should some felonies fall off over time?

[Guest oldslowchevy]

seems to me when when i was in my late teens though my mid twenties i did some dumb stuff, some of which if i would have gotten caught would have been felony charges. nothing violent mind you. but still.

my son who now lives in maryland just got a felony charge ... a drug charge for having a half oz of weed and mistermeanor chages of open container and possation of beer while not of age. he is 19, he is not very smart either... oh wait i am sure you figured that out already.

so now if conviced (2nd time in a year just so you all know) he will be a felon and his life is screwed form here on out.

here is yet another example... a friend i work with is 34 now, but when he was 19 he had sex with his then girl friend which was 16 at the time,and in walks her dad... opps, her mom and dad filed charges on him for statutory rape and he is now a felon and regestered sex offener, he and his then girl friend got married when she turned 18 and are still happily married to this day with 3 kids. he has never so much has had a parking ticket other wise.

so my question is after so many years (say 10-20 depending on the crime) should some non voliolent felonies come off of someone's record so they can be truly free amricans with 2nd amendment rights restored?

there are times people do stuiped stuff when they are young and then staigten out once they get crap scared out of them.

my son is a fool and i will just leave it at that but i thought i would use his case as an example. what do you guys really think? i know i am not the same person i was 20 years ago not even 10 years ago for that matter.

Edited November 20, 2011 by oldslowchevy

[Mike.357]

they both need to hire really good attorneys. Pretty much anyone's records can be fixed with enough cash and the right lawyer.

We have a legal system not a justice system.

[Guest pfries]

Some things that are felonies today are not things that are forefathers considered felonies. Not much we can do about not having these be felonies but both of them should be up to look at getting them expunged. Here in Tennessee your one friend would not of been convicted as the spread was less than four years of age. I personally think he should be able to go to a judge with his marriage certificate and his wife, after being together for fifteen years and get that one dropped pretty easily. But I guess sometimes him a bit of an idealist. I think most of those things should be considered on a case-by-case basis and that the judge's discretion. They should be able to be dismissed after X amount of time.

[DaveTN]

Young people need to know that some things can ruin their lives or careers, such as a DUI or drug charges. The free pass stops when you are no longer a juvenile.

There is a remedy. After a long period of time the law allows for the expungement of charges if the person hasn’t been in any trouble. It doesn’t help in all cases, but for some it does.

However, the state of Tennessee will not restore gun rights if it’s a violent crime or drugs.

[bigwakes]

Play stupid games win stupid prizes. The idea of consequences was the only thing that kept me away from weed and other drugs in college. I was terrified I would ruin my life. That's also what made me stay away from dating girls younger than 18 once I was of age. If we make the consequences less then we would have more people willing to take the chance. Reducing consequences is not the answer.

[1gewehr]

Consequences should match the action. Extended jail periods should be reserved ONLY for those who are danger to society. That is the purpose of jail; to provide a place for people who are a danger to others. It is not a parking lot for anyone who has committed a crime.

Likewise a felony conviction should not be a life sentence as a second-class citizen. I had a friend who smoked marijuana. He bought an ounce of weed (enough to last him a long time) since it was cheaper than buying it a couple of joints at a time. That got him a felony conviction as a 'dealer'. Thirty years later, he still can't own a firearm, but owns a successful business and employs 50 people. I hardly think prohibiting him from owning firearms serves any useful purpose except to disarm another individual.

The linked study shows that in 2010, the number of felons and ex-felons was almost 20 million people. That's 20 million people who have been prohibited for life from owning a firearm. While I have no doubt that there are some folks in that group that nobody wants to have firearms, I would be very surprised if it amounted to 10% of that number. To have a full 7% of the legal population of the country prohibited from ever owning a firearm seems a bit absurd. Unless your goal is to disarm an ever-increasing number of citizens.

http://paa2011.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=111687

[-boatman-]

Yes, some but not all should fall off over time. Still parents need to reinforce to their children that some mistakes will follow them their entire lives.

[DaveTN]

The purpose of jail is punishment and hopefully, for some, rehabilitation. If the purpose was to protect us, people charged with violent crimes would not be allowed bail or released from jail.

If a family member fears you so much they have to call the cops on you, or you are stupid enough to deal in felony amounts of drugs; you don’t have the self-control or mental stability to carry a gun.

If you can convince the court that sentenced you that you deserve to have your felony expunged that option is available to you. And in other states you can get your gun rights back. However, Tennessee still will not restore your gun rights if that felony involves violence or drugs. That has been tested in the courts in this state and there is another case pending now.

