Should convicted felons be allowed to bear arms?

[stealthyeliminator]

An eye for an eye has always been a great crime deterrent.

Sent from an unspecified mobile phone using unspecified software.

I don't know which interpretation of that phrase you're using, but in the case of, say, domestic abuse, I don't think "my wife hit me in my face and gave me a black eye, so the court said I could hit her in the face and give her a black eye" would work out very well.

 

[Primus]

What do you believe it should be (that's not intended to be a loaded question, if you don't support the overall theory/method, just try to humor me)? I haven't come to any conclusions, myself. I'd be interested to see how people try and determine an appropriate amount, what factors they consider, etc.

I honestly think more emphasis on working groups (chain gangs?) Or community service.

Take unarmed robbery. You punch them in the face and rob their phone. Well your caught, now what? Jail for 5 years will just introduce you to more dbags on my dime. Can't have you go to the persons house who you just violently assaulted and have you pull weeds from their lawn. Can't have them punch you in the face and take your phone. So what's left? Make you pay then x amount of dollars? Does it go by value of phone? Or how how many times you punched them?

I think rehabilitation is a big key that is missed in the CJ system. And no probation isn't rehabilitation.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I honestly think more emphasis on working groups (chain gangs?) Or community service.

Take unarmed robbery. You punch them in the face and rob their phone. Well your caught, now what? Jail for 5 years will just introduce you to more dbags on my dime. Can't have you go to the persons house who you just violently assaulted and have you pull weeds from their lawn. Can't have them punch you in the face and take your phone. So what's left? Make you pay then x amount of dollars? Does it go by value of phone? Or how how many times you punched them?

I think rehabilitation is a big key that is missed in the CJ system. And no probation isn't rehabilitation.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

So repayment to the victim is left out. Thanks state.

 

[Primus]

So repayment to the victim is left out. Thanks state.

I asked before and you dodged.

If you were punched in face and robbed of your cell phone what would you want as compensation? A dollar amount? OK what's it based on? Value of phone or value of your face?

Ok now the guy can't pay you since he was poor enough to rob you to sell the phone for crack.

Now what?

All of the above is very serious inquiry. I'd like an insight into your solutions.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[EMNofSeattle]

If you're too dangerous to own a gun, you're to dangerous to be out of jail.

Free people shall not be denied the RKBA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfortunately the far right and far left both despise funding the government adequately to maintain prisons. So it's not always practical. People who sexually abuse others. Rapists, child rapists etc should never be allowed to own firearms again. Then again I think child rapists should hang on a rope......

But with our current system, I believe felons should regain their rights, except sexual predators, who should never, and I think they should be subject to capital punishment.....

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I asked before and you dodged.

If you were punched in face and robbed of your cell phone what would you want as compensation? A dollar amount? OK what's it based on? Value of phone or value of your face?

Ok now the guy can't pay you since he was poor enough to rob you to sell the phone for crack.

Now what?

All of the above is very serious inquiry. I'd like an insight into your solutions.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

LOL...no I didn't dodge reading is your friend. Look how you asked.

Sure medical bills and phone back. A jury of the peers can start setting precedents again for what a proper compensation would be.

This has historical precedent in common law. What started happening is the kings and rulers started making more and more things crimes against the state, so that they benefit not the victim.

A poor person can perform work to pay back his debt in many ways, none which are accomplished by paying his debt to "society" (misapplied to mean the state) than by paying back to the victim.

 

[hhofent]

I honestly think more emphasis on working groups (chain gangs?) Or community service.

Take unarmed robbery. You punch them in the face and rob their phone. Well your caught, now what? Jail for 5 years will just introduce you to more dbags on my dime. /snip/

I think rehabilitation is a big key that is missed in the CJ system. And no probation isn't rehabilitation.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

I agree with this. Prison has a tendancy to make the soft hard, and the hard harder.

Sent from an unspecified mobile phone using unspecified software.

 

[Primus]

LOL...no I didn't dodge reading is your friend. Look how you asked.

Sure medical bills and phone back. A jury of the peers can start setting precedents again for what a proper compensation would be.

This has historical precedent in common law. What started happening is the kings and rulers started making more and more things crimes against the state, so that they benefit not the victim.

A poor person can perform work to pay back his debt in many ways, none which are accomplished by paying his debt to "society" (misapplied to mean the state) than by paying back to the victim.

Medical bills for a punch in the face? And if there isn't a medical bill? They rob you at gun point.

So you get phone back..... No harm no foul? Now whats the compensation?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[EMNofSeattle]

LOL...no I didn't dodge reading is your friend. Look how you asked.

Sure medical bills and phone back. A jury of the peers can start setting precedents again for what a proper compensation would be.

