[mvpel]

There are no exceptions to the right to vote, but felons, who were duly convicted under due process of law, are denied the right to vote as part of the penalty for their anti-social actions. There is no exception to the right to keep and bear arms, but the situation is similar. When you commit a crime, and are convicted of that crime, you should not expect to assert every last one of your civil rights.

A convicted felon can, under certain circumstances, after 7 years from the end of their sentence, apply for restoration of their civil rights, including the right to vote. There is a case underway in the Supreme Court to determine whether a district court can act in place of the ATF to restore firearms rights as well. Again, through the due process of law.

[Eagle Eye]

If you cannot do that, then would you please list all the people that you do not think should be allowed to arm themselves?

A third time I'll ask.

Please don't tell me what is, but what, in your opinion, should be the rules for denying someone the right to arm themself?

[dcwusmc]

A direct answer to the question asked would be good. Also, FYI, prior to GCA '68, when someone PAID THEIR PENALTY and was released from prison there was no fedgov prohibition on him owning a firearm again. Nor should there be. If a convicted felon's still a danger, why is he released early? Or put on probation? Keep him in prison until he's completed his sentence. But you may NOT properly deny him the right to protect himself once he's been released.

As has been asked, what part of "...[S]hall not be infringed" do you fail to comprehend?

[inquest]

There are no exceptions to the right to vote, but felons, who were duly convicted under due process of law, are denied the right to vote as part of the penalty for their anti-social actions. There is no exception to the right to keep and bear arms, but the situation is similar.

Wrong. There's a very important difference: there's no provision in the Constitution providing for an absolute right to vote.