Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sleavelessinseattle
I neither "spewed nor ranted". "Rant" was your word. I simply think folks who've done their time and their obligatory parole or probation and satisfied all those requirements should have their gun rights restored. A number of states feel the same as I do. The Feds as well as a larger number of states do not. Before Janet Reno, a Federal ex-felon could apply for limited gun rights restoration from the Marshall's service. Now one must go to a Fed judge and Ashcroft is challenging that practice in the DC courts as we speak.

I simply do not agree with you. I also worry about the infringments, the overlapping jurisdcitions and the draconian sentencing guidleines.

I would guess that probably 5% of American Males are already disenfranchised from gun rights if one takes into account all of these laws and infractions. Over 1% of America has done time. The vast majority is for non violent crimes. If you juxtapose that 1% and the other convictions requiring no time including some misdemeanors that preclude gun rights with the adult male population then I would think the surmisal that 1 in 20 American adult males have no gun rights Federally (sans Black Powder Firearms) and are at risk for these draconian in my view sentences should they be found to even be in "constructive" possession of a firearm.

Regards

24 posted on 06/12/2002 2:44:46 PM PDT by wardaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: wardaddy
I neither "spewed nor ranted". "Rant" was your word. I simply think folks who've done their time and their obligatory parole or probation and satisfied all those requirements should have their gun rights restored.

Okay, So I can shoot someone-do my 10 years, fill out a form and use a high powered deer rifle and blow their wife away from 400 yards? If a violent criminal is walking the street with a grudge I want him unarmed ALL the time...no knives...no guns no bow and arrows...(This isn't precisely spew, BUT you don't know criminals) Lets move on shall we?

A number of states feel the same as I do. The Feds as well as a larger number of states do not. Before Janet Reno, a Federal ex-felon could apply for limited gun rights restoration from the Marshall's service. Now one must go to a Fed judge and Ashcroft is challenging that practice in the DC courts as we speak.

Thanks for the info...an appeals process should be in place...I told you I was operating off the cuff...this is just chaff. Individual extenuating circumstances were covered in my above post. They need to be considered!

I simply do not agree with you.

I gathered that...you just have a naive take on people who have been incarcerated...even someone who is inside unjustly can come out violent and dangerous just from the socialization process.

I also worry about the infringments, the overlapping jurisdcitions and the draconian sentencing guidleines.

more chaff.

I would guess that probably 5% of American Males are already disenfranchised from gun rights if one takes into account all of these laws and infractions. Over 1% of America has done time. The vast majority is for non violent crimes. If you juxtapose that 1% and the other convictions requiring no time including some misdemeanors that preclude gun rights with the adult male population then I would think the surmisal that 1 in 20 American adult males have no gun rights Federally (sans Black Powder Firearms) and are at risk for these draconian in my view sentences should they be found to even be in "constructive" possession of a firearm.

All I got out of that was liberal "I feel your pain..." vibe...The fact of the matter is, I DO feel sorry for anyone who isn't allowed to go to the range and blast away with a high capacity mag equipped ruger 10/22...Our government has real problems Wardaddy...But being too hard on VIOLENT Criminals IS NOT ONE OF THEM...(having said that...the takings for minor drug offenses are beyond the pale...) Regards

28 posted on 06/12/2002 3:26:52 PM PDT by sleavelessinseattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

To: wardaddy
It shouldn't be that difficult to understand. If you're out of prison or the mental hospital, that should mean that you're either rehabilitated or cured. But the government didn't want to spend the money so they let the bad and crazy people out before their time was up. Now we have to contend with killers and psychos that shouldn't be on the streets. Unless that's changed, no one is willing to give rights back to released prisoners the way it should be.
40 posted on 06/12/2002 4:11:26 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson