insofar as voting is concerned-I do not believe any individual should forever lose their right to vote.

 

[dawg23]

I will let the constitutional lawyers and the moral police argue it out. Tell me who wins. So I will know If it's alright to rob a convenience store on my way home.

Go ahead and rob the store.

If anyone challenges you, tell them I gave you permission. I'll support you all the way.

However, this offer is valid only if you wear your tinfoil hat and Open-Carry your handgun during the robbery.

 

[VeedUp]

non-violent convicted felons can file for their rights back after 10 years of no criminal activety. You can pay a lawyer or do it yourself if you know your P/O.

 

[SimonJester308]

And arguing with a convicted felon.

You're right - they are wiser than the rest of us when it comes to arming kooks, psychos, retards, child molesters and serial rapists.

Of course it provides entertainment for the emotional adolescents (aka Campus Leaders). But I still have to remind myself periodically about wrestling with pigs.

I'll leave this thread to them -- recognizing that none of their whining is going to change anything..........but they get to think they are altering society.

Well thought out and articulate.

 

[SimonJester308]

dawg, your feeding trolls. your arguing with a guy that carries backup guns and spare magazines, 2 knives, a 3 multitools.

his weapons are what makes him tough. the real world has escaped him....

As usual the dreaded "troll" smear gets pulled out of someones diaper when they lack anything constructive to say.

 

[SimonJester308]

Rights can be taken away, and if someones past actions have warranted that s/he is not responsible enough to be trusted with those rights than they do not deserve them.

It was s/he right to not break the law and they decided to do so, so it is them, being held responsible for their own actions who choose to lose their right.

In this country we are born with certain God given rights, and we should fight to preserve them and cherish them, however if a person decides to act in a fashion untrustworthy of said rights, than that is the price they pay. I did not make the law, but I support this particular one.

And keep in mind, we are speaking more or less of a blanket type of law, I understand that not all crimes are equal, and if the legal system ever decides to invest the time and money it would take to handle each case, on a case by case basis I would most likely applaud such actions, as it is a shame for someone to voluntarily decide to give up their rights by breaking the law to get themselves into trouble in the first place.

However, that is out of my hands and I dont particularly feel it is an important enough of an issue to see my tax dollars go towards such a cost, when so many other more important matters need attention.

A persons ignorance of the law isnt an excuse. The law is there for people to read and understand for themselves, if they need help in having it explained to them, there are people that would do it. I can only speak about from what I know from my own experience and what it cost me. Four cases of beer stolen from a warehouse after my nineteenth birthday, cost me my military career that was waiting for me to sign for on the dotted line the next monday, my right to vote, my firearms rights and the stigma of being a convicted felon for the rest of my life. A hefty price tag for beer. I was foolish, and took a wrong turn right out of the gate. But it didnt just affect me, it would affect my closest friends years later, they put their jobs on the line just being around me. Sheriffs Deputies and Detectives, every single one of them. It would affect my wife she couldnt have her firearms in the house, her CCP was about useless. Yada Yada Yada BlaBlaBla, any ways, do I think the law needed to be different when I screwed up, NO. You break the rules, you pay the penalty. Simple enough, but fortunately there are rules for civil rights restoration, and firearms rights restoration, even from the federal government. There is a reason for those rules, hope. Nothing is more treasured than a Right restored to you after foolishly squandering it away. That is the real second chance. My sob story I expect no sympathy, no victim here, but I wanted to let some of you know that there are thousands, yes, thousands that should legally have their right to bear arms restored to them. But who wants to stand up for the rights of Felons? And to have a few ignorant bigots look down from their perch of indignant self righteousness just boils my blood. Because they dont really know what its like to lose their Second Amendment rights. Ive fought for mine, as I will until my final breath.

 

[LouisianaCarry]

But who wants to stand up for the rights of Felons?quote]

That is an example of why I would like to pass the bar.

 

[Garra]

A persons ignorance of the law isnt an excuse. The law is there for people to read and understand for themselves, if they need help in having it explained to them, there are people that would do it. I can only speak about from what I know from my own experience and what it cost me. Four cases of beer stolen from a warehouse after my nineteenth birthday, cost me my military career that was waiting for me to sign for on the dotted line the next monday, my right to vote, my firearms rights and the stigma of being a convicted felon for the rest of my life. A hefty price tag for beer. I was foolish, and took a wrong turn right out of the gate. But it didnt just affect me, it would affect my closest friends years later, they put their jobs on the line just being around me. Sheriffs Deputies and Detectives, every single one of them. It would affect my wife she couldnt have her firearms in the house, her CCP was about useless. Yada Yada Yada BlaBlaBla, any ways, do I think the law needed to be different when I screwed up, NO. You break the rules, you pay the penalty. Simple enough, but fortunately there are rules for civil rights restoration, and firearms rights restoration, even from the federal government. There is a reason for those rules, hope. Nothing is more treasured than a Right restored to you after foolishly squandering it away. That is the real second chance. My sob story I expect no sympathy, no victim here, but I wanted to let some of you know that there are thousands, yes, thousands that should legally have their right to bear arms restored to them. But who wants to stand up for the rights of Felons? And to have a few ignorant bigots look down from their perch of indignant self righteousness just boils my blood. Because they dont really know what its like to lose their Second Amendment rights. Ive fought for mine, as I will until my final breath.

Not exactly sure why I was quoted in this reply. Your situation is pretty much exactly the sort of situation I was talking about. I would agree that the punishment does not exactly fit the crime in your situation, and as I said I would be all for restoration of rights in certain case by case basis.

Alot of people do foolish things when they are young and it stays with them for a long time.I'm not offering sympathy I am simply echoing what I have said previously. In a case like yours I dont see the harm in you getting your rights back. If you would have commited a violent crime, I would have a different opinion. That is the blanket law effect I was speaking of.

As for the comment about indignant self righteous people, I hope that was not directed at me, if so, it was unwarranted. Something I have learned in life and I am sure you have learned it as well is to never expect people to fully understand you if they have not walked in your shoes. Being angry over that lack of understanding is fruitless in my opinion.

 

[mcinfantry]

A persons ignorance of the law isnt an excuse. The law is there for people to read and understand for themselves, if they need help in having it explained to them, there are people that would do it. I can only speak about from what I know from my own experience and what it cost me. Four cases of beer stolen from a warehouse after my nineteenth birthday, cost me my military career that was waiting for me to sign for on the dotted line the next monday, my right to vote, my firearms rights and the stigma of being a convicted felon for the rest of my life. A hefty price tag for beer. I was foolish, and took a wrong turn right out of the gate. But it didnt just affect me, it would affect my closest friends years later, they put their jobs on the line just being around me. Sheriffs Deputies and Detectives, every single one of them. It would affect my wife she couldnt have her firearms in the house, her CCP was about useless. Yada Yada Yada BlaBlaBla, any ways, do I think the law needed to be different when I screwed up, NO. You break the rules, you pay the penalty. Simple enough, but fortunately there are rules for civil rights restoration, and firearms rights restoration, even from the federal government. There is a reason for those rules, hope. Nothing is more treasured than a Right restored to you after foolishly squandering it away. That is the real second chance. My sob story I expect no sympathy, no victim here, but I wanted to let some of you know that there are thousands, yes, thousands that should legally have their right to bear arms restored to them. But who wants to stand up for the rights of Felons? And to have a few ignorant bigots look down from their perch of indignant self righteousness just boils my blood. Because they dont really know what its like to lose their Second Amendment rights. Ive fought for mine, as I will until my final breath.

have you made the LOUISIANA requirements to regain your right ot firearm ownership? i had come across SEVERAL convicted felons of the enumerated crimes who had done just that, and they walked away free.

at 19, i cant understand how no adult had ever explained what would happen had you done what you did. thats the real crime.

theft isnt one of the enumerated felonies under louisiana law, what were you convicted of?

 

[SimonJester308]

Not exactly sure why I was quoted in this reply. Your situation is pretty much exactly the sort of situation I was talking about. I would agree that the punishment does not exactly fit the crime in your situation, and as I said I would be all for restoration of rights in certain case by case basis.