Some jobs will even ask if you have ever been arrested, not have you been convicted. They will make the decision if they want you or not based on the situation.

Actions have consequences and they always will. If you don’t want to suffer the consequences; don’t commit the crimes.

[10-Ring]

It just depends. Sex crimes per say I don't think should just "fall off." A 19 year old having sex with a 16 year old, should not be and is not an issue per TN state law. Marijuana itself should just be decriminalized anyway. I find that people that think that marijuana is evil usually have a lot in common with the "guns are evil" crowd, in that they have never been around it. Marijuana users are non violent, and are not prone to steal and vandalize things. The same can not be said for alcohol yet it's not illegal. Due to the nature of the drug of ounces is not going to take out the kingpins. If anything go after the guys that posses pounds of it, they are the ones that are close to the ones who are importing or growing it. If they want to really put a stop to it that's the ones they need to be chasing not a kid with an ounce.

[Guest db99wj]

Yep depends. For non violent, certain type of drugs, I think there should be a deal where in x amount of years, you are able to come to the court, plead your case, show that you screwed up as a young person, but have done this that and the other since then to turn your life around, you are an upstanding citizen that has made amends and the judge would then rule to clear you or not.

[RobertNashville]

Unfortunately, perhaps in an effort to correct the bad decisions of bad judges, we've legislated a lot of the "human touch" out of the justice system - we've replaced common sense with legislated mandatory sentencing.

Most people can look at at the situation above with the now married adults and know instinctively that he shouldn't have to wear the "badge" of a registered sex offender for the rest of his life - we know, instinctively, that two teenagers (even though one was an "adult" and one wasn't of the age of consent in THAT state) is a vastly different situation than a 40 year old raping a 12 year old little girl.

We know that a 20 year old who has a bag of pot on him or who commits some other non-violent crime (albeit a "felony") is different than someone who committed an armed robbery even if the "felonies' are classed the same or nearly the same.

We know the difference but our "law" doesn't, at lest not on a consistent basis anyway.

I do think that 1) After a reasonable period of time, 2) Where the person can demonstrate that he/she is not committing further crimes, and 3) When the original crime was non-violent; a person should be able to get his/her rights restored. At a minimum, if ANY right can be restored (i.e. the right to vote) then it should be possible for ALL/ANY right to be restored, including firearm rights.

[RobertNashville]

The purpose of jail is punishment and hopefully, for some, rehabilitation.

That's true and it's too bad that it is true.

If we kept dangerous criminals locked up our "need' to carry a gun for self-protection would be diminished a great deal...how many times do we read of some horrific crime being committed by someone who has already committed other violent crimes but who are either still or once again on the streets?

I"m getting tired of reading about this grandmother being killed or that cop being killed by some thug with a dozen or prior, serious criminal charges. We'll never be rid of violent criminals but we could put a big dent in their population if we kept them locked up until they were too old or too ill to be a danger to the public.

[Capbyrd]

Nope. I don't care if it was nonviolent or not. I personally believe pot should be legal but under the current system it is not. Everyone knows it but they break the law to partake. You knowingly break the law and are aware of the consequences, you live with it. Period.

[Smith]

Personally, I think there are far too many felonies. If sentencing was carried out, plea bargaining limited to very special circumstances, and early release (parole etc.) limited then you wouldn't need all the extra felony "severity". It's become a way for politicians to claim they are tough on crime. Kinda like when a parent says, "Obey me now! I REALLY mean it this time." The kid knows it's just a threat without much weight.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I do believe there should be a classification for various crimes. Everybody breaks it down between felony and misdemeanor but there should be additional categories or classes based on if it is violent or harms another.

To me an assault or even worse domestic assault is a violent crime but in most jurisdictions they are misdemeanors. While possession of drugs is most times a felony even if the criminal exhibits no violent behavior.

And I agree that with time the criminal classification should drop. Let it drop from the highest level to the lowest level as long as they deserve the drops. And no matter the number of nonviolent offenses they should not move into the same category as a violent offender.

Dolomite

[Guest WyattEarp]

seems to me when when i was in my late teens though my mid twenties i did some dumb stuff, some of which if i would have gotten caught would have been felony charges. nothing violent mind you. but still.

my son who now lives in maryland just got a felony charge ... a drug charge for having a half oz of weed and mistermeanor chages of open container and possation of beer while not of age. he is 19, he is not very smart either... oh wait i am sure you figured that out already.

so now if conviced (2nd time in a year just so you all know) he will be a felon and his life is screwed form here on out.

so my question is after so many years (say 10-20 depending on the crime) should some non voliolent felonies come off of someone's record so they can be truly free amricans with 2nd amendment rights restored?

there are times people do stuiped stuff when they are young and then staigten out once they get crap scared out of them.

my son is a fool and i will just leave it at that but i thought i would use his case as an example. what do you guys really think? i know i am not the same person i was 20 years ago not even 10 years ago for that matter.

