# Gun Rights Restoration for Felons



## 7052 (Jul 1, 2014)

I was just reading an article about how some felons can get their gun rights restored in various circumstances, depending on certain factors.

It's a complicated issue, but I was wondering what you guys think of it? Here are some questions I'm rolling around in my head...

1) On what *legal/constitutional* basis do we legally remove a person's 2nd amendment rights _for life_?
2) Should these rights be returned after their prison sentence is complete?
3) Are there some people that should never get them back? If so...
a) Who are they?
b) Why should they not get them back?
c) On what constitutional basis do we revoke them?

What are your thoughts?


----------



## HeIsRisen (May 5, 2013)

The fact that we remove a man's constitutional right after entering into and returning to society from our corrections system heralds that systems ineffectiveness. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Illini Warrior (Jan 24, 2015)

just because it wasn't spelled out specifically by the forefathers - that inspired & wrote The Constitution - does't mean it wasn't implied or intended ... highly doubt the likes of Jefferson ever thought that a murderer, highwayman, cutthroat pirate, or defiler of women & children would EVER be considered to be released back into society - much less re-armed to commit the crimes all over again ...

I'm on Jefferson's side - not near enough execution sentences these days ....

if some dirtbag makes it back onto the street - I want it as eazy as possible to be taken out permanently ....

nobody EVER wants to admit THEIR motivation for re-arming criminals - so I just take it for granted they are themselves a felon or have some relative that is stinking up the place - it's the only logical answer for the stupidity involved ....


----------



## Boss Dog (Feb 8, 2013)

The 2nd amendment makes no distinction for felons. If you've done your time and you're not on parole you should have 2A rights again. Of course if you keep committing crimes, they should put you away and throw away the key, or shoot you, depending.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Should murderers be allowed to have guns?
How about armed robbers?
How about a rapist who holds a gun to his victims head?


----------



## Boss Dog (Feb 8, 2013)

We need stiffer sentencing, that's for sure. 
Murder and rape should receive the death sentence. Here in SC robbery has a 7 year minimum. Second time, throw away the key.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Do your time and keep clean for two or three years you should get your rights back IMHO.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Florida has a 10-20-Life law.
Use a gun in the commission of a crime - 10 year minimum.
Fire that gun during the crime - 20 year minimum.
Shoot someone with that gun during the crime - minimum of life.

In The South, criminals are not coddled nor are they considered "victims of society".


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

We are suffering from a cultural problem, and that problem is the uprooting and discarding of the fundamental ethics, morals and principles understood by all. Right and wrong was not only understood, but expected.

Today, the incarcerated feel as if they are victims of the Man, and feel little pressure to assimilate back into civilized society.

Until our culture is healed, how can we address this or any other issue?

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams


----------



## Illini Warrior (Jan 24, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Florida has a 10-20-Life law.
> Use a gun in the commission of a crime - 10 year minimum.
> Fire that gun during the crime - 20 year minimum.
> Shoot someone with that gun during the crime - minimum of life.
> ...



yet - the only states with ANY kind of legal maneuvering to re-store gun rights are located in the South .... they just passed a law allowing felons to get a barber's license - and that was hotly disputed .....


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

In most case it was not 1 felony nor a minor one that got them finally in prison. They have shown they they refuse to live by any standard but their own and will pray upon others to their own benefit. 
They had their chance likely many free pass There is a price to pay and they should pay it.
Time and time again And these people were let off many times. Just two in the news today 100's you will never hear about unless it touches you. In my case they had 14 felonies never served a day on any of them all serious ones. 
Texas woman granted clemency by Obama last year back in prison | Fox News

Ex NBA star again
Former NBA Player Sebastian Telfair Arrested on Gun Possession-Related Charges: NYPD | NBC New York


----------



## HeIsRisen (May 5, 2013)

Illini Warrior said:


> just because it wasn't spelled out specifically by the forefathers - that inspired & wrote The Constitution - does't mean it wasn't implied or intended ... highly doubt the likes of Jefferson ever thought that a murderer, highwayman, cutthroat pirate, or defiler of women & children would EVER be considered to be released back into society - much less re-armed to commit the crimes all over again ...
> 
> I'm on Jefferson's side - not near enough execution sentences these days ....
> 
> ...


You're ignorant of the period Sir. Not only did they arm such men in this country's fight for it's independence but even they themselves were such men in the eyes of the law they were under in their settlement of this land.

