Guns and (non-violent) felons... How do you feel about it?

[Volzfan]

Ok, so let me pose this question to all of you guys from the "if you commit a felony, you lose your rights, tough s***" camp...

Have you ever forgot that you had a gun on you and carried it somewhere you weren't supposed to? Ever gone to mail a package and just innocently forgot you were CCWing? Hopped out of the car at you're kid's school? Carried in your car on a college campus?

Never. I know where I can carry and where I can't. I try to stay up on the laws so that I don't put myself in the position of accidentally breaking the law. That is one of the reasons for being a member of this forum. Oh and LMAO at some of the responses from our members!

[Guest milkman]

I think that for white collar crimes, possibly DUI's, and certain other felonies ones right should be able to be completely restored. I do not include drugs. Sorry violent or not there is far too much violence associated with drugs. One doesn't wake up one morning and decide, "I'm going to do some herione this morning," At any time they could have gotten help.

[Guest jackdm3]

I think that for white collar crimes, possibly DUI's, and certain other felonies ones right should be able to be completely restored. I do not include drugs. Sorry violent or not there is far too much violence associated with drugs. One doesn't wake up one morning and decide, "I'm going to do some herione this morning," At any time they could have gotten help.

Yes, they get into it on their own accord, but you know how when you just feel REALLY lazy and unmotivated to get up and fix that doohickey in the garage or spare bedroom you've been putting off for two years? Exhaustion's got you down with no influence of drugs. All without the putrid addiction of an incapacitating gram of junk. I don't know how it came so far for them, but I think getting help will be the absolute furthest thing from their minds tomorrow morning.

[Guest (BH)]

I think getting help will be the absolute furthest thing from their minds tomorrow morning.

Yeah, from the ones that I've talked to, that's the case. It's similar to cigarettes in that you will always quit next week, next month, whenever things aren't so stressful, etc.

I don't know how they feel. It's not my domain, but this is how it was explained to me.

I just know that there will always be drugs, and even if there weren't, there would still be large amounts of senseless violence and crime. I don't think that my friend honestly contributed to violence. It's like saying buying oil contributes to war. There will always be something for terrorist to be pissed about and gangsters will always fight over something.

[deerslayer]

Drug abuse is a victimless crime? Ask Deputy Louie Puroll:

FOXNews.com - Ariz. Deputy Shot; Illegal Immigrants Suspected

Ariz. Deputy Shot; Illegal Immigrants Suspected

PHOENIX -- Law officers backed by helicopters hunted gunmen in Arizona's desert early Saturday after a sheriff's deputy was wounded by suspected illegal immigrants believed to be smuggling marijuana, officials said. The violent episode came amid nationwide debate over the state's tough new immigration law.

Pinal County Deputy Louie Puroll was patrolling alone Friday afternoon in a rugged area near Interstate 8, about 50 miles south of Phoenix, when he came upon a band of suspected smugglers, authorities said.

At least one of five suspects opened fire on the 53-year-old lawman, tearing a chunk of skin from just above his left kidney. The officer was found after a frantic hourlong search, Pinal County sheriff's Lt. Tamatha Villar said.

The wound was not serious and Puroll was released Friday night from Casa Grande Regional Medical Center.

State and federal law enforcement agencies deployed helicopters and scores of officers to search a 100 square-mile zone near the Interstate and Arizona 84 for the suspects. The Arizona Republic reported officials said more than one of the choppers came under fire during the manhunt.

April 29: A a drop house is raided by state and federal agents, yielding nine suspected illegal immigrants, and three suspected human smugglers in Phoenix.

The Pinal Sheriff's department told The Associated Press that the hunt into the early morning hours Saturday but no arrests had been made.

The shooting was likely to add fuel to an already fiery national debate sparked last week when Gov. Jan Brewer signed a law cracking down on illegal immigration in the state.

A backlash over the law has surged with civil rights activists, concerned it will lead to racial profiling, calling for protests and a boycott of the state.

The new law's passage came amid increasing anger in Arizona about violence, drug smugglers, illegal immigration drop houses and other problems that some say are caused by poor border security. The issue gained focus a month ago when a southern Arizona rancher was shot and killed by a suspected illegal border crosser.

Arizona politicians called Friday's shooting an outrage and urged the federal government to do more to secure the border with Mexico.