I think the states and nation need to re-visit how crimes are classified, and how they are punished.

generally speaking, young people don't understand what they do or the consequences associated with it, to them life is a big game, and while that's not an excuse, they are still learning about themselves, experiencing life, and experimenting with their adolescence and immaturity, but I think crimes of a non-violent nature should be allowed to be removed after a certain period. Corrective action is always needed to correct improper behaviors and actions, but I don't feel these mistakes should haunt them all of their life. Many make a mistake or two, and then learn from it and move on to be productive outstanding and law abiding citizens.

The military has an idea that works in the training phase. If you get in trouble in Basic or AIT, like disobedience, disrespect to an NCO or Officer, you get in a fight with someone in your platoon, you fail a drug test or get caught with some weed, or something of a mostly petty nature, once you complete training, the offenses do not go into your permanent military jacket, instead any disciplinary actions are forever gone, there's no trace, your Commanding Officer can't see them, your Platoon Sergeants and First Sergeants can't see them, they simply cease to exist. Even JAG and higher ranking officials can't see them. This doesn't apply to things like murder, drug distribution, or forcible rape by use of violence or threats of violence.

Youngsters who do petty things, should be given the same leeway. When they're 21, any minor offenses should disappear, and not even be visible to cops or prosecutors.

severe crimes like murder, arson, forced rape (not statutory, unless it's like blatantly obvious...e.g a 20 year old having sex with a 10 year old, but if it's a 15 year old and a 17 or 18 year old, and they're in a relationship, there's really nothing wrong with that in my book. It's kids being kids.

here is yet another example... a friend i work with is 34 now, but when he was 19 he had sex with his then girl friend which was 16 at the time,and in walks her dad... opps, her mom and dad filed charges on him for statutory rape and he is now a felon and regestered sex offener, he and his then girl friend got married when she turned 18 and are still happily married to this day with 3 kids. he has never so much has had a parking ticket other wise.

in the coming next 2 weeks, there will be a story in the Nashville, Murfreesboro and other local media about 4 Riverdale High School (Murfreesboro PD) football players being arrested last Saturday night. The 4 players went to a football game after party, one of the players was 18, and he had sex with his girlfriend who was 16, mom and dad of the girl found out she was having sex and have now pressed charges against him for statutory rape. The other 3 were arrested for fleeing from the police, and a K-9 was used to track them down.

That's BULL****! This is a stupid law that needs to be changed to allow a +/- of 5 years. There is nothing wrong with a 16 year old and an 18 year old dating, having a relationship, and I while I wouldn't want my 16 year old daughter having sex, I know that youngsters do things, they experiment with drugs, they experiment and explore sex and their sexuality, they make mistakes, but if it was my daughter, I couldn't bring myself to file charges and ruin some young kids life no matter what I thought of him. Pressing charges for statutory rape when the age difference is 2 year is ignorant.

What pisses me off, is the parents of this girl are going to ruin an 18 year old boys life, because their daughter and he had consensual sexual intercourse, are in a relationship and they probably don't like him or approve of him, so it's personal. I believe the penalties he faces are a felony charge of statutory rape, up to a $10,000 fine and up to 15 years in prison. and he'll have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. How is there any logic to this?

THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY ****ING SENSE AT ALL! The system will take a kid who was preparing to go off to college and play football, and get an education and have a career, and throw a felony sex offender label on him, for something that many teenagers are doing across this country on a daily basis. 2 years age difference does not constitute felony sex charges, especially when they are dating and it's consensual. Now the kid won't have anything to look forward to, this will haunt him all of his life, and will impact how his life turn's out from here. His name will be plastered all over the internet, his face put on a state registry website for his future neighbors to find, and then jeer and stare at him in some rabid paranoia driven state as if he's about to snatch their children from their front yards and molest them. It'll keep him from getting gainful employment. This kid's life will be ruined.

The reality of the situation is the parents of the girl are pissed that she's as willing to spread her legs as he is, and so they're gonna punish him for it. Teenagers don't have any business having sex at that age, because they don't understand how an unwanted pregnancy or contracting an STD can affect their lives, but sometimes, you gotta pop your titty out of their mouth and let 'em learn from their mistakes on their own and be responsible for their actions. You coddle them and try to protect them from everything, and if you don't allow them to fail and learn from their failures on their own, then they will not know what to do or how to handle it when they do fail later on in life.

