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 ...
What is the difference between misdemeanor theft and felony theft? Does a single dollar value in difference make sufficient grounds to take away a Constitutional Right? Not all felonies are violent or indicative of someone's ability to be responsible with a firearm...
Yeah, except many felonies are not violent. Denying felons their 2nd amendment rights is simply about punishment, not necessarily about protecting anyone. Same with denying them their voting privileges.
While I agree wholeheartedly that once one has served their time, their rights should be fully restored, in the interim, one should seek alternate solutions. Federal Law exempts black powder arms from the "firearms" definition so there's nothing in the federal law to prohibit a felon from a black powder weapon. Many states have closed this "loophole" so you'd have to evaluate this on a state by state basis, but if I ever found myself in that position, I'd be eying up a Colt Walker repro...
Which is why they get to petition for those rights back. I see no reason to do it automatically, especially as many charges are pleaded down. That said, you are talking about an adjustment of the law to apply only to "violent felonies". That is a logical thing to explore.
A better guage than any other, I argue. And the system still allows them to petition their individual case.
No. My mouth was never anywhere close to paying released felons to petition the court. They got themselves into those restrictions, let them bare the burden of getting them lifted. Yes, tough to be a felon.
I believe if they are safe enough to have on the street they should have full reinstatement of all rights.
I don't. All convicted felons should be on lifetime parole, which the firearm and voting restrictions are. You can make a logical case for not treating all felonies the same, but I totally reject the notion that a person released from prison must be automatically reconstituted a full citizen.
How do they defend themselves while they are in prison?
THEN THERE WOULD BE A PROBLEM!!!!!!
The logic on your argument is that we should have no punishment for felonies, as anything might be made a felony.
Sorry but I just reject that out of hand. You aren't going to protect yourself from tyranny by removing the punishment for criminal activity. No power that would do one would hesitate because of some earlier action you took.
We have to fight for just and fair laws, enforcement and punishment every day. Creating a low standard for punishment today in order to preempt a bad law tomorrow is no way to run a country.
True enough. But its even better to avoid both. Most citizens do that by not committing felonies.
The 2Amd doesn’t make an exception for convicted felons- “shall not be infringed.”
Riding a bicycle in a wilderness area is a felony now. It defies common sense why that would disqualify someone from possessing a firearm
The problem is that we are way past that point already. There are already numerous bad laws on the books. There are already numerous ways that people can be convicted of felonies for actions most people would find to be innocuous.
"The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague. In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior. The volume of federal crimes in recent decades has increased well beyond the statute books and into the morass of the Code of Federal Regulations, handing federal prosecutors an additional trove of vague and exceedingly complex and technical prohibitions to stick on their hapless targets. The dangers spelled out in Three Felonies a Day do not apply solely to “white collar criminals,” state and local politicians, and professionals. No social class or profession is safe from this troubling form of social control by the executive branch, and nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional democracy hangs in the balance."
http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229
/johnny
Those who would create a totalitarian society first create laws that will make everyone guilty of something..............
tough to be a felon.
I suppose it is. I would hate to have that on my resume'.
All convicted felons should be on lifetime parole
But in this case I am not in favor of lifetime punishment for an individual determined to be allowed in the public. Perhaps we could agree on a system that had, and used, the death penalty, where life in prison was, and institution of penal colonies for paroles. If your paroles can not be full functioning citizens , they do not belong on our streets.
Not very well. I'd rather be in a mall without a gun than in a prison without one.
Being put at a disadvantage (like DUI convicts having to walk) comes with the committing the crime.
Besides, as with any other gun law, it affects only those inclined to obey the law. What the law does is make those that obey it (former convicts obviously not a threat) at risk while those that disobey it (violent offenders) get their weapons, regardless of your opinion, or of the law.
/johnny
Spoken like a statist.
I agree with the other posters here. If a man cannot be trusted with his own self defense then he belongs in prison.
A God given right cannot be taken away by man.
“We have to fight for just and fair laws, enforcement and punishment every day. Creating a low standard for punishment today in order to preempt a bad law tomorrow is no way to run a country. “
What about this? Remove all restrictions on “...keep and bear...” and when enough bad lads are left toes up at the scene, they get the message that criminality might not be the best career choice. As to the convicted, restitution would be a better route than punishment by incarceration. That whole “debt to society” thing is pretty nebulous, but paying restitution to the offended party is a bit closer to home. It seems that someone who can learn from a mistake has a better chance of actually doing something to learn from the mistake. Three hots, a cot, and living the lord of the flies doesn’t sound like much more than a higher criminal education.
.02
Its very hard to pay restitution for the dead, raped, and maimed. Most people don’t afix a price to that. Early germanic tribal law did, but it was less than perfect and generally meant to prevent feuds.
Concur, on “debt to society” being bull. People are locked away because we won’t kill them and they aren’t safe to put on the street. I’m all for penal societies where they are sequestered away from the innocent for the rest of their lives, while working to survive.
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.