Drugs n Guns

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

druryj

In Remembrance / Dec 27 2021
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
21,474
Reaction score
17,724
Location
Yukon, OK
Why would he worry about extra crimes while he's committing crimes? I'm just trying to se the logic of your argument.
Might result in a little extra time in prison perhaps? I doubt the dumb ass would worry about it though. I think he's too stupid to have to have much brain function anyway.
 

dennishoddy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
84,543
Reaction score
61,808
Location
Ponca City Ok
I'm in agreement with most. If it wasn't a violent crime, and they have kept a clean record, there is no reason to not restore their rights. Not only guns but voting.
 

Dave70968

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
6,676
Reaction score
4,619
Location
Norman
Why would he worry about extra crimes while he's committing crimes? I'm just trying to see the logic of your argument.
There isn't any. To wit:
Might result in a little extra time in prison perhaps? I doubt the dumb ass would worry about it though. I think he's too stupid to have to have much brain function anyway.
More laws won't change a thing, druryj just wants to exercise control over people because he thinks he's better than them, same as all statists.
 

Shadowrider

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
21,505
Reaction score
9,294
Location
Tornado Alley
As soon as a person is released from prison they have been deemed able to live amongst the rest of us in society, and the second their foot touches freedom, all their rights should be fully restored.

^^^ This...

I would compromise though, I'd go for making them complete their parole if applicable. I'm a hard ass, if WE allow them to walk among us, WE might want to consider the ramifications of that and think about our sentencing practices. But I consider prison as punishment and if they've done their time they've paid their debt to society. I also believe what goes around comes around, if they pick up a gun and start using it in crime again, they'll reap what they sow somewhere along the line.
 

dennishoddy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
84,543
Reaction score
61,808
Location
Ponca City Ok
^^^ This...

I would compromise though, I'd go for making them complete their parole if applicable. I'm a hard ass, if WE allow them to walk among us, WE might want to consider the ramifications of that and think about our sentencing practices. But I consider prison as punishment and if they've done their time they've paid their debt to society. I also believe what goes around comes around, if they pick up a gun and start using it in crime again, they'll reap what they sow somewhere along the line.

Repeat offenders doing crimes right after release is why we need to have a waiting period IMHO.

Its tough for them to find work. I'll acknowledge that, and makes getting back into crime easy. Waiting periods won't prevent them from obtaining a firearm, but it will make it a "tiny" more difficult.
 

Shadowrider

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
21,505
Reaction score
9,294
Location
Tornado Alley
Repeat offenders doing crimes right after release is why we need to have a waiting period IMHO.

Its tough for them to find work. I'll acknowledge that, and makes getting back into crime easy. Waiting periods won't prevent them from obtaining a firearm, but it will make it a "tiny" more difficult.

That's what most people believe I think and I understand the logic. The only problem with it is that a convicted felon has served his sentence, is still a US citizen and therefore has the same rights under the Constitution as anyone else. Any law, state or federal, that says otherwise is null on it's face IMO. The deterrent should be stiff sentencing but the public doesn't have the stomach for that. I personally think that any violent felony should be a mandatory 15 years minimum and I wouldn't balk at 20 for a 1st offence. No parole ever, that just makes no sense to me but it is what it is. A second felony? 30 years. Also years are 365 days long. I also agree with you on the voting. Hey! I said I was a hard ass.... :D
 

owu1bag5

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
1,843
Reaction score
5
Location
Mustang
How does parole affect the opinion expressed above? or does it?

It doesn't. I believe that the most basic of human rights is the right to self defense. The ability to provide one's own defense could and will often times require deadly force. If a person is free from prison then they should be able to defend themself if necessary, or be given a cop on a keychain.

It has been said in this thread that it is likely that a person newly released from prison could go back to his old ways and thus should be forced to wait to regain their rights. What if the person has made a decision to do the right thing, but people from his previous life find him and want to do him harm. Do we just tell him "sorry 'bout your luck bro"...?
 

dennishoddy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
84,543
Reaction score
61,808
Location
Ponca City Ok
It doesn't. I believe that the most basic of human rights is the right to self defense. The ability to provide one's own defense could and will often times require deadly force. If a person is free from prison then they should be able to defend themself if necessary, or be given a cop on a keychain.

It has been said in this thread that it is likely that a person newly released from prison could go back to his old ways and thus should be forced to wait to regain their rights. What if the person has made a decision to do the right thing, but people from his previous life find him and want to do him harm. Do we just tell him "sorry 'bout your luck bro"...?

That's what most people believe I think and I understand the logic. The only problem with it is that a convicted felon has served his sentence, is still a US citizen and therefore has the same rights under the Constitution as anyone else. Any law, state or federal, that says otherwise is null on it's face IMO. The deterrent should be stiff sentencing but the public doesn't have the stomach for that. I personally think that any violent felony should be a mandatory 15 years minimum and I wouldn't balk at 20 for a 1st offence. No parole ever, that just makes no sense to me but it is what it is. A second felony? 30 years. Also years are 365 days long. I also agree with you on the voting. Hey! I said I was a hard ass.... :D

I'm a hard ass too, and have read the stats of incarcerated felons getting right back into the game because they never left the game while in prison.

That is my issue. The detention center in a Baltimore thread that was ran by the prisoners for years is a prime example.

If they serve good time on the outside, let them have the right to defend themselves.

Violent criminals should be denied those rights forever. They have proven they don't deserve that right.
 

300WSM

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
363
Reaction score
7
Location
Kellyville
Many are making the assumption that prison is the whole sentence. Losing rights after conviction is part of the sentence. It is not like the felons didnt know they were commiting a felonious action that would have lifelong consequences. People have to be held accountable for their actions.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom