I started this petition. Hopefully it will help regain some of the 2nd Amendment

[Guest CCI]

[quote name='maroonandwhite' timestamp='1352920801' post='845611']
I didn't get a chance to check out the link before it was removed but I can't imagine anyone wanting to support this guy if he in fact plead guilty to DV. I support the decision by Dolomite on this one. It does say in the code of conduct that the staff has the final say so......

Not saying I agree with the views on the rights being stripped but I would not support anyone who plead guilty having their rights restored. Pleading innocent and being convicted is another story and I really don't know what I think about that scenario.
[/quote]
It's not just one individual! It's 170,000 men who are banned for life, from possession, and ownership of any fire arm! Many states have laws that impose a mandatory 10 year ban! Lautenberg is for life, due to a misdemeanor conviction!

[wewoapsiak]

[quote name='Dolomite_supafly' timestamp='1352920263' post='845602']Because I am not going to support anything that improves the life of an abuser.

Hit the report button if you feel that strongly about it.

Dolomite[/quote]

Honestly I could care less if you supported midgets wearing drag, teaching sex ed at schools. And I don't see the point of reporting moderators to another moderator. I just feel that you involved emotions and you lost your objectivity in your decision to remove his link.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Xparent Red Tapatalk 2

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='wewoapsiak' timestamp='1352922374' post='845626']
Honestly I could care less if you supported midgets wearing drag, teaching sex ed at schools. And I don't see the point of reporting moderators to another moderator. I just feel that you involved emotions and you lost your objectivity in your decision to remove his link.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Xparent Red Tapatalk 2
[/quote]I reported it...it's my understanding that the "report" goes to all moderators and, hopefully, it might at least generate a little discussion and perhaps a better explanation of what was wrong with the OP posting the link.

I agree, and I mean no disrespect to Dolomite, but it sounded to me as if the decision to remove the link was made on emotion rather than a concrete reason/violation of TOS, etc.

If it's reasonable and IAW TOS to, for example, discuss the pros/cons of restoration of rights to convicted felons, then we ought to be able to discuss the pros/cons of restoration of rights of someone convicted of a misdemeanor.

[Dolomite_supafly]

[quote name='Spots' timestamp='1352920966' post='845615']
Whether or not we agree with the subject, without him violating a specific rule, deleting the post on a board the encourages personal freedom and speaking for what you believe in is very disturbing to me. While I don't believe in the hurting or touching a woman in any violent or non consensual manner, I saw a lot of consensual sex get turned into rape cases if they got caught in the barracks when I was in. I have seen all to often how quickly a scorned woman can ruin a mans life and career when he did nothing wrong.
[/quote]

And if the accused plead guilty or was found guilty then they are guilty. We have a legal system and as fouled up as it may seem at times it is the law. I met all kinds of criminals that proclaimed their innocence. Now I will say on rare occassions that the innocent are wrongly found guilty but it is a rarity and not the norm. All those who were brought before their command had the option of trial by court martial but they chose to accept their punishment at the company level.

[quote name='CCI' timestamp='1352920521' post='845608']
It is you choice not to support that! But you are denying others their choice of supporting it, or not!
[/quote]

Go find the petition and and show your support for it. I am not denying you the ability to support it.

Dolomite

[Spots]

[quote name='Dolomite_supafly' timestamp='1352922862' post='845632']
And if the accused plead guilty or was found guilty then they are guilty. We have a legal system and as fouled up as it may seem at times it is the law. I met all kinds of criminals that proclaimed their innocence. Now I will say on rare occassions that the innocent are wrongly found guilty but it is a rarity and not the norm. All those who were brought before their command had the option of trial by court martial but they chose to accept their punishment at the company level.



Go find the petition and and show your support for it. I am not denying you the ability to support it.

Dolomite
[/quote]

I'm not discussing the rights or wrongs of the crime. I'm simply asking what rule the post violated? If it didn't violate a specific rule, then why was it deleted?