Alot of people do foolish things when they are young and it stays with them for a long time.I'm not offering sympathy I am simply echoing what I have said previously. In a case like yours I dont see the harm in you getting your rights back. If you would have commited a violent crime, I would have a different opinion. That is the blanket law effect I was speaking of.

As for the comment about indignant self righteous people, I hope that was not directed at me, if so, it was unwarranted. Something I have learned in life and I am sure you have learned it as well is to never expect people to fully understand you if they have not walked in your shoes. Being angry over that lack of understanding is fruitless in my opinion.

No it wasnt directed at you, the reason why you were quoted is because your statement landed the closest to the discussion without an insult in it. I agree that blanket laws aren't always fair, and you have to do the best with what you got as far as making the rules workable. There are a surprising number of states that allow firearms rights restoration as I think there should be in every state. I also think that funding should be restored to the ATF for the relief of firearms disabilities program.
As for those with mental problems, I dont know, I would just be tossing out an uninformed opinion. But the way the rules are now, I know a person or two that served this country in combat that wont seek the help they need because they fear that with the stroke of a pen from some doctor has the power to take their most cherished Right away.
But when you stand up for them, someone always gives an example of the ridiculous and extreme so they can rack up some clever points. So I guess that because of my past experience and because I wouldnt want the firearms rights taken from returning combat veterans when they need some help, somehow my "bleeding liberal" heart's desire is to ensure that violent repeat offenders are well armed while they are raping children, and that machine guns and schizophrenics in a mall go together like marshmellows and hot chocolate. Then to top it off, just because I dont step away from the campfire because someone is being a weenie, I morph into a hungry Troll, somehow. But you're right, anger and frustration is fruitless But somehow there are always people who put their point of view out here where we can all learn something. Whether we agree completely or not.

 

[SimonJester308]

have you made the LOUISIANA requirements to regain your right ot firearm ownership? i had come across SEVERAL convicted felons of the enumerated crimes who had done just that, and they walked away free.

at 19, i cant understand how no adult had ever explained what would happen had you done what you did. thats the real crime.

theft isnt one of the enumerated felonies under louisiana law, what were you convicted of?

I had my run in with the law in another state. That is were I had to have my firearms rights restored. But I was advised to make sure I was in line with Federal law. I checked with them, they said since it wasnt a federal felony, and the state restored my right, they informed me that I was ok with possession of a firearm. Which started more paperwork to allow the purchase of firearms. But while I was waiting for that I checked the laws of louisiana and there were two parts my situation fell under. One was time, and the other was permission from the parish sheriff. 10 years had to pass when the punishment for the crime was over. There was the first glitch. I didnt recieve my discharge paper because of a clerical error at the county courthouse back home. They misspelled my name by one letter. Now according to the FBI I have an alias on my criminal record. So even though my screw up was over 18 years ago, the discharge paper was only 9. So I went to the Sheriff of the parish I lived in for a permission letter, or permit. He told me it wasnt hunting season. If you want to read the law yourself, Im sure you could find it at louisianacarry's website. You tell me where its about hunting. I had a copy of the statute and asked him to help me understand what the law said, and he was very helpful informing me what the law meant after turning the piece of paper face down on his desk. He looked me right in the eye and said to me in front of my wife and child, was the law meant that he said it wasnt hunting season, therefore he would not give me permission and that no convicted felon was going to have a firearm without his permission, in his parish, while he was on watch and that if he knew there was a convicted felon in possession of a firearm without his permission he would see to it they be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[mcinfantry]

interesting. who was the sheriff?

you know i cant help but think about your story where you were 19, and of sound mind to join the military, but were unable to decide against committing a felony. now, you allude to the fact you were un-aware it was a felony, but your moral bearings allowed you to take something KNOWING it was not yours, so you made the decision one week before joining the military to break the law.

im not trying to rub it in, but then again, you brought it up, and then try and minimize the role you had in it.

kind of like smoking "medicinal marijuana" and lying on your gun application form.... and then joining a shooting forum. then crying when you get caught. since "medicinal marijuana" isnt recognized by the feds......