No seriously, how does legally restricting possession of firearms to criminals who were convicted as felons give the state more power?My friend, do you not know how the state works? (Rhetorical question)
Today, what is classified as common sense behavior, 10 years from now is a felony. Refuse to call the tranny by their preferred pronoun? Felony for you. Refuse to ignore certain racial data? Felony. Refuse to give up your seat to accommodate the 450lb minority that well deserves that seat? Hmm, felony.
I completely understand that these examples may be far fetched, I agree, but you cannot sit here and tell me that they are out of the realm of possibility. And, with that being the case, it is certainly not out of the realm of possibility that other, minor offenses would be classified as a felony.
This world would run much better if it relied more on individual choice and the responsibility of the individual, rather than relying on the false security that the state provides, especially when that false security involves certain rights that should never, ever be possible for them to take away. The constitution was written the way that it was written for a reason. The amendments are in the order they are in, for a reason. And the verbage in those amendments means exactly what it says, for a reason.
Now, I wonder how many of the statistics in this chart, were contributed by,...take a guess?
No, the answer I was looking for was felons...
I'm all about easing restrictions on firearm ownership, but I couldn't care less if felons are permanently barred from firearm ownership.