Stupidity involved? I'm neither of those things and have no felons in my family. In fact, myself and others decorated veterans of foreign war.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

FWIW, not every felon is a gang-bangin' child molester that likes to rob liquor stores at gunpoint, is a pimp and peddles drugs. Writing a rubber check over a certain dollar amount is a felony. So is tempering with your electric meter. _Copyright infringment_ is a felony....... egads..... how many here have downloaded an image or some text off the innernet and used it?

So if someone ends up in the pokey because they bounced a $50,000 check, they serve their time, learn their lesson, and go on to be productive members of society (read: commit no further crimes), why not?

I have two friends who surprised the living snot out of me when I learned of their youthful transgressions. You'd never know it by their behaviour today. One is actually petitioning to have his 2A right restored, solely so he can go with me to the range and go boom.

Would you deny Willy Nelson the right to own a gun because of his troubles with the IRS?


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

As I have said in similar threads that I have started....if someone has completed their punishment and "is safe enough to live" in society, then they should have full rights restored. If they are a danger, keep incarcerated or stretch their neck and be done with it. I know felons that should have their gun right restored.


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

IMO... Any felon who has served his time and has been charged with nothing more serious than a traffic ticket in the 7 years following his release should have his 2A rights fully restored.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

IMHO it's all a matter of trust. After committing a crime and doing your time are you automatically FULLY trust worthy??? Just because you did time completely changed you mindset?? I would assume spending time with hardened criminal's was the complete cure all needed. You'll never do a bad thing again. BS. 

Just like a dog that attacked a kid. Do you ever really trust that animal? OK, lets give them a gun back, are you fricken kidding me???

The criminal knew the penalties yet went ahead and did the crime anyway. Live with the consequences.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Chipper said:


> IMHO it's all a matter of trust. After committing a crime and doing your time are you automatically FULLY trust worthy??? Just because you did time completely changed you mindset?? I would assume spending time with hardened criminal's was the complete cure all needed. You'll never do a bad thing again. BS.
> 
> Just like a dog that attacked a kid. Do you ever really trust that animal? OK, lets give them a gun back, are you fricken kidding me???
> 
> The criminal knew the penalties yet went ahead and did the crime anyway. Live with the consequences.


I think part of the risk and gift of being a constitutional republic.


----------



## Jammer Six (Jun 2, 2017)

All rights, all people, all the time.

If his sentence is over, it's over, and everyone has the right to self-defense. Everyone. Including felons, immigrants and every single person you hate. The only adults who should be denied weapons are the insane.

If it's not over, don't let him out.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Jammer Six said:


> All rights, all people, all the time.
> 
> If his sentence is over, it's over, and everyone has the right to self-defense. Everyone. Including felons, immigrants and every single person you hate. The only adults who should be denied weapons are the insane.
> 
> If it's not over, don't let him out.


Now, now Leonard.....


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

Chipper said:


> ................The criminal knew the penalties yet went ahead and did the crime anyway. Live with the consequences.


Sometimes, the 'criminal' didn't even know what they were doing was a crime.

You decide to take your motorbike for a ride in the woods, along the marked path where it's permitted. You didn't realize that a massive blizzard was coming and by the time there is a layer of snow covering the ground, you've lost track of the path. An officer finds you and charges you with having your motorbike in an area where it is not allowed, because you, unknowingly and without intent, have violated the Wilderness Act, which seeks to protect federally-designated areas of wilderness, partly by prohibiting motor vehicles.

Real example: In 1996 well-known automobile racer Bobby Unser was convicted of a federal crime and sentenced to six months in prison. Why? Because he got lost in a blizzard in Colorado for two days while snowmobiling, and was guilty of "unlawful operation of a snowmobile within a National Forest Wilderness Area."

You tell a park ranger that you cleaned up your picnic table. You honestly did think that you cleaned up, completely unaware of the fact that your friend's plastic cup dropped on the ground. As you and your friends are leaving the park's picnic area, a park ranger asks if you've cleaned up after yourselves. You innocently answer, "Yes, sir." Unbelievably, it could be argued that you have just given false statements to a federal official, a federal felony. Any false statement made to a government official, even when it's in conversation and not under oath or in writing, can fall under a "false statement" charge.

