To revise my statement, once someone is deemed to have paid their time/debt, they should have full rights restored. The question should be: should we determine whether an individual is a menace to society before we release them? It makes no sense to release them and defy them the right to be armed, because they will do as they wish anyway. Example: A felon is released. Someone else may threaten him, so he decides to get a gun for self defense. The threat may or may not occur. In both scenarios, before or after an occurrence, if he is found armed he goes back to prison. Is it really fair? We can't assume that his having the gun will be to commit a crime. IMO, once someone threatens or shoots another while committing a crime, should get the death penalty, period. If someone commits a brutal(enough to warrant great harm and possible death) act without a gun, during a crime, should get the death penalty. On the other hand, there are numerous felonies that don't constitute a viable threat and should not remove ones rights once they have paid their time/debt.
