Posted on 05/27/2012 1:11:49 PM PDT by ColdOne
The now-70-year-old Cunningham wrote that he plans to live with his brother and mother in rural Arkansas after his prison release. He said he wants to restore his gun rights so he can hunt and compete in sport shooting contests.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
“Cunningham pleaded guilty in 2005 to taking $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors in exchange for using his House appropriations position to steer government contracts to them.”
Cunningham steals 2.4 million dollars from the American tax payer and only serves seven years in prison?
Wow, that’s $342,857.00 per year!
Not too shabby for sitting is a posh federal prison for a few years.
I agree. All people who aren’t in prison should have their rights restored.
Otherwise it's a continuation of the punishment, which is not proper. If we think the punishment should continue, then make it part of the sentence.
I think the Founders would be quite clear on this. The Second Amendment is unequivocal, and in the absence of a continuing legal sentence, a citizen who as done their time should be restored to full rights of citizenship.
The judge is either a liar or ignorant.
Neither makes him look good.
This guy was not a violent felon, he’s a paper abusing felon, similar to the guy who writes bad cheques.
No rational reason beyond vindictive spite to not allow him arms in his old age.
He’s supposed to have “paid his debt” and be “rehabilitated” now.
I suppose that once EVERYONE has been found guilty of some felony the second amendment will be moot, once playground antics are felonies no one will escape losing their rights.
No more voting either, Komrad!
I hope Cunningham rots, but I wonder if convicted felons can legally bow hunt?
In general I agree.
There may be reasonable exceptions, for example if a particular right (e.g. gun use) was central to the committed crime, I can imagine an argument for saying, "You grossly abused your gun rights in the commission of your felony, so we're not giving you that right back. But all your other rights return to you."
This Congresscritter didn't use a gun as part of taking bribes (as far as I can tell) so his gun rights should be restored.
We might consider prohibiting him from taking any job with responsibility for the public money, though. :)
They use the dangle of taking away gun/voting/driving rights as a threat to keep the little people in line. And after tim eis served, why must your rights still be suspended?
Whats more, its suprising how many things are felonies. Something really minor could land in deep trouble for the rest of your life.
I personally don’t see the point of sending people convicted of financial crimes to prison anyway. I’d rather put them on a very short leash and make them repay what they took.
After all, putting them in prison just ends up costing the taxpayers.
“This guy was not a violent felon, he’s a paper abusing felon, similar to the guy who writes bad cheques.”
This guy stole 2.4 million dollars and is an American Tax Payer Abusing Felon and the money he stole belonged to us.
Not at all like writing bad checks.
I’m just kinda curious, where exactly did this rule on denial of gun rights come from, and how does it avoid conflicting with the Constitution?
The way this usually works is that at some point before the full sentence is served, a felon is offered a parole deal which includes limits to his rights. Voting rights and second amendment rights are typically bargained away for early release. I have no idea why they pick on these rights but the deal is usually taken.
It’s so sad to see how far Duke Cunningham fell. He was once a person to look up to...I guess you just never know!!
“This guy stole 2.4 million dollars and is an American Tax Payer Abusing Felon and the money he stole belonged to us”
This is chump change compared to what Obama is funneling to his friends. We are talking billions through so-called green energy firms and other assorted schemes.
That is EXACTLY the danger!
He got caught unlike the rest of the crooks in congress.
Very good point about financial criminals.
“This is chump change compared to what Obama is funneling to his friends. We are talking billions through so-called green energy firms and other assorted schemes.”
Yes, but that does not chance the fact that Cunningham is a political thug that ripped off the American tax payer for 2.4 million and should rot in prison.
What do you think would happen to you if you were caught embezzling 2.4 million from your employer?
Does he still have the money, or did the Fed. take it as I expect?
Holy cow. That's really interesting. I guess, though, that Cunningham didn't bargain his rights away. Otherwise he'd obviously have no standing at all for his request.
In general I agree.
There may be reasonable exceptions, ..etc..
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Allow me to add - If a person is sentenced to 75 years and gets out in 10, at least make him ineligible for the remaining 65 years - and if he breaks the law again make him serve the remainder + - sort of like a ‘super parole’ without all the expense of supervision etc.
Kind of like I used to ‘push’ when they were complaining the crack dealers got harsher sentences than straight coke dealers - with the complaint usually being the crack dealers were more than likely to be black etc....
My solution is to raise the minimum for the crack dealers and then make the coke dealers serve the same, thereby wiping out the inequity.
Yes, felons can bow hunt, but it varies by jurisdiction what equipment they can use. Some can only use bow without any sort of release mechanism (some call it a “trigger”). Some jurisdictions allow felons to use a crossbow. Some even allow primitive arms, such a muzzle loader.
He can take up bowling.
The Federal Prison were Cunningham has resided must have really great healthcare as when Duke was being sentenced to prison, he claimed that he was in too frail of health to be in prison.
And now that he is about to get out of the slammer, he is is perfect health and ready to go hunting.
I agree with you, but the exception should be congresscritters.
“Does he still have the money, or did the Fed. take it as I expect?”
Do bank robbers get set free if they give back the money they stole?
I have an autographed copy of his book, “Fox 2”.
Too bad, soo sad Cunningham. Yer a felon - case closed.
Let's see.
Took bribes while holding office in the House.
Barred from holding elected office?
Barred from having bank accounts?
Barred from having a lobbying position?
Or, barred from his unalienable Second Amendment Rights?
Viewed in the light of COMMON SENSE and FREEDOM we see it makes no sense whatsoever.
Viewed in the light of tyranny and oppression we see it making perfect sense.
.
Not a clear answer.
Please put aside the vitriol for a moment.
Does he have millions in illicit funds waiting for him on release or not?
The money he got in bribes was hardly “Taxpayer funds”, or are the taxpayers now the intended recipients of bribes which he intercepted?
No use of arms in his crime, no one was physically harmed.
Greedy, yes.
Gave in to temptation, yes.
But no one injured.
So I would restore his basic rights.
Same for others, unless physical harm or threat was involved, rights to be restored.
Under that standard I would include drug dealers among those losing some of their civil rights, drugs kill and maim.
EVERYONE retains the right to self-defense sans firearms, even thugs.
No one can be compelled to accept assault.
The idea that we will continue to with hold your constitutional rights from you for something you have already been punished for is repugnant.
It they are not able to be trusted out in the public... well, we should have kept them locked up.
BINGO!
I think the sentiment is growing in part due to the expanding number of crimes.
There also seems to be a trend to give short sentences to the truly dangerous. A bad combination.
“The money he got in bribes was hardly “Taxpayer funds”, or are the taxpayers now the intended recipients of bribes which he intercepted?”
Is it your belief that the companies with government contracts that give 2.4 million in bribes to a congressman do not pass that cost on to the taxpayer?
Just curious, how much better than that would the best bid have been if it had been opened to all bidders. Maybe the taxpayer wasn’t too badly cheated after all.
Though of course it still stinks to high heaven that the congresscritter got a kick back. How can anybody with any semblance of ethics DO that.
Cool!
Although he is a typical shyster congress critter, at least HE risked his life for the country unlike most in congress that wouldn't even consider serving in the military.
“Just curious, how much better than that would the best bid have been if it had been opened to all bidders. Maybe the taxpayer wasn’t too badly cheated after all.”
Maybe the guys at the defense contractors just thought Duke was a swell guy and gave him 2.4 million out of their own personal checking accounts.
Criminals everywhere, generally get the best health care money can buy.
And to think that this guy was a true fighter ace.
What a shame.
2.4 Million divided by how many companies?
2.4 Million is no doubt inconsequential compared to the overall program expenses involved.
If it were truly a significant amount for those companies, they would have found a cheaper way to manipulate him.
2.4 Mill. does not begin to compare to the perfectly legal grants and low interest loans congress passes around like Halloween candy to their benefactors.
How much, if any, of that money does he still have?
He did prison, I expect he was also fined, ending with a net loss.
Does he retain his congressional pension?
“He got caught unlike the rest of the crooks in congress.
BINGO! “
I believe the crime he was actually charged with is called “Governmental Incompetency”. Anyone who is in congress that long and can’t get away with stealing that much, or more, is considered legally incompetent. Hell, most Senators can do that in a year - and a good percentage do! I’d like to know how much Chuckiee-boy has taken in his ‘career.’ I’m certain it makes this look like chump-change.
He was my congressman. I knew he was a cretin. It would be justice if he never saw daylight again.
I had that same thought. I remember he was claiming to be on “death’s door” and couldn’t go.
Ask Elizabeth Warren.
The constitution does not exempt felons from the RTKBA. There is a common law theory that convicted felons have no civil rights and are therefore "outlaws." Usually, however, the enactment of constitutional provisions, treaty provisions or statutes nullifies common law theories inconsistent with such enactments.
The courts are restoring the RTKBA, case be case. Perhaps we can soon look forward to BATF as a national chain of gun and ammunition shops selling adult beverages and tobacco products as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.