Posted on 10/23/2012 6:38:07 AM PDT by marktwain
SHREVEPORT, LA (KSLA) -
Shreveport Police say they arrested a homeowner who exchanged gunfire with intruders Monday night because the homeowner illegally possessed his handgun.
Rafeal Sinville, 29, was booked on one count of being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm.
The arrest came after police responded about 9:35 p.m. Monday to a call of a home invasion at a home in the 2500 block of Dupont Street.
Authorities say the homeowner was inside his home, heard a knock at the door, and, when he opened it, found one man who was armed and another man trying to force their way in.
(Excerpt) Read more at bayoubuzz.com ...
That will no doubt come as a shock to everyone in prison.
You are factually mistaken. The same logic applies to restraining orders. Can someone break the law? Well, of course they can, but doing so puts them in jeopardy. Many will avoid it or get caught before taking it to the next level. But, I would still outlaw murder, even if only 5% of people were ever caught.
Everyone here seems to have missed the constitutional issue of due process. People are not automatically losing their rights, felons are losing their rights AFTER due process.
He can’t go back and undo that.
He can’t go back and undo that.
The felony? Not likely, although he could petition to have his rights reinstated. If he's been a good citizen and doesn't pose a threat, he would have good odds.
That said, there are many, many decisions that we make in life, which cannot be unmade. The consequences also cannot be unmade. Likewise, people who are raped cannot be unraped, people who are beaten cannot be unbeaten, etc.
We are not taking away rights willy-nilly. It is established due process with a purpose. The purpose is to protect society and to put the burden of proving otherwise on those who have already been judged to be a threat.
You have said that twice. In theory that may be so. Except $ZERO dollars are appropriated for such a process. So there is no one to hear your case, no one to render a judgment. Just a process.
And then there is the issue of just how many things are now "felonies". It is just gun control by other means.
You are correct, I do not suggest special treatment for felons nor government dole to correct what they themselves have created. THEY, the felon, can pay for a lawyer, if that is important to them. Why in the hell should I pay for it. They brought it on themselves. Its called consequences and responsibility.
I want citizenship to mean more, not less. Felons do and should lose certain rights.
And then there is the issue of just how many things are now "felonies". It is just gun control by other means.
I wouldn't repeat so often, if what I said weren't' ignored. If jaywalking were a felony, the way to fix that is to make it a misdemeanor, not to make murder a $5 fine.
What for? There is no one for the lawyer to plea to, no one to render a decision. The process exists in theory only. It is dishonest to pretend otherwise.
If jaywalking were a felony, the way to fix that is to make it a misdemeanor, not to make murder a $5 fine.
No one suggested that. How ridiculous.
>>> “Everyone has the right to self defense. A felon still should be able to defend his home.”
In theory, I totally agree.
In practice, hmmmmmmmmmm. I’m awful relieved my neighbor cannot legally exercise his 2A rights. Every so often he manages to reactivate probationary conditions that make him liable to a home search, and that’s a good thing. Before, he used to be quite the firearms collector.
It’s silly that his “felony” status came about due to DUI x3, but that only scratches the surface of his problem: impulse control. For example, he assaulted the last wife for the last time in my presence.
Couldn’t meet a nicer guy when he’s sober. But he won’t stay in that condition. Undoubtedely he would resent the comparison, but just as a ballot or a gun in the hands of a liberal is a disaster in the making...
Simply Googling the issue will get you the detailed process for each state. Here is the statute for Virginia:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-308.2
In VA, the felon gets a letter from the Gov. then petitions the court.
Simple process? No. Nor should it be simple to reverse the judgement of the legislature, a jury, and a judge. Harsh, well yea, its kindof like these people committed a crime or something.
No one suggested that. How ridiculous.
You certainly did suggest decreasing the punishment for serious crimes, because punishment is accorded to too many offenses. My analogy simply demonstrated your thought process. If you think something shouldn't be a felony, then push to fix that, don't weaken all felony punishment.
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.