[Guest CCI]

[quote name='Dolomite_supafly' timestamp='1352922862' post='845632']
And if the accused plead guilty or was found guilty then they are guilty. We have a legal system and as fouled up as it may seem at times it is the law. I met all kinds of criminals that proclaimed their innocence. Now I will say on rare occassions that the innocent are wrongly found guilty but it is a rarity and not the norm. All those who were brought before their command had the option of trial by court martial but they chose to accept their punishment at the company level.



Go find the petition and and show your support for it. I am not denying you the ability to support it.

Dolomite
[/quote]

Thank you very much, and I honestly and truely mean that! CCI


Link removed Edited November 14, 2012 by CCI

[maroonandwhite]

[quote name='CCI' timestamp='1352921504' post='845621']
It's not just one individual! It's 170,000 men who are banned for life, from possession, and ownership of any fire arm! Many states have laws that impose a mandatory 10 year ban! Lautenberg is for life, due to a misdemeanor conviction!
[/quote]

Thanks CCI for clearing that up. I just browsed the site and didn't really see anything wrong about it. I still stand by my statement regard those who pleaded guilty but I realize that some people are wrongfully convicted of domestic violence and other crimes.

It didn't bother me that it was removed though so I don't guess I have a dog in this fight.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='Dolomite_supafly' timestamp='1352922862' post='845632']And if the accused plead guilty or was found guilty then they are guilty.[/quote]

I know that's not what we are talking about here but when I read a line like that I can't help think of the people who have been found guilty of rape or even of murder and sentenced to death then later, with DNA evidence not available when there were tried and convicted, showed that the guilty were not guilty at all.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I also posted this Robert
"Now I will say on rare occassions that the innocent are wrongly found guilty but it is a rarity and not the norm. "

Dolomite

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='Dolomite_supafly' timestamp='1352925192' post='845662']
I also posted this Robert
"Now I will say on rare occassions that the innocent are wrongly found guilty but it is a rarity and not the norm. "

Dolomite
[/quote]I know...but every time a person is wrongfully convicted (and often even just accused) their life can become a nightmare and may never be the same.

I don't have an answer for that but I still hate that it happens.

[E4 No More]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352924981' post='845659']
I know that's not what we are talking about here but when I read a line like that I can't help think of the people who have been found guilty of rape or even of murder and sentenced to death then later, with DNA evidence not available when there were tried and convicted, showed that the guilty were not guilty at all.
[/quote]This!!^^ It is not as rare as Dolomite suggests. Lying cops and prosecutorial misconduct have been pretty rampant over the decades. Not saying all do it, but as a former LEO I saw and talked to many who had no problem telling a lie under oath to get a conviction. Their logic was that if the criminal can lie then so can they. Seeing this was just one of the reasons that I got burned out!

[MacGyver]

Who's going to listen to your argument and do something with this petition?

Even if by some act of God you advance past the 11 votes you've got as of now and make it to the 25,000 signatures required to advance it to a mailbox no one actually reads, who do you expect to take up your banner? Find me one politician in 2012 who's going to go on the record and say, "I'd like to sponsor a bill restoring gun rights to people convicted of domestic violence." Their opponents wouldn't even need to make commercials about their record, they'd just play the tape of their comments.

I agree that there are several problems with Lautenberg. Whether you consider it a 2nd Amendment issue, a 10th Amendment issue, or simply the fact that in many cases it's been applied ex post facto - there are a lot of Constitutional problems with it. It deserves to have it's day in court, and in fact the 7th Circuit heard a case on it recently and reversed a conviction.

If you want to be involved in overturning this law, there are paths to do that. Get involved. This petition, however may as well be spitting in the wind.

I'm closing this thread because of the above reasons. To all of you who are reporting this thread on both sides of the issue, I'll just say that we give our moderators a fair bit of leeway in making decisions abot what's appropriate and what's not. That's part of the reason they're here.