Should there be harsher penalties for illegal gun possession?

Rune said:
If they are carrying illegal guns, yes of course.
You disagree?

FYI in Mass, possession of any type of gun witjout a permit is a mandatory year in jail and has been for 30 years.
Click to expand...

what's an illegal gun?
why is a permit required for a constitutionally protected right?
 
cawacko said:
unless your position allows murders to continue at the current pace in which case we also know who is hurt the most; #winningrevoked
Click to expand...

That's a big unless. Show me that delta in body count. Show me with a longitudinal study controlling for all other variables that the one year bullet in county or state lockup for possession without any priors for technical vio of possession versus the body count with my fine and forced registration alternative. And keep in mind a person who would be unable to register due to say gang priors or whatever else, mental condition, conservancy, would not get a weapon. Prove it.

Win maintained.
 
Rune said:
If one is convicted of a violent crime one should not be able to carry a handgun.

Permitting is the only way to know.

I don't want convicted felons carrying guns. Do you?
Click to expand...

I agree, but it is a thorny question solely because the stupid right is enshrined as constitutional. It would be a better world if it was simply a privilege like driving a car. For example, should we live in a world where free speech is deprived convicted felons? Press? Peaceful assemby? It is SOLELY because of the equal footing as to other constitutional rights that gun ownership enjoys that we cannot control the propblem of gun violence. Not eliminate, but greatly control. Imagine how nice it would be. Think of all the innocent dead who would be alive now if rightards didn't have the constitutional error in their favor. Mistakes were made. None mor elarge than the 2nd.
 
Rune said:
If one is convicted of a violent crime one should not be able to carry a handgun.

Permitting is the only way to know.

I don't want convicted felons carrying guns. Do you?
Click to expand...
permitting does not stop those with intent. never has, never will. all a permit law does is cause a burden on the otherwise law abiding citizen.
 
Micawber said:
That's a big unless. Show me that delta in body count. Show me with a longitudinal study controlling for all other variables that the one year bullet in county or state lockup for possession without any priors for technical vio of possession versus the body count with my fine and forced registration alternative. And keep in mind a person who would be unable to register due to say gang priors or whatever else, mental condition, conservancy, would not get a weapon. Prove it.

Win maintained.
Click to expand...

are you saying that gun registration stops gun violence??????
 
Micawber said:
I agree, but it is a thorny question solely because the stupid right is enshrined as constitutional. It would be a better world if it was simply a privilege like driving a car. For example, should we live in a world where free speech is deprived convicted felons? Press? Peaceful assemby? It is SOLELY because of the equal footing as to other constitutional rights that gun ownership enjoys that we cannot control the propblem of gun violence. Not eliminate, but greatly control. Imagine how nice it would be. Think of all the innocent dead who would be alive now if rightards didn't have the constitutional error in their favor. Mistakes were made. None mor elarge than the 2nd.
Click to expand...

you do realize that it's classical liberalism that enshrined that right to arms, do you not?
 
Micawber said:
I agree, but it is a thorny question solely because the stupid right is enshrined as constitutional. It would be a better world if it was simply a privilege like driving a car. For example, should we live in a world where free speech is deprived convicted felons? Press? Peaceful assemby? It is SOLELY because of the equal footing as to other constitutional rights that gun ownership enjoys that we cannot control the propblem of gun violence. Not eliminate, but greatly control. Imagine how nice it would be. Think of all the innocent dead who would be alive now if rightards didn't have the constitutional error in their favor. Mistakes were made. None mor elarge than the 2nd.
Click to expand...

I don't see it as thorny.
Get convicted kof a violent felony, lose some rights
 
cawacko said:
Was reading this article on homicides in Baltimore and saw this tidbit on a proposed one year sentence for illegal gun possession. Was curious if those who are "pro" and "anti" guns would share the same sentiment towards it.




