Losing the right to be able to buy guns for the rest of your life.

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by Anders Hoveland, Nov 7, 2014.

  1. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So apparently the Second Amendment only protects your right to keep guns, not to buy them. At least according to the American government today.

    It's also interesting how the federal government's interpretation of "the Power to regulate commerce among the States" in the Constitution keeps ever expanding...

    But should people who have been convicted of a felony at some time in their past be banned for the rest of their life from ever being able to buy a gun?
    Keep in mind that nowadays all sorts of things have become classified as "felonies", not necessarily just all the really bad crimes. Were you 18 years old and had consensual sex with your 17 year girlfriend in high school?

    In some states, if you get caught drinking alcohol while driving three times it's a felony. You don't even have to have alcohol in the car the second and third time, they just have to detect alcohol in a breath analyzer test. That means you could have just drunk a cup of beer at a party, drove off in your car, and then got pulled over. Felony.

    You could have mistakenly purchased a gun without properly filling out the right paperwork. Sometimes the law can be ambiguous and complex. Felony.
    http://lightfromtheright.com/2014/01/23/supreme-court-determine-validity-straw-man-gun-sales/

    Even just making your own gun is a felony, if you have not gotten a registration permit first. So you could be banned for the rest of your life from ever being able to buy a gun, because you made a gun. How does that make any sense?

    You don't even have to be convicted yet by a jury to be banned from legally buying guns. In the Gun Control Act passed in 1968, 18 U.S.C. 922 (d), there is a provision banning gun purchase if you are under indictment. That means if the government thinks you committed a crime.

    And a lot of people who are arrested just plead guilty to crimes they did not commit when they cannot come up with bail money. To get a fair trial they would have to sit 9-18 months in jail, or they could just take a prosecutor's plea bargain (when the evidence is really flimsy, or the crime is not really that bad) and just be sentenced to 6 months in jail, without having to worry about the possibility of a much longer sentence. It happens all the time. Someone else hides drugs in your home and the police get a tip off. Or you are an accountant and your employer has been running a scam, unknown to you.

    So first it is "felons". Which group of people will it be next?
    2.4% of the adults in the U.S.A. have felony convictions, that's a fairly significant number of people. Seems like they're throwing out felony convictions right and left, looking for any excuse.

    And once you get a felony, you have to get "permission" from someone higher up to have your rights restored. It does not happen automatically, even 10 years after the fact. Those convicted of a federal felony have to file a petition with a special Attorney office in the Department of Justice. There is a minimum waiting period of 5 years after the sentence. And these petitions to be allowed to buy guns again are not automatically granted. It's not just violent former criminals who are having their petitions denied. There have been all sorts of lawsuits over this: http://articles.philly.com/2000-09-27/news/25581675_1_felons-gun-privileges-third-circuit
     
  2. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    64,255
    Likes Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    113
    some states ban people from voting for life, if they have been convicted of a felony
     
  3. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, but this is about federal law. That means anywhere in the U.S.A you go.

    At least with states passing laws, if the laws get too restrictive in one state people can get up and go move to another state if things are bad enough.
     
  4. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    64,255
    Likes Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    113
    GOP now rules Congress, they can change the law.

    along with finally passing CCW reciprocity.
     
  5. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I doubt they will. The GOP might support gun ownership, but many of them still want to exert control over who has guns. It's definitely not a Libertarian mindset.
     
  6. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    64,255
    Likes Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    113
    GOP almost passed CCW reciprocity a year ago.

    though i don't know how i feel about it, as some states barely care who has can conceal carry.

    i support nation-wide CCW only if all states have some minimum requirements.

    like an exhaustive background check, interview, safety test & exam, and 5-year renewal
     
  7. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    6,485
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Full faith and Credit. 'Nuff said.
     
  8. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Some states don't like guns. The federal government should not be telling them what to do. (not unless the state has passed some extremely oppressive law)

    A state might have passed terrible laws, but the voting people of that state need to work out the problems themselves. Otherwise you get a single government telling everyone what they have to do, and if there are bad laws there is nowhere else you can go.
     
  9. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It ain't a frickin privilege!!!!!!!!!!! WTF??? and this from an attorney??? he needs to have his license revoked until he knows the difference from a Right and privilege ...............it'll damned sure make him a better attorney
     
  10. Greataxe

    Greataxe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    8,644
    Likes Received:
    967
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What would the Founding Fathers have done to the same hardcore felons that rape, rob, murder, torture and kidnap back 200 years ago??

    Would they have put them in jail a few years to send them back to prey on the population again and again?

    Or would they have straightened them out once and for all with a rope, so they wouldn't have to worry about them getting a gun?
     
  11. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But the point is that a large portion of these so-called "felons" did not really do anything that bad. With more and more laws being passed every year, an ever increasing number of things are becoming classified as felonies.

    Do you think the founding fathers would have approved of someone banned from owning a gun for the rest of their life just because they bought a gun without following the necessary laws to do so?

    Or should they be banned from buying a gun just because they accidentally forgot a gun case in the back of their car and drove through another state where it is not legal to possess hollow point ammunition?

    Or maybe a man hears gun shots coming from their child's school and rush onto the school grounds with a gun in his holster to check to make sure everything is okay, even though it is not really legal for him to do so. All these things are felonies now.

    Did you know just carrying a gun without a concealed carry permit is a felony in many states?

    Now, what do you think the Founding Fathers would say?

    We are talking about federal law here.
     
  12. Greataxe

    Greataxe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    8,644
    Likes Received:
    967
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There isn't anyone more against gun control laws in here than myself. However, I have very little mercy for criminals doing intentional criminal acts to harm others. For ridiculous gun control law violations like taking one's own firearm into areas hostile to 2nd Amendment rights, or buying a gun from an honest individual---there is no need to classify these as felonies that would deny one's right to own a firearm.

