John King

Although I disagree with your premise, I do understand your position!

I think it is important to remember that in those days, a firearm was as important as a horse . . . and they hung horse thieves! In today's society, we don't have to be on guard as much as they did back then. But, at the heart of the 2nd amendment . . . it has more to do with defending the country against tyranny and despotism . . . against enemies from without . . . and within!

To me, it boils down to what kind of crime one is in prison for. Murder is an extreme case and I'd not like to see firearms in their hands. But, one could argue that there is many means of murder . . . knifes, baseball bats, fire, running someone over with a car . . . only the imagination holds one back.

It has been a kind of cognitive dissonance . . . how to maintain the 2nd amendment rights and insure the safety of the masses! It really boils down to the character of the person in question . . . is this person rehabilitated to a level of acceptability? Is this person still pron to murder?

Then we have the person in prison for manslaughter. The death was an accident . . . not an act of malice or anger . . . something that just happened and sorrow and remorse is evident. Should this person have their 2nd amendment rights suspended? No! The real issue is treating those that fall under a certain category all the same . . . a felon is not just a felon . . . the time has to fit the crime. The idea of treating felons all the same is wrong!

In my opinion, you have brought up a relevant and worthwhile topic. Perhaps you could create a new topic about this!!!!

jeff smith

well ,well ,well .
why not ? I know a few criminals . I trust them to v**e AND I would trust them with the ownership of a firearm . BUT our system of rules prohibit them from owning a firearm . I personally think that if a person is convicted of any crime that had no weapon of any kind, and released from prison and released from parole , ALL of their rights should be reinstated . if your debt to society has been fulfilled then all rights restored . taking away some ones rights after fulfilling a debt is just another way of control . extended punishment . I am not talking about people who use weapons during a crime . I also do not think that a person still incarcerated should ever be permitted to v**e .

jeff smith

all felons DO NOT V**E FOR THE BIMBOCRTIC PARTY .

jeff smith

if the course was a success to the individual . why deny the person their rights ? individual bases for denying a person their rights . if the course was for show an tell to the court system . again individual bases .

Ricktloml

Reasonable

Reaper13

I would be wasting my time. I did something stupid 30 years ago. Since then I have coach youth hockey, received an award from the mayor, went to school and obtained my national heavy equipment operator license. My wife and I make turkey meal for the homeless on thanksgiving. Numerous other acts of kindness. I still will not win. The 2nd does not say unless a felon. What ever law made against the 2nd is unconstitutional. There would need to an amendment to the 2nd stating said reasons for me not to get my rights back.

Big dog

👍👍👍

John King

First, can we agree that going to prison results in the lose of some of the constitutional rights of the individual?!? They take everything you have on you . . . your clothes, your watch, sometimes your glasses . . . even your name is replaced with a number! They tell you when and what you can eat . . . . when you can sleep and how long . . . if you can touch your visitor . . . so many rights we take for granted on the outside!

The guy who robbed a bank . . . NOT WITH ANY WEAPON AT ALL . . . is now a felon because robbing a bank is a federal offense! I was once charged with driving while revoked . . . . because I kept driving under a suspension and after being caught 5 times driving! This is classified as a felon . . . driving while revoked . . . and my bail was $100,000, and more than anybody in the holding tank, more than the guy who had beat up 3 guys in a bar . . . my "crime" didn't hurt anyone, yet my bail is 3 to 10 times more than anyone else in that holding tank simply because my crime was classified a felony!

I am making the point that NOT ALL felons deserve to be classified as a felon! That point needs to be addressed before any other decision can be made as to how we treat felons when they get out . . . as well as while they are in! The constitution declares that we CAN have our possessions taken . . . we CAN be held to answer for a capital crime . . . we CAN be deprived of life, liberty, and property . . . all to be done with due cause and binding justification! So, YES WE CAN lose some of our "rights" as most of us understand them today. My point is not all classified as felons should be classified as felons!


But, to address the issue of treating all felons the same . . . until there is some kind of way we differentiate the term in a kind of classification, they all will be treated the same . . . a felon is a felon until otherwise notified! So . . . does a murderer get the same rights revoked as a bank robber who never used a weapon . . . yes, and rightly so! Because, under current standards, a felon is a felon . . . and that's what we currently have to deal with! This "title" sticks with us for the rest of our lives . . . and the results of our actions do also!

If Charlie Manson could have been released . . . would it then be appropriate to restore his right to bear arms? Not just no . . . but HELL NO!!! But, should he be able to v**e . . . there is no question about that to me . . . yes he should be able to v**e!

woodguru

And now lets deal with those who should be barred from owning guns, those with anger management issues, those with domestic violence issues, those with restraining orders, those with psychological issues, those with social media red f**gs, those with ties to d******c t*******t h**e group affiliations....

They can v**e, they just shouldn't have guns.

John King

Let's not and say we did!