Mayor Pugh, a Democrat who took office in December, is pushing for a mandatory one-year sentence for illegal handgun possession within 100 yards of a school, church, park, public building or other public place of assembly—a description that would cover much of the city. The proposal has drawn criticism from some City Council members who question whether it would deter criminals.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/baltimore-homicide-rate-has-officials-pointing-fingers-1500807605
Click to expand...

If liberals actually wanted to do something about the drugs and gun violence in THEIR inner cities of course they would advocate tougher sentencing, but instead they cry for more lenient sentencing, allow these thugs to return to the streets.

You want to end gun violence

You get 6 months to turn in your illegal weapons.

After that if you get caught with an illegal weapon, ANYWHERE, never mind near a church or school, ANYWHERE, mandatory 10 years no parole.
You get caught in the commission of a felony with a firearm, 25 years mandatory, no parole,

you shoot someone with an illegal firearm, life no parole.
PROBLEM SOLVED
 
cawacko said:
Was reading this article on homicides in Baltimore and saw this tidbit on a proposed one year sentence for illegal gun possession. Was curious if those who are "pro" and "anti" guns would share the same sentiment towards it.




Mayor Pugh, a Democrat who took office in December, is pushing for a mandatory one-year sentence for illegal handgun possession within 100 yards of a school, church, park, public building or other public place of assembly—a description that would cover much of the city. The proposal has drawn criticism from some City Council members who question whether it would deter criminals.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/baltimore-homicide-rate-has-officials-pointing-fingers-1500807605
Click to expand...

there should be no such thing as illegal gun possession. so no.
 
Micawber said:
Possession alone of anything other than a nuclear, chemical or biological contraband should not be jailable unless you are dealing with multiple priors or presumed saleable quantities.

Race not an issue, cwack. More to the point, if an illegal gun possession is that it's a convicted felon who has no right to possess, you can jail the guy for violating that. If its just a man with a gun and the sale was illegal, my penalty is requiring him to register the weapon and do the background check or its confiscated, no jail. Maybe a fine for our costs.
Click to expand...

i think i've misjudged you.
 
callinectes said:
What are they doing now if they catch someone illegally possessing a firearm? How difficult is it to legally own and carry a firearm in Maryland? If you jump through all the hoops to own and carry a firearm legally, then owning and carrying a firearm illegally should be punishable by at least 5 years in prison without parole, black, white, brown, yellow or purple. Expedited permission should be granted to victims of domestic violence and other crimes of that nature.
Click to expand...

you can jump through all the hoops to be legal, but then when they say you can't be within 100 feet of a park, church, school, gazebo, arby's restaurant, you are pretty much banned from having it everywhere. which is bullshit and a violation of the 2nd amendment, in which our right to bear arms shall not be infringed. it's an underhanded way to violate our rights
 
SmarterthanYou said:
what's an illegal gun?
why is a permit required for a constitutionally protected right?
Click to expand...

it's like if we needed permits to criticize the government. liberals would claim it doesn't violate the first amendment because anyone can get a permit provided they follow the proper procedure.

So then we can go to our town mayor to apply for the special permit, but then they can deny us if they feel we don't have a legitimate reason for the speech permit.

that's how they do it in mass
 
cawacko said:
Was reading this article on homicides in Baltimore and saw this tidbit on a proposed one year sentence for illegal gun possession. Was curious if those who are "pro" and "anti" guns would share the same sentiment towards it.




Mayor Pugh, a Democrat who took office in December, is pushing for a mandatory one-year sentence for illegal handgun possession within 100 yards of a school, church, park, public building or other public place of assembly—a description that would cover much of the city. The proposal has drawn criticism from some City Council members who question whether it would deter criminals.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/baltimore-homicide-rate-has-officials-pointing-fingers-1500807605
Click to expand...

Absolutely, unequivocally and emphatically .... NO.

There is no doubt in my mind that on occasion I have been in violation of the law where I've carried. One time I went to visit a member of our congregation in the hospital and forgot about my firearm until I was 2 floors up. I turned around and went to my truck and made things right but it would be ridiculous to jail someone for that and things similar....which is what this law would potentially do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top