    But for someone who robbed a gas station when 17 years old at gunpoint, or a 21 year old who stalked and raped someone, or a young gang member of a violent street gang selling dangerous narcotics and killing rivals-----all should be banned for gun ownership---for life.
     
  13. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,671
    Likes Received:
    805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They're not "prohibited for life" from ever owning or purchasing a firearm.

    Both the courts and the governor of the state can reinstate the right for the person to purchase and own firearms. The governor, for example, can issue a full pardon for the crime which reinstates the person's rights. All states have laws that allow for the reinstatement of the rights of a person convicted of a criminal act either by action of the courts and/or by executive pardon.
     
  14. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    64,255
    Likes Received:
    3,868
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yes, convicted felons for violent crimes should automatically lose the right to own firearms.

    but they should of course be able to appeal this after 5 year since they left prison and are done with parole, by appearing before a panel of judges and having character witnesses.

    yes, your rights can be denied...as long as you have Due Process to contest it.
     
  15. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,671
    Likes Received:
    805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Many confuse a "statutory civil right" with an "inalienable (natural) right" of the person.

    We do not have an "Inalienable (natural) Right" to own or possess a firearm. That is a statutory civil right granted under the Constitution and can be limited based upon statutory law. The "Inalienable (natural) Right" of the person is the "right of self-defense against acts of aggression" and that is not a civil right granted by statutory law. The "Freedom to Exercise" that inalienable right of the person maybe protected or restricted by statutory law but the inalienable right exists without regard to any statutory law. Civil rights only exist based upon statutory law.
     
  16. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But I would argue that gun ownership, and the right to defend oneself, is an inalienable right. With only small exceptions.
    And that right should not be taken away unless someone does something seriously wrong (not just a little mistake), like rape, murder, serious robbery, etc.

    But as it is right now, someone can lose the right for the rest of their life for not paying taxes, and all sorts of other little things. And if you think everyone who pleads guilty to a crime is guilty, you really have no idea how the court system operates. If there is a domestic dispute, the police might arrest someone based on no more evidence than what the person they were fighting said. And if they cannot afford bail, they are basically coerced to just plead guilty or they will likely be spending a year in jail. This abuse by the court system happens to people in low income communities all the time.

    Felony does NOT equal a heinous crime. If you think it does, you do not know anything about the American legal system.

    A few years ago a 10-year-old girl was arrested and charged with a felony for bringing a small steak knife to school. It turns out that all she wanted to do was to cut up her lunch so that she could eat it.
    http://www.wftv.com/news/news/knife-at-lunch-gets-10-year-old-girl-arrested-at-s/nFBC5/

    A Michigan man has been charged with a felony and could face up to 5 years in prison for reading his wife's email.
    http://content.usatoday.com/communi...6NUbpObpQ-CE6Jct20mAiuCeL_kDCpDA#.VGJ_l7N0yUk
     
  17. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    58,265
    Likes Received:
    8,207
    Trophy Points:
    113
    banning Americans from owing guns or voting because of past crimes is a violation of the constitution

    every American should be able to protect their homes and family

    it's just a way to turn gun ownership into a privilege rather than a right
     
  18. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They can be, if they are denied permission, and many non-violent former criminals are.

    If it is a federal felony, the local State cannot be the one to reinstate the right under the current law. So if some office in the Department of Justice decides you can't buy a gun, then no matter which state you decide to live in, it is still illegal.

    Although I do believe it is indeed a natural right, the Second Amendment in the U.S. Constitution was meant to keep the Federal government from infringing on gun rights. It was really meant to be a State issue. If your State would not let you parade around a gun in public, you could move to another state that would, if it was really that important to you. At the time, no one had any concept of trying to keep "restricted" things out of the hands of free people. The idea of the federal government trying to regulate sales within a state to supposedly prevent them from illegally ending up in another state is really a modern phenomena, beginning with the Prohibition of alcohol in 1920, and then the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was supposedly intended to fight organized crime resulting from the war on drugs that begin in 1930-1935.

    I wonder what ever happened to individual responsibility? If someone wants to get drunk all the time in a bar, or intoxicate their bodies with drugs, it used to be that they were allowed to do it, and reap the consequences of their own actions.
     
  19. galant

    galant Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2014
    Messages:
    876
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    bs, there's no time period involved, the feds NEVER recognized your gun rights as being restored. the ONLY way that a federal felon gets them back is a presidential pardon, and that costs 10 million $ and only happens once every 6 years (on average)

    if the state CAN take it from you, then it's not a right, it's a privelege.
     
  20. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,671
    Likes Received:
    805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Firearm ownership doesn't typically meet the criteria of an "Inalienable (natural) Right".

    An inalienable right is inherent in the person, not dependent upon any other person, does not violate the inalienable rights of another person, and does not impose an involuntary obligation upon any other person.

    In almost all cases a person does not manufacture their own firearm and therefore firearm ownership is "not inherent in the person" and is "dependent upon another person" both of which violate the criteria of an Inalienable (natural) Right of the Person.

    As noted the actual Inalienable (natural) Right is the Right of Self-Defense Against Acts of Aggression. That Right is not dependent upon any other person nor does it require a commodity that we would trade for or purchase to obtain.

    Now, if you want to argue that a person can go out mine the iron ore, create steel, and manufacture a firearm from scratch as well as producing their own ammunition then we could state they have a Right of Property related to the firearm but "commerce" itself, because it involves more than one person, is not an Inalienable Right.
     

Share This Page