Real example: In 2008 Emadeddin Z. Muntasser was sentenced in U.S. District Court to a year in prison for lying to an FBI agent when he denied traveling to Afghanistan years earlier. The transcript suggests that Muntasser was not purposefully trying to deceive interrogators, but rather had doubts about his original answer and felt he needed advice from legal counsel. The point here is that the wording of the very serious charge is open to interpretation at best.

Boundless similar stories exist because the Feds like to have classes on how to convict ham sandwiches.


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

We can, and should, impose more life time paroles. I only say that since the sheep can't stomach executions. Parole is an agreement. If the person doesn't want it then let them rot in prison. If they agree then it's not an issue.


----------



## 7052 (Jul 1, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Should murderers be allowed to have guns?
> How about armed robbers?
> How about a rapist who holds a gun to his victims head?


Well, if we're asking for an opinion, then my answer is simple. It wouldn't matter because they would be dead.

I believe wholeheartedly in expanding the death penalty to include a whole host of crimes. All premeditated murder, forcible rape, non-family kidnapping, violent sexual assault, etc, etc. I also believe in reforming what qualifies as certain crimes (such as no calling it "rape" because she changed her mind a week later and regrets having sex).

My view is simple. There should be *NO* "life in prison". There should be no sentences longer than 20 years. If you can't be trusted to be back in society, or if you are so dangerous that we need to lock you away for two decades or more, then we simply should not have you in society. Perhaps the death penalty isn't a deterrent to crime. So the hell what. It is a punishment for crimes.

For everyone else, I'm thinking that once you have done your time, you get all ov your constitutional rights back. Second offences (even for more minor offenses) get things elevated close to "bang!".


----------



## BlackDog (Nov 23, 2013)

I have a friend who was convicted of a felony back in 1989. No priors. He served his time well and has lived well since he got out. Started a successful business and with his wife raised two great kids. One has graduated from college with a degree in engineering and the other is in her first year in college.

He got his voting and firearms rights restored last year. I couldn't be more proud of the way he's turned his life around.

Not every felon is a lost cause.


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

I believe it should be a case by case process that factors the nature of the crime and the person applying for rights to be restored.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

I have a cousin who was in a small County sheriff's department. He was convicted of misappropriation of funds by diverting money from one fund to a task force without approval.
Felony. 12 years in law enforcement turned into 6 months jail and 5 years probation. He can't own a handgun but can own a rifle and a shotgun.
Big difference between his screwup and druggies and rapists and violent predators. I agree that if a man can't see his error and rehabilitate himself, then we don't need him in society. 
My other thought is that if the government wasn't so intent on keeping us in the victim/prey category, we might not have so many predators to contend with.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

I think that a judge should decide if a person can get their gun rights back...It is one of those things that is hard to have a hard and fast rule..too many scenarios


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Maine-Marine said:


> I think that a judge should decide if a person can get their gun rights back...It is one of those things that is hard to have a hard and fast rule..too many scenarios


 I would agree, except. Most felons plea down the charges, the most serious often get dropped. Serious Violent crimes end up with paper work that just says he had a bad day got caught with a joint. In most every case they had to work really had to get convicted and go to prison. It may have been different 50 plus years ago but not anymore.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Society is very prejudice towards anyone with a criminal record but yet our politicians continue to create more laws. Most of ya'll break laws everyday and don't even realize it. It is all fun and games until you get caught. Some of you are all for the death penalty and want to throw it around freely. All the time they are proving someone on death row innocent because of evidence tampering or new DNA evidence or what ever. How would you feel being on death row knowing you didn't do what was charged?

Take that same statement and apply it to a simple prison sentence. Prosecutors are pricks and only care about the statistic to get re elected. I am not going to say all cops because I don't feel it is all cops but look on YouTube. Your going to see enough videos to make you sick. Excessive use of force, just plain being a dick and searching without a search warrant. The last was a new find for me. I cant believe these people can get away with searching without a warrant and being video taped at the same.

I trust no one and I especially do not trust anyone that has that kind of power over me. I have not had any interaction with law enforcement in many years. Usually I see a cop in passing on the road and that's it. Using common sense I speak little beyond common courtesy and if I do have to speak officially it is I need to consult my attorney. I cop is not my friend or buddy they are there to do a job and put someone in jail.

When I was a correction officer both in Georgia and in Michigan report writing was called creative writing. You wrote it the way to make it fit. Whether it was a disciplinary report or a use of force report. I may have or may not have done or seen stuff but what I have saw or done I am ashamed of now that I am some years older and hopefully wiser.

Just because you are in prison does not make you a horrible person. It means you make a mistake and F'd up. Sure there are a lot of repeat offenders and a lot that are just to street stupid to change. There are first or second time offenders that made mistake(s) that turn around and lead productive lives. The United States leads the world in prison populations and I believe recidivism rates also. We have to many laws on the books. A large reason our recidivism rate is high is because of education and society being prejudice towards those with a record. If you cannot get a job and do not have job skills what would you do? Are you going to starve and live in the street or would you go back to selling weed? Until America gets some common sense and starts investing the cycle will continue.

We need to provide technical job skills and training, college if they pay for it themselves. Where we really need to invest is with the youth while you can still mold them like clay. This is all a fairy tale. America will never put forth an effort to change. I am just glad I live in a rural area where we still invest in our youth.

Here are some threads on criminals and prison terms etc. from not to long ago. Well worth looking over.

http://www.prepperforums.net/forum/...-gun-rights-saved-trooper-arizona-ambush.html

http://www.prepperforums.net/forum/...169-afteraction-self-defense-altercation.html

http://www.prepperforums.net/forum/political-news-topics/63521-another-commuted-criminal.html

http://www.prepperforums.net/forum/...-her-refused-medicine-left-her-catatonic.html


----------



## Salt-N-Pepper (Aug 18, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Should murderers be allowed to have guns?
> How about armed robbers?
> How about a rapist who holds a gun to his victims head?


Murderers should die in prison (one way or the other).
Armed robbers should die in prison (of old age)
Rapists should die in prison (one way or the other)

Stop sending non-violent criminals away forever for stupid stuff like pot, and put dangerous people away for life (again, one way or the other).

Do that, the question is moot.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Egyas said:


> Well, if we're asking for an opinion, then my answer is simple. It wouldn't matter because they would be dead.
> 
> I believe wholeheartedly in expanding the death penalty to include a whole host of crimes. All premeditated murder, forcible rape, non-family kidnapping, violent sexual assault, etc, etc. I also believe in reforming what qualifies as certain crimes (such as no calling it "rape" because she changed her mind a week later and regrets having sex).
> 
> ...


You and my Work Wifey. She says the same thing. If someone can't be trusted on the street, fire up the chair or throw the rope over a brace. There's no good reason for so many prisons.


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

Maine-Marine said:


> I think that a judge should decide if a person can get their gun rights back...It is one of those things that is hard to have a hard and fast rule..too many scenarios


But where in the constitution does it provide for that? Please note I agree with you but many interpret the right to keep and bear arms to all. As I recall a limit on one could create a limit on all? Common sense we know fails the progressive but in the strict constitutionalist it fails them as well. Which is why I belief in parole for life. Again parole is an agreement and no inmate has to accept the offer.


----------



## Jammer Six (Jun 2, 2017)

Maine-Marine said:


> I think that a judge should decide if a person can get their gun rights back...It is one of those things that is hard to have a hard and fast rule..too many scenarios


The difference between a right and a privilege is that rights don't come from other people, nor do they require anyone's permission.

In the U.S., only one constitutional right is unlimited, the rest are regulated. Generally speaking, that's a good thing, but a right is a right, and isn't up to man.


----------



## 7052 (Jul 1, 2014)

stowlin said:


> But where in the constitution does it provide for that?


That was one of my initial questions. One that I don't think anyone ha answered.

"What is the constitutional basis for revoking a man's second amendment rights?"


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

Egyas said:


> That was one of my initial questions. One that I don't think anyone ha answered.
> 
> "What is the constitutional basis for revoking a man's second amendment rights?"


The 5th Amendment.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,* nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;* nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


----------



## 7052 (Jul 1, 2014)

Back Pack Hack said:


> The 5th Amendment.
> 
> No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,* nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;* nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


I have doubts that the "5th amendment is the legal basis" argument holds in this case. Think about it. Were that the case, then someone could go to court for slander/libel, and then via "due process" have their first amendment rights revoked permanently. That has never been held as reasonable. Same w/ other Constitutional rights.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Jammer Six said:


> The difference between a right and a privilege is that rights don't come from other people, nor do they require anyone's permission.
> 
> In the U.S., only one constitutional right is unlimited, the rest are regulated. Generally speaking, that's a good thing, but a right is a right, and isn't up to man.


Your idea is really only half formed though... Rights are indeed rights BUT you can GIVE them up... Right to remain silent, you can talk to police...

Right to keep and bear arms, if you decide to commit a crime you can give up that right

all rights are regulated.

freedom of speech does not allow for slander or creating a disturbance
freedom of the press has limits/regulated
assembly has restrictions

So....
I say let a pro 2nd judge determine if a released person gets that right back


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

stowlin said:


> But where in the constitution does it provide for that? Please note I agree with you but many interpret the right to keep and bear arms to all. As I recall a limit on one could create a limit on all? Common sense we know fails the progressive but in the strict constitutionalist it fails them as well. Which is why I belief in parole for life. Again parole is an agreement and no inmate has to accept the offer.


parole for life..... imagine living each day KNOWING that if you get caught doing something wrong you go back to jail. imagine getting caught with a knife while you are fishing, or on a ride with a buddy he has a joint, or you miss a meeting with your parole officer, no drinking a cold beer after work

parole for life is a very very very very bad idea

nobody should have to live with the Sword of Damocles over their head


----------



## Inor (Mar 22, 2013)

If you are convicted of a felony, you lose your U.S. citizenship for life. Period. You have already proven that your judgement is flawed, so why should you be allowed to have access to a firearm? Or a ballot? Or a passport?

You may get out of prison and be able to return to society, but you never regain your status as a citizen. Don't like it? Don't commit crimes.


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

Punishment is supposed to be a deterrent and parole for life would be. Alt is they be executed. I think they'd choose parole. Don't look at it like a Hollywood movie it's a state of existence with agreed upon limited rights based on prior bad behavior.



Maine-Marine said:


> parole for life..... imagine living each day KNOWING that if you get caught doing something wrong you go back to jail. imagine getting caught with a knife while you are fishing, or on a ride with a buddy he has a joint, or you miss a meeting with your parole officer, no drinking a cold beer after work
> 
> parole for life is a very very very very bad idea
> 
> ...


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

stowlin said:


> Punishment is supposed to be a deterrent and parole for life would be. Alt is they be executed. I think they'd choose parole. Don't look at it like a Hollywood movie it's a state of existence with agreed upon limited rights based on prior bad behavior.


Your idea is so bad, I do not even know where to start
but I will start with the money.... Do you have any freaking idea how much it would cost to track all the people on parole!!!!!!!!!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Inor said:


> If you are convicted of a felony, you lose your U.S. citizenship for life. Period. You have already proven that your judgement is flawed, so why should you be allowed to have access to a firearm? Or a ballot? Or a passport?
> 
> You may get out of prison and be able to return to society, but you never regain your status as a citizen. Don't like it? Don't commit crimes.


Horrible idea.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

Egyas said:


> I have doubts that the "5th amendment is the legal basis" argument holds in this case. Think about it. Were that the case, then someone could go to court for slander/libel, and then via "due process" have their first amendment rights revoked permanently. That has never been held as reasonable. Same w/ other Constitutional rights.


"This case" may not be based solely on the 5th. But there's a plethora of laws, rulings, court decisions etc that are.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Some felons should have their gun rights restored and some should not; it is like everything else in life, that is a hard question, it takes hard thinking to solve.
A board set up to review any applications to restore, would be needed, with wise men sitting on it. Right there is the nub of it, can wise men be found? If they are found, then great!
I won't hold my breath, and vainly hope that wise men will be in charge of restoration. They would be political appointees, but you gotta use somebody, to fill a board.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

This thread is turning idiotic just like the other threads have. People having hard core ideas but they don't have a clue how it really works. If you want to be hard core then look at both sides. Cops, prosecutors and then the criminals and what brought them into the system and for some what is keeping them in the system.

What about you hard core people? If they outlaw firearms or something near and dear to your heart are you going to comply? Are you willing to fight? You will be a criminal and some piece of sh*t prosecutor will be doing their best to ruin your life. The criminal justice system is no joke. Your life as you know it will be over in seconds and if you try to fight your savings if you have savings​ will be depleted being used up in attorney fees. The government​ doesn't care. They have someone else's money to spend, yours the tax payer. 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Inor (Mar 22, 2013)

MaterielGeneral said:


> This thread is turning idiotic just like the other threads have. People having hard core ideas but they don't have a clue how it really works. If you want to be hard core then look at both sides. Cops, prosecutors and then the criminals and what brought them into the system and for some what is keeping them in the system.


What brought them into the system? How about breaking the law...



MaterielGeneral said:


> What about you hard core people? If they outlaw firearms or something near and dear to your heart are you going to comply? Are you willing to fight?


Absolutely. But there is a right way to fight and a wrong way. Fighting it the wrong way gets you thrown in jail and your rights stripped. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.



MaterielGeneral said:


> You will be a criminal and some piece of sh*t prosecutor will be doing their best to ruin your life. The criminal justice system is no joke. Your life as you know it will be over in seconds and if you try to fight your savings if you have savings will be depleted being used up in attorney fees. The government doesn't care. They have someone else's money to spend, yours the tax payer.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


Why would I try to "fight my savings"?

It really is pretty simple. If you want to keep all your rights, then just follow the law. What is the problem?


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

I'm all for restoring ALL rights of every American citizen, regardless if they were convicted felon. The key here is, if you have done the time then your debt is paid. But I want to be clear with the "if you have done your time" statement. Let's say you are a bank robber. 25 years for bank robbery means 25 years. Not 25 years, serve only 5 and do 10 years of probation. For example, in Baltimore 1st degree murder is life sentence. You do life sentence and when you are done you get your rights back. But 1st degree murder in Baltimore is bargained down to manslaughter with 20 years prison in which you will only have to do 4 years then you will be out. No rights restoration for that kind of prison sentence deals.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

If they get their rights back then their time need to be increase 100 fold. Part of letting them out is losing the rights if they get them back they need to stay locked up. This whole topic is based on some misconception that the good boy just had a joint and went to prison with a felony . Nope don't happen. The have to really work at it.


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

M-M the state of parole is fixed to you, and if done the way I suggest it would need to adapt. The correctional institution of probation and parole needs to adapt to our way of life. We can use electronic tracking on new parolees to insure compliance. Later after they've adapted to society they won't need a so called college educated parole officer assigned to them. They can check in digitally along with their tax return. It just does not have to be the way it is, and can in fact be so much more affordable that I would also impose a tax on them to pay for it.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

stowlin said:


> M-M the state of parole is fixed to you, and if done the way I suggest it would need to adapt. The correctional institution of probation and parole needs to adapt to our way of life. We can use electronic tracking on new parolees to insure compliance. Later after they've adapted to society they won't need a so called college educated parole officer assigned to them. They can check in digitally along with their tax return. It just does not have to be the way it is, and can in fact be so much more affordable that I would also impose a tax on them to pay for it.


I seldom swear but what the ^%$^.. now you want to have parole last forever and you are going to tax released prisoner to pay for their monitoring

you have taken a bad position and now are doubling down on it

released prisoner already have a hard time.... finding work, find housing, trying to catch up on child support, past taxes, etc etc etc... and now you want to add a tax to them to pay for parole...

do you understand NO TAXATION without representation!!!

at some point you have to be able to complete your time and be a freeman.

electronic monitoring requires some major network infrastructure and unless you are willing to pay verizon or att $80 per month per parolee..

no sir.. we need to allow people that have served their time to be freeman again


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

Technology is far better today then when we started paying $80 a month for monitoring. It can be done for $125 a year now pretty easily, and for a good parolee dedicated to turning life around it's not needed for a life time just until we can enable them to reside in our society again. You and me have a different opinion. You are thinking old school implying the way things are, and I'm trying to offer a solution that would not require any change to our constitution. I for one love the 2nd amendment but I recognize the quagmire of extending it to a released felon who is likely to abuse that right and get someone hurt, and I offer a solution that prevents that. A solution that is constitutional because it's voluntary and an agreement between society and an offender. I see the only other choice as execution and our society won't adopt that choice. 

BTW I have long thought criminals ought to pay a higher tax rate, just like student who abuse federal student loans and tax dodgers. It's not taxation with out representation. If you don't want to pay sit in prison. It's an agreement hence a sincere act of representation.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

These have been the dumbest comments I have read in a long time.

You can only push a person so much and eventually the person is going to push back.

If a person is put into prison regardless of the reason. Gets out and does their probation and parole if required and pays their fines, fees and restitution if required they are done with the criminal justice system. They have paid their debt to society. 

If you were to try that crap of lifetime probation and monitoring I personally would tell you to shove it up your butt. After the beginning of this working in a prison would get much more dangerous than it already is