"Regardless of the outcome of tonight's manhunt and investigation, Arizona is now confronted by some of the most vicious and dangerous narco-terror organizations the world has seen," Brewer said in a statement.

Rep. Kirkpatrick, a Democrat whose district includes part of Pinal County, said the violence "should show the rest of the country what we Arizonans have known for too long -- the unsecured border poses a very real and very immediate danger."

Puroll, a 15-year department veteran, had been carrying out smuggling interdiction work before finding the bales of marijuana and encountering the five suspected illegal immigrants, two armed with rifles.

"He was out on his routine daily patrol in the area when he encountered a load of marijuana out in the desert. He obviously confronted the individuals and took fire," Villar told The AP.

The Republic quoted Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu as saying about 30 bullets were fired at the deputy, who returned fire with a semi-automatic rifle and a handgun.

The area is a well-known smuggling corridor for drugs and illegal immigrants headed from Mexico to Phoenix and the U.S. interior.

"(Puroll) is a search-and-rescue deputy, so its not uncommon for them to work those areas A) looking for drugs and looking for people who need assistance out there," Villar said.

[Guest Joey]

Drug use is a victimless crime. Not all drug users kill people or shoot at cops. And not all people who shoot at cops are drug users.

[deerslayer]

Drug use is a victimless crime. Not all drug users kill people or shoot at cops. And not all people who shoot at cops are drug users.

Right. Those poor drugusers have nothing to do with all the border violence that the demand for drugs is causing.

To the OP: I have no sympathy for your friend. He knew the rules, the laws, and the possible consequences. He needs to be a man and face the music. If his judgment was so lousy that it allowed him to use heroine, I don't trust him with a gun in his hands.

Edited May 1, 2010 by deerslayer

[mikegideon]

Never. I know where I can carry and where I can't. I try to stay up on the laws so that I don't put myself in the position of accidentally breaking the law. That is one of the reasons for being a member of this forum. Oh and LMAO at some of the responses from our members!

+1. All you gotta do is comply with the law.

[mikegideon]

Drug use is a victimless crime. Not all drug users kill people or shoot at cops. And not all people who shoot at cops are drug users.

I'll agree that SOME of the drug laws need to be changed. But, until they are...

[Guest cowboy20th]

First and foremost, much respect to the OP. Many of us on this board have a drastically different viewpoint from you and yet you have continued to stick by you original idea. This is what debates are all about, much respect to you.

Secondly, this is not an issue where one can ride the fence in hopes of being able to appease everyone. Creating loopholes in felony punishments is a very dangerous idea, you cannot control who uses the loopholes, only the loopholes themselves. This is the basis for any argument from the tough sh*** camp.

Ignorance is not an argument, if you commit a felony because you didn't bother to understand the laws and regulations that you have voluntarily subjected yourself to, then you are still responsible for the crime. It is like shooting someone and afterward saying, "I didn't know I could not shoot them." This concept has been established and reinforced throughout the history of our legal system.

I can agree that crimes do not fit the punishments, punishments need to be more severe in my opinion. A felony crime is a federal offense, a crime against our government or nation as a whole. These crimes are labeled as felonies because they undermined the simple purposes of our government or create an atmosphere which damages the moral fabric of our society. This might sound extreme to some Americans who believe in freedom of self, but our country is founded upon a specific ideology the same as most are founded. If a state is not allowed to uphold and protect the ideology that created it, then the state is doomed in its existence and cannot fulfill its true purpose.

And drug use is in fact a crime with a victim, and the victim is every American that has to put up with that drug use. How about an impressionable child stumbles upon his father shooting heroin, does this child not become a victim? What about the inflated health costs of metropolitan areas with high drug use?

The United States of America was founded upon the people. Drugs destroy people. Destroying people destroys the foundations of American society, therefore drugs destroy the foundations of the American Society, this is why they are punishable as a felony offense.

[Spiffy]

Yup, and killers wouldn't be in there either if that horrible, un-winnable war on murder was ended.

I agree that once a person has paid their debt they should have all rights reinstated.

However, when you commit a felony, part of that debt is you loose rights and privileges for life.

It's like they say, "can't do the time, don't do the crime".

Should you lose all your rights for say....... hacking someone's email. Or say insider trading. Yes I picked these 2 because they are "victimless" crimes and with the Sarah Palin case in the news it is timely and of course Martha Stewart is the insider trading.

I think there should be a process after you had severed your time and it have a sliding scale as to the severity of the crime.

[strickj]

Should you lose all your rights for say....... hacking someone's email. Or say insider trading. Yes I picked these 2 because they are "victimless" crimes and with the Sarah Palin case in the news it is timely and of course Martha Stewart is the insider trading.

I think there should be a process after you had severed your time and it have a sliding scale as to the severity of the crime.

Umm... hacking someone's email and insider trading are both victim-full crimes.

People have very sensitive information sent to their emails today.

Everything from E-bills to credit card info.

Just one way criminals are stealing identities.

Insider trading is just a PC way to say stealing.

Look that one up sometime....

[Mike.357]

possibly DUI's, and certain other felonies ones right should be able to be completely restored. I do not include drugs.

so someone can drive drunk , but if caught with some pot they are in a different boat? I am not buying into that.

[Guest clownsdd]

Ok, so let me pose this question to all of you guys from the "if you commit a felony, you lose your rights, tough s***" camp...

Have you ever forgot that you had a gun on you and carried it somewhere you weren't supposed to? Ever gone to mail a package and just innocently forgot you were CCWing? Hopped out of the car at you're kid's school? Carried in your car on a college campus?

You don't have to tell the story or anything, but come on, almost all of us have done it at one point or another.

I know these are examples of unconscious felonies, but the fact still stands, you'd most likely lose your rights for life. Every liberal in town would agree that you committed the crime, you lost your rights, tough s***. Are they right? No, but it's all very subjective. Most people in this country, like it or not, would say that a gun offense (accident or not) is worse than a drug offense.

Nobody's opinion is worth more than another, but I'd bet if you posed a national pole for who should get their rights back ten years after the crime, the druggie who knew what they were doing would get more votes than the legal carrier who walked into the bank or school.

Would that be right? No. Either way, the people wouldn't look at it like we would. You wouldn't be a guy who just innocently forgot, you'd be a guy who didn't use enough common sense to know when he did or didn't have possession of a deadly weapon, the guy who didn't take his gun serious enough to constantly know when he had it, the guy who broke the law and shouldn't have a gun if he's not responsible enough not to have it where he isn't supposed to....

Just something to think about...

None of the above.

You break the law, it is your responsibility, regardless or the situation, to know them and suffer the consequences if you break them. Ya got no business carrying if you are unable to understand the responsibility of knowing the "terms and conditions".

[Guest pwhphd]

Much of this discussion is based upon "mistakes." While most are, in fact, mistakes they are also conscious decisions and choices made by citizens who are usually fully aware of their consequences. A sliding scale already exists, it is the basis for the distinction between misdemeanor and felloneous crimes. Drug offenses are not victemless crimes. Just consider the families of the offenders, those harmed in unlawful acquisition and distribution of drugs, lives lost by criminal acts committed by offenders under thier influence, and the economic cost of dealing with drug related health issues.

[jughead]

how many here know exactly where the state line in virginia and d.c. is? what happens if one accidently steps across it. and gets caught.one foot in and one foot out doesnt matter. there are so many felony statutes out there that there is not a lawyer in the U.S.knows them all. i submit that 99 out of a 100 of us have committed one in our life times and didnt know it. violent felons should feel the full force of the law non-violent should be cleared when they do the time period. it has been a sore spot with this old man as long as i can remember. and no i aint a felon.

[deerslayer]

how many here know exactly where the state line in virginia and d.c. is? what happens if one accidently steps across it. and gets caught.one foot in and one foot out doesnt matter. there are so many felony statutes out there that there is not a lawyer in the U.S.knows them all. i submit that 99 out of a 100 of us have committed one in our life times and didnt know it. violent felons should feel the full force of the law non-violent should be cleared when they do the time period. it has been a sore spot with this old man as long as i can remember. and no i aint a felon.

So a convicted felon who helped sell heroin should be able to buy and carry a gun?

Why do they call you "jughead?"

[Wyldk2]

Oh, there is so much i want to say to the people that have it wrong about drugs. But that is for another discussion. And no, I'm not a drug user( heck i don't even drink alcohol), Which in case studies has been proven it is more potent than Marijuana. Don't believe me? look it up.

I'm glad i'm not alone in thinking that non-violent felons should at least be given the chance to get their rights back. But who decides what the difference in a felony and a misdemeanor is anyways?

[Guest Joey]

I always find it odd when gun owners support gun control. It seems to me all of the arguments used against the liberal gun grabbers can be used to support changing the law to let felons legally own guns.

First off we need to realize that many felons own guns even though it's illegal. If it were made legal for felons to own guns the only thing that would change would be that the nonviolent law abideing felons would be able to buy guns. Or to put it another way all the law really does is to keep guns out of the hands of the peaceful and is powerless to stop the violent felons who don't care about the law. Can someone tell me what this current law actually accomplishes? What good does it do in the real world?

...

About the drug issue: a government that can tell adults what they can't put in their own bodies scares me a lot more than any drug cartel or junkie. I'd rather deal with the problems of having a little freedom than deal with the problems of having a Big Brother nanny State.

Now just so there's no confusion I think that doing illegal drugs is a stupid idea. I don't do illegal drugs and I don't hang out with people that do.

Freedom is what made this country great. Losing that freedom has been detrimental to this country no matter how small the loss or in what area freedom is lost. Even though I think doing illegal drugs is a stupid idea I don't have any right to tell you what you can and can not put into your body. Nor does the government have that right.

I'm through talking about drugs in this thread. If you want to continue the discussion then PM me or start a different thread. I'm just trying to keep things on topic in the future.

Edited May 3, 2010 by Joey

[wjh2657]

I think everybody, even convicted felons should be allowed to have as many guns as they want. I think everybody should be able to shoot anybody that ****** them off. Then I think their kinfolk have the right to come over and blow them and their family away. If neighbor kids are around they are fair game for potshots too. That's what the Second Amendment is about!

If this sounds crazy you better go back and consolidate all of the thoughts floating around here. We don't need the anti-gunners to lose our gun rights. Decent, sane people will take them away from us if they ever start reading these forums!

Edited May 3, 2010 by wjh2657

[Guest crotalus01]

Just my 2 cents...I am a 2A purist. I believe that once you have done the time regardless of your crime ALL your rights should be restored, period. Voting, gun ownership, ALL of them.

Having said that, I also believe that if the authorities are worried about a person reoffending then they should not be let out. I believe that the death penalty should be automatic for 1st degree murder, rape, and child molestation. I believe that we should have across the board mandatory minimums for a lot of crimes - drug use not being one of them. IMO the drug war is a collosal waste of time and money and can never be won. Do I have the answers for this problem? Nope. Thats why politics never interested me as a career...

[Guest Joey]

I think everybody should be able to shoot anybody that ****** them off. Then I think their kinfolk have the right to come over and blow them and their family away. If neighbor kids are around they are fair game for potshots too. That's what the Second Amendment is about!

I never said that.

[deerslayer]

Just my 2 cents...I am a 2A purist. I believe that once you have done the time regardless of your crime ALL your rights should be restored, period. Voting, gun ownership, ALL of them.

Having said that, I also believe that if the authorities are worried about a person reoffending then they should not be let out. I believe that the death penalty should be automatic for 1st degree murder, rape, and child molestation. I believe that we should have across the board mandatory minimums for a lot of crimes - drug use not being one of them. IMO the drug war is a collosal waste of time and money and can never be won. Do I have the answers for this problem? Nope. Thats why politics never interested me as a career...

So who determines whether a criminal is in danger of "reoffending?" Does the thug who shot my father in his own driveway and was convicted of second degree attempted murder get a gun when he gets out? In his first parole hearing, he swore that he was reformed and that he'd found Jesus. What if some government idiot buys this crap? Are you ok with that?

I truly hope anti-2Aers don't read this thread. Some people are bizarre.

[Guest Patty]

I think everybody, even convicted felons should be allowed to have as many guns as they want. I think everybody should be able to shoot anybody that ****** them off. Then I think their kinfolk have the right to come over and blow them and their family away. If neighbor kids are around they are fair game for potshots too. That's what the Second Amendment is about!

If this sounds crazy you better go back and consolidate all of the thoughts floating around here. We don't need the anti-gunners to lose our gun rights. Decent, sane people will take them away from us if they ever start reading these forums!

Yep, we all need guns. I am all for what you said.

[wjh2657]

I never said that.

I didn't say you or anybody else in particular did. My remark was just sarcasm about the trend these forums are going to that all laws are evil and people should be able to do what they want. A convicted felon is just that, a law breaker, I for one am not going to stand up for them nor am I about to say they should be allowed to carry guns.