Pelosi introduces bill to give vote to all FELONS nationwide.

Legion said:
What does the applicable state law say? Is there a a "time line" where your anonymous "friend" can prove their "worth" to regain their rights?

And, yes, if he is in possession of firearms illegally you are under an obligation to report that fact to the authorities. Failure to do so could make you an accessory if he commits a related felony. Not every state makes it a crime not to report a crime, but it is still every citizen’s responsibility to do so. If you know a felon has possession of a firearm, you should inform the police.
Click to expand...

You are aware that it was dems who introduced (and continue to introduce) gun control laws limiting firearm ownership when years ago they were not breaking the law?
And no, I would not even consider ruining my friend's life when he has proven he is a responsible and productive citizen after all these years.

Again, answer my question.
 
RB 60 said:
I would not even consider ruining my friend's life when he has proven he is a responsible and productive citizen after all these years.

Again, answer my question.
Click to expand...

Aiding and abetting, eh?

Unless I know more about this anonymous "friend" of yours, I cannot speak to the applicable statutory jurisdiction.

Generally, any person who has been convicted of a felony cannot possess a firearm unless the conviction is vacated, overturned, or dismissed, or the felon is pardoned.

Restoring a felon's right to possess a firearm under state law does not automatically mean the felon's right to possess firearms has been restored under federal law, BTW.
 
RB 60 said:
That's not always true. Some actually do come to their senses, live prosperous lives and vote accordingly. The friend I mentioned above is a conservative.
Click to expand...

There isn't an exemption for "conservatives" or "friends" in the law that I'm aware of, nor should there be.
 
Legion said:
DEMOCRATS are highly selective in their stance regarding the rule of law, aren't they?

If allowing criminals to flout the law seems to benefit DEMOCRATS, they don't want that law enforced.

But if applying a law furthers their lust for power, they become vigilant upholders of the law instantly.
Click to expand...


That is very true. Of course to be fair, the GOP is no less hypocritical. Personally, I don't agree with someone who commits a crime losing their rights forever. And I don't know of any good reason republicans have for being against this other than they think ex felons will vote for democrats. Conversely, I don't believe that democrats believe in this as a moral issue, they just believe they have the felon vote locked up.

I remember when the democrat party opposed illegal immigration because their belief was that hispanics being overwhelmingly catholic and pro life would vote Republican. They also thought they would be like the Cuban vote. So they wanted to keep them out.

Both sides really do suck mouse dick
 
Legion said:
Aiding and abetting, eh?

Unless I know more about this anonymous "friend" of yours, I cannot speak to the applicable statutory jurisdiction.

Generally, any person who has been convicted of a felony cannot possess a firearm unless the conviction is vacated, overturned, or dismissed, or the felon is pardoned.

Restoring a felon's right to possess a firearm under state law does not automatically mean the felon's right to possess firearms has been restored under federal law, BTW.
Click to expand...

Call it what you will. I would never turn him in.
Again, do you think a person can redeem himself enough to have his rights reinstated? Answer my question.
 
I Love America said:
That is very true. Of course to be fair, the GOP is no less hypocritical. Personally, I don't agree with someone who commits a crime losing their rights forever. And I don't know of any good reason republicans have for being against this other than they think ex felons will vote for democrats. Conversely, I don't believe that democrats believe in this as a moral issue, they just believe they have the felon vote locked up.

I remember when the democrat party opposed illegal immigration because their belief was that hispanics being overwhelmingly catholic and pro life would vote Republican. They also thought they would be like the Cuban vote. So they wanted to keep them out.

Both sides really do suck mouse dick
Click to expand...

You make some fair points.

There really is no way around the fact that the laws must be obeyed in a just society if we are to live under the rule of law.

It's sad that some otherwise sensible people seem to "feel" that it's OK for someone they like to violate the law.
 
RB 60 said:
Call it what you will. I would never turn him in. Again, do you think a person can redeem himself enough to have his rights reinstated? Answer my question.
Click to expand...

I call it what a prosecutor is likely to call it if it ever comes to light in the investigation of a crime.

What I "think" is that the laws were enacted by duly-elected representatives of the people, and those who knowingly violate the law are at risk of prosecution, regardless of anyone's "feelings" about said person.

If you want "redemption" for your anonymous "friend," work with your elected officials to enact the necessary legislation, or petition your governor for a pardon.
 
I Love America said:
That is very true. Of course to be fair, the GOP is no less hypocritical. Personally, I don't agree with someone who commits a crime losing their rights forever. And I don't know of any good reason republicans have for being against this other than they think ex felons will vote for democrats. Conversely, I don't believe that democrats believe in this as a moral issue, they just believe they have the felon vote locked up.

I remember when the democrat party opposed illegal immigration because their belief was that hispanics being overwhelmingly catholic and pro life would vote Republican. They also thought they would be like the Cuban vote. So they wanted to keep them out.

Both sides really do suck mouse dick
Click to expand...

Depends on what the crime is. Certain choices that produce life-based results should affect the one making the choice for life.
 
Legion said:
I call it what a prosecutor is likely to call it if it ever comes to light in the investigation of a crime.

What I "think" is that the laws were enacted by duly-elected representatives of the people, and those who knowingly violate the law are at risk of prosecution, regardless of anyone's "feelings" about said person.

If you want "redemption" for your anonymous "friend," work with your elected officials to enact the necessary legislation, or petition your governor for a pardon.
Click to expand...

So then you are for more gun control laws? Hell, Schumer, Pelosi and Waters would love you!
 
RB 60 said:
Just a question dog...
Back just after I graduated from HS, a friend/classmate was "set up" (by an asshole who was busted for DUI) and sold a 1/4 lb. of weed (a felony) to an informant. He did a stint in prison and after his release he got a job at a service station, married, had 2 kids and ultimately bought his own auto repair shop (which he still operates today). Other than maybe a speeding ticket or two, hasn't been arrested for anything since.
My question is, should that be held against him for the remainder of his life? Should I turn him in for owning a few guns he inherited from his father?

Myself, back when I was 20, I got busted for eluding a police officer (back then it wasn't a felony, today it is). I've had 2 minor traffic violations since (running a stop sign and speeding). If it was a felony back then, I probably couldn't have landed 1 or 2 of the good jobs I've had, become a very successful hunter, firearms instructor or bought the military rifles I used in hi-power rifle competitions.

My point is, not all felons are violent or repeat offenders, many do learn from their mistakes and become productive citizens. Do you think there should be a "time line" where someone can prove their "worth" to regain their rights? Myself, I think they should.
Click to expand...

RB, my understanding is that a Felon is only banned from voting in the State that he committed the crime ... if that State has a law banning ex-con voting. And that an ex-con can simply move to anther State to have regain his voting rights.

On a side note, WV does ban ex-cons from voting and has the lowest recidivism rate in the nation.

The ex-con gun rights debate deserves its own thread. And No, I don't think you are under any obligation to turn your friend in if he wants to accept the risks of illegal ownership.
 
RB 60 said:
So then you are for more gun control laws? Hell, Schumer, Pelosi and Waters would love you!
Click to expand...

If that's what you think I said, I can't reason with you.

My belief is that there should be NO "gun control laws", because the Second Amendment is part of the supreme law of the land. Any legislation that abridges the right to bear arms is therefore unconstitutional, in my view.

Having said that, I live in the real world, and accept the fact that until my views become legally binding, I am bound to obey all applicable statues currently in force.
 
Bigdog said:
RB, my understanding is that a Felon is only banned from voting in the State that he committed the crime ... if that State has a law banning ex-con voting. And that an ex-con can simply move to anther State to have regain his voting rights.

On a side note, WV does ban ex-cons from voting and has the lowest recidivism rate in the nation.

The ex-con gun rights debate deserves its own thread. And No, I don't think you are under any obligation to turn your friend in if he wants to accept the risks of illegal ownership.
Click to expand...

Here in PA, after a felon has served his time, he can re re-register to vote. Myself, I don't know if the conviction (pertaining to voting rights) follows him to another state.

Yes, I do agree that the ex felon gun rights debate is a good one for another thread.
That said, what are your thoughts on the subject? Do you think one can, after time, prove their responsibility (if they haven't committed a violent felony) and have their gun rights restored?
 
CFM said:
Depends on what the crime is. Certain choices that produce life-based results should affect the one making the choice for life.
Click to expand...

I disagree. While they are in prison? Yes.

Once they have paid their debt to society, it is paid. They should have ALL rights restored. That being said, I am an advocate for the death penalty for particularly heinous crimes so in my world it would be a moot point
 
Legion said:
It seems to have made you react emotionally, which was not my intent.

I suspect that the "asking for a friend" scenario is in play, so I'll just drop it.
Click to expand...

I wasn't " asking for a friend," just wondering what you thought of reinstating a person's firearm right if he can prove he's responsible enough.
 
I Love America said:
I disagree. While they are in prison? Yes.

Once they have paid their debt to society, it is paid. They should have ALL rights restored. That being said, I am an advocate for the death penalty for particularly heinous crimes so in my world it would be a moot point
Click to expand...

Then by all means work with your elected officials to make that happen legally. That's the only way change can come about in a society governed by the rule of law.
 
RB 60 said:
I wasn't " asking for a friend," just wondering what you thought of reinstating a person's firearm right if he can prove he's responsible enough.
Click to expand...

I "think" that legislation making that possible can be worked for. I know that flouting the existing law is not something I can condone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top