This has historical precedent in common law. What started happening is the kings and rulers started making more and more things crimes against the state, so that they benefit not the victim.

A poor person can perform work to pay back his debt in many ways, none which are accomplished by paying his debt to "society" (misapplied to mean the state) than by paying back to the victim.

It depends, if you know anything about the average drug user (at least who use drugs harder then pot, pot doesn't do this but crack or heroin can) you probably don't want them working for you in anyway, they cast be trusted because at best they'll do a crappy job at worse they'll be dangerous. If someone steals your car for drugs, would you consider them paying their debt to you by hiring them on one of you job sites?

I would also contest the state simply selfishly collects the benefits of punishing criminals, when you take into account the cost of courts prisons, public defenders, appeals, food, medical housing, and at best the crooks will stamp license plates in return, I really don't think you can argue the state benefits, at least on a financial level. The state uses relatively long term connections, whereas in many places in the west 150 years ago criminal justice was a trial by the buddies of the person you wronged followed by a rope or maybe banishment from town forever if you were lucky. Unlucky, you could be dealt with by bands of citizens operating outside of "the law" in a strict legal sense...

Now is the current way we handle criminal justice great? I don't think so, but I think it's slightly better then decades past.

 

[Primus]

It depends, if you know anything about the average drug user (at least who use drugs harder then pot, pot doesn't do this but crack or heroin can) you probably don't want them working for you in anyway, they cast be trusted because at best they'll do a crappy job at worse they'll be dangerous. If someone steals your car for drugs, would you consider them paying their debt to you by hiring them on one of you job sites?

Bingo..... You don't have the dude who shoved a gun in your wife's face to steal her purse come to your house and plant bushes.

Also wouldnt have him come to my place of employment and "work" for me. All set with him seeing my vehicle and knowing where I work live.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[since9]

Haven't we had this discussion before?

If they are too dangerous to carry arms, then they should not be walking amongst us - so say some.

I hear you. I think the question boils down to whether or not rehabilitation is credible, whether or not to take away the rights of a convicted felon forever, even their max sentence may only be say, 5 years.

Given the time-based studies I've done on violent crime here in America as compared to elsewhere, most notably the United Kingdom, I'm inclined to agree with the following:

First Felony Offense: Unless circumstances such as aggravated assault, etc., dictate otherwise, first-time offenders need to complete the minimum sentence required for their crime, plus an additional two years of supervised probation.

Following successful completion, their full rights are restored, including all rights involving firearms.

Second Felony Offense: No firearms rights are to be restored. Ever.

Third Felony Offense: Three strikes and you're out. If any component of your third strike involves an aggravated crime or any form of murder, it's lights out. And no, you don't get 10 years of freeloading on the taxpayer dime. You get 1 year, period. That may be increased to up to 3 years, total, upon decision by a judge, after presentation of credible evidence that such an extension is warranted as being in the best interest of the people or that new evidence, not previously available, is obtainable in the foreseeable future.

 

[hhofent]

Good ideas. But if that were to happen, serious changes would have to be made about what constitutes a felony.
In an earler post someone mentioned littering as a felony.
No victimless crime should ever be considered a felony.(or a crime at all) And I emphasize drug crimes. I know a lot of people who use various illegal drugs on occasion. They do so in their own home, and a few are close friends. They don't have a violent bone in their body. They aren't addicts. They will never turn into addicts. And they have just as much right to self defense as the next guy.
Yet if they were caught, they would be felons.

I do not advocate drug use, but I respect these peoples decisions, and firmly believe that what they do on their own time is none of my business.

Also, with the current legal/justice system, 3 years is simply not long enough, you hear of people aquitted all the time after serving more time.

Sent from an unspecified mobile phone using unspecified software.

 

[PistolPackingMomma]

I would also contest the state simply selfishly collects the benefits of punishing criminals, when you take into account the cost of courts prisons, public defenders, appeals, food, medical housing, and at best the crooks will stamp license plates in return, I really don't think you can argue the state benefits, at least on a financial level.

The more prisoners, the more funding the prison receives.

The U.S. has the highest number of prisons, and the most populated prisons, in the world.

Follow the money.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Good ideas. But if that were to happen, serious changes would have to be made about what constitutes a felony.
In an earler post someone mentioned littering as a felony.
No victimless crime should ever be considered a felony.(or a crime at all) And I emphasize drug crimes. I know a lot of people who use various illegal drugs on occasion. They do so in their own home, and a few are close friends. They don't have a violent bone in their body. They aren't addicts. They will never turn into addicts. And they have just as much right to self defense as the next guy.
Yet if they were caught, they would be felons.