The parents of this girl should be ashamed of themselves. You can be good parents, raise your kids right, teach them right and wrong, and they can still do things you don't approve of, and turn out the way you didn't want them to.

considering I work for 2 newspapers, my source is credible and the info is valid, but for some reason this has been kept hush-hush so far and there's not yet a peep about it yet, but anyone can go to the police station and get a listing of the persons arrested last Saturday night. it's public information.

[Guest db99wj]

I think the states and nation need to re-visit how crimes are classified, and how they are punished.

generally speaking, young people don't understand what they do or the consequences associated with it, to them life is a big game, and while that's not an excuse, they are still learning about themselves, experiencing life, and experimenting with their adolescence and immaturity, but I think crimes of a non-violent nature should be allowed to be removed after a certain period. Corrective action is always needed to correct improper behaviors and actions, but I don't feel these mistakes should haunt them all of their life. Many make a mistake or two, and then learn from it and move on to be productive outstanding and law abiding citizens.

The military has an idea that works in the training phase. If you get in trouble in Basic or AIT, like disobedience, disrespect to an NCO or Officer, you get in a fight with someone in your platoon, you fail a drug test or get caught with some weed, or something of a mostly petty nature, once you complete training, the offenses do not go into your permanent military jacket, instead any disciplinary actions are forever gone, there's no trace, your Commanding Officer can't see them, your Platoon Sergeants and First Sergeants can't see them, they simply cease to exist. Even JAG and higher ranking officials can't see them. This doesn't apply to things like murder, drug distribution, or forcible rape by use of violence or threats of violence.

Youngsters who do petty things, should be given the same leeway. When they're 21, any minor offenses should disappear, and not even be visible to cops or prosecutors.

severe crimes like murder, arson, forced rape (not statutory, unless it's like blatantly obvious...e.g a 20 year old having sex with a 10 year old, but if it's a 15 year old and a 17 or 18 year old, and they're in a relationship, there's really nothing wrong with that in my book. It's kids being kids.

in the coming next 2 weeks, there will be a story in the Nashville, Murfreesboro and other local media about 4 Riverdale High School (Murfreesboro PD) football players being arrested last Saturday night. The 4 players went to a football game after party, one of the players was 18, and he had sex with his girlfriend who was 16, mom and dad of the girl found out she was having sex and have now pressed charges against him for statutory rape. The other 3 were arrested for fleeing from the police, and a K-9 was used to track them down.

That's BULL****! This is a stupid law that needs to be changed to allow a +/- of 5 years. There is nothing wrong with a 16 year old and an 18 year old dating, having a relationship, and I while I wouldn't want my 16 year old daughter having sex, I know that youngsters do things, they experiment with drugs, they experiment and explore sex and their sexuality, they make mistakes, but if it was my daughter, I couldn't bring myself to file charges and ruin some young kids life no matter what I thought of him. Pressing charges for statutory rape when the age difference is 2 year is ignorant.

What pisses me off, is the parents of this girl are going to ruin an 18 year old boys life, because their daughter and he had consensual sexual intercourse, are in a relationship and they probably don't like him or approve of him, so it's personal. I believe the penalties he faces are a felony charge of statutory rape, up to a $10,000 fine and up to 15 years in prison. and he'll have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. How is there any logic to this?

THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY ****ING SENSE AT ALL! The system will take a kid who was preparing to go off to college and play football, and get an education and have a career, and throw a felony sex offender label on him, for something that many teenagers are doing across this country on a daily basis. 2 years age difference does not constitute felony sex charges, especially when they are dating and it's consensual. Now the kid won't have anything to look forward to, this will haunt him all of his life, and will impact how his life turn's out from here. His name will be plastered all over the internet, his face put on a state registry website for his future neighbors to find, and then jeer and stare at him in some rabid paranoia driven state as if he's about to snatch their children from their front yards and molest them. It'll keep him from getting gainful employment. This kid's life will be ruined.

The reality of the situation is the parents of the girl are pissed that she's as willing to spread her legs as he is, and so they're gonna punish him for it. Teenagers don't have any business having sex at that age, because they don't understand how an unwanted pregnancy or contracting an STD can affect their lives, but sometimes, you gotta pop your titty out of their mouth and let 'em learn from their mistakes on their own and be responsible for their actions. You coddle them and try to protect them from everything, and if you don't allow them to fail and learn from their failures on their own, then they will not know what to do or how to handle it when they do fail later on in life.

The parents of this girl should be ashamed of themselves. You can be good parents, raise your kids right, teach them right and wrong, and they can still do things you don't approve of, and turn out the way you didn't want them to.

considering I work for 2 newspapers, my source is credible and the info is valid, but for some reason this has been kept hush-hush so far and there's not yet a peep about it yet, but anyone can go to the police station and get a listing of the persons arrested last Saturday night. it's public information.

I read your long post......in the journalism business.....I get it......Oh, I also agree with what your wrote.

One size doesn't fit all in reality.

[Dolomite_supafly]

in the coming next 2 weeks, there will be a story in the Nashville, Murfreesboro and other local media about 4 Riverdale High School (Murfreesboro PD) football players being arrested last Saturday night. The 4 players went to a football game after party, one of the players was 18, and he had sex with his girlfriend who was 16, mom and dad of the girl found out she was having sex and have now pressed charges against him for statutory rape. The other 3 were arrested for fleeing from the police, and a K-9 was used to track them down.

There has to be more to this. It is NOT against the law for a 18 year old to have consensual sex with a 16 year old. Needs to be 4+ years between them to be unlawful. He may have been arrested but he should not have been.

39-13-506. Statutory rape.

(a) Mitigated statutory rape is the unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant, or of the defendant by the victim when the victim is at least fifteen (15) but less than eighteen (18) years of age and the defendant is at least four (4) but not more than five (5) years older than the victim.

( Statutory rape is the unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant or of the defendant by the victim when:

(1) The victim is at least thirteen (13) but less than fifteen (15) years of age and the defendant is at least four (4) years but less than ten (10) years older than the victim; or

(2) The victim is at least fifteen (15) but less than eighteen (18) years of age and the defendant is more than five (5) but less than ten (10) years older than the victim.

© Aggravated statutory rape is the unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant, or of the defendant by the victim when the victim is at least thirteen (13) but less than eighteen (18) years of age and the defendant is at least ten (10) years older than the victim.

(d) (1) Mitigated statutory rape is a Class E felony.

(2) Statutory rape is a Class E felony.

(3) Aggravated statutory rape is a Class D felony.

Dolomite

[DaveTN]

considering I work for 2 newspapers, my source is credible and the info is valid, but for some reason this has been kept hush-hush so far and there's not yet a peep about it yet, but anyone can go to the police station and get a listing of the persons arrested last Saturday night. it's public information.

What does the public information say the charges were?

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

I agree that there should be some kind of new way of classifying crimes.

Those that are non violent should be treated different than those that are.....that is after all only common sense.

And for heavens sake my first wife was only 16 when we got married, I was 19. She did turn 17 less than a month later but she was indeed only 16 when we said "I Do" and it was not because we had to. Years and years ago people married even younger and those were the people who helped build the country in which we now live.

We can all sit back and say that kids that age should not be having sex at that age and I certainly dont wish for my daughter to marry so young, or my sons either for that matter. But I also know that this stuff goes on everyday and will continue to so long as there is a human race. A parent can only do so much.

I also feel that alcohol is much more dangerous than weed and that weed should be made legal for adults. Keeping people locked up and or labled over things like weed and consensual sex with only a few years difference in age is just crazy. Then again a whole lot of things in this world dont make much sense anymore.

So Yes IMO some felonies should go away over time and ALL a persons rights should be restored.

[peejman]

Regarding the statutory rape thing... if it was consensual sex, either they both should get charged or neither one does.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Regarding the statutory rape thing... if it was consensual sex, either they both should get charged or neither one does.

+1

Dolomite

[Guest WyattEarp]

There has to be more to this. It is NOT against the law for a 18 year old to have consensual sex with a 16 year old. Needs to be 4+ years between them to be unlawful. He may have been arrested but he should not have been.

Dolomite

Interesting, was not aware of this, and maybe who i heard it from didnt know either. There may be indeed more to this.

[Guest WyattEarp]

What does the public information say the charges were?

I havent seen the report.

[Dolomite_supafly]

What may have happened is the girl, faced with the wraith of her parents, lied to her parents and said he raped her. It won't be the first time a young girl has claimed to have been raped to avoid the punishment from parents. Or maybe the girl was pressured by her parents to claim it was something more than it was. Or maybe the boy did rape her against her will. Perhaps things got too heated for the boy to stop when asked to.

Hard to say without seeing an actual police report.

Dolomite