I do not advocate drug use, but I respect these peoples decisions, and firmly believe that what they do on their own time is none of my business.

Also, with the current legal/justice system, 3 years is simply not long enough, you hear of people aquitted all the time after serving more time.

Sent from an unspecified mobile phone using unspecified software.

I would love to see a law describing littering as a felony, unless you're littering something like asbestos into a city water reservoir, I am sure that "littering" is only a felony if it's hazardous product...

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The more prisoners, the more funding the prison receives.

The U.S. has the highest number of prisons, and the most populated prisons, in the world.

Follow the money.

We have the highest prison populations becaus of our successful mandatory sentencing laws. Now instead of violent criminals being revolved back on to the street, after three strikes they're sent up the river for life and never come back. When the generation of felons in the system born between 1969 and 1990 starts dying out our prison population will shrink very fast.

It used to be one may serve less then a year for armed robbery, now , especially in Washington, if you commit a crime while armed with a gun you'll probably spend at least 5 years. The hard times for armed crimes act is a other successful piece of legislation.

But since people now get sentenced to several times the sentences they used to, then the population of prison will increase until the initial glut of criminals from the first few years cycles out of the system,

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Medical bills for a punch in the face? And if there isn't a medical bill? They rob you at gun point.

So you get phone back..... No harm no foul? Now whats the compensation?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

You don't pay attention well do you?

It depends, if you know anything about the average drug user (at least who use drugs harder then pot, pot doesn't do this but crack or heroin can) you probably don't want them working for you in anyway, they cast be trusted because at best they'll do a crappy job at worse they'll be dangerous. If someone steals your car for drugs, would you consider them paying their debt to you by hiring them on one of you job sites?

I would also contest the state simply selfishly collects the benefits of punishing criminals, when you take into account the cost of courts prisons, public defenders, appeals, food, medical housing, and at best the crooks will stamp license plates in return, I really don't think you can argue the state benefits, at least on a financial level. The state uses relatively long term connections, whereas in many places in the west 150 years ago criminal justice was a trial by the buddies of the person you wronged followed by a rope or maybe banishment from town forever if you were lucky. Unlucky, you could be dealt with by bands of citizens operating outside of "the law" in a strict legal sense...

Now is the current way we handle criminal justice great? I don't think so, but I think it's slightly better then decades past.

Your ignorance about drug users is very telling.

It isn't the business of the state to compensate itself. It isn't justice not to compensate the victim.

If your buddies were convicting it was also the buddies of the criminal. Yet you have no proof for your statement.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Bingo..... You don't have the dude who shoved a gun in your wife's face to steal her purse come to your house and plant bushes.

Also wouldnt have him come to my place of employment and "work" for me. All set with him seeing my vehicle and knowing where I work live.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Those would be the only ways of compensation.......

 

[sudden valley gunner]

We have the highest prison populations becaus of our successful mandatory sentencing laws. Now instead of violent criminals being revolved back on to the street, after three strikes they're sent up the river for life and never come back. When the generation of felons in the system born between 1969 and 1990 starts dying out our prison population will shrink very fast.

It used to be one may serve less then a year for armed robbery, now , especially in Washington, if you commit a crime while armed with a gun you'll probably spend at least 5 years. The hard times for armed crimes act is a other successful piece of legislation.

But since people now get sentenced to several times the sentences they used to, then the population of prison will increase until the initial glut of criminals from the first few years cycles out of the system,

One word, Bullshite!

 

[georg jetson]

Medical bills for a punch in the face? And if there isn't a medical bill? They rob you at gun point.

So you get phone back..... No harm no foul? Now whats the compensation?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

As things stand today, crimes have penalties involving both money and time. If the existing penalty for robety is $5000 and 2 years in jail then the convicted perp does his 2 years and is not let out until the $5000 is paid to the victim. If he has no money then utilize work release.

More OT - if you're in prison then your rights are curtailed. If you've done your time and are released, full rights should be restored.

 

[Primus]

You don't pay attention well do you?



Your ignorance about drug users is very telling.

It isn't the business of the state to compensate itself. It isn't justice not to compensate the victim.

If your buddies were convicting it was also the buddies of the criminal. Yet you have no proof for your statement.

Those would be the only ways of compensation.......

One word, Bullshite!

Wow..... Don't have much on this topic?

I've asked several times what you would see as just compensation. I even laid out a clear and concise crime.

Unarmed robbery where you are physically punched in the face and your cell phone is stolen.

You said medical bills, so I asked what if there are no medical bills? Either from no injuries or no battery being involved.

So again... What would you deem just compensation? You have seemed to imply there are other forms of compensation other then monetary to you or them working directly for you. So what are they?

No response.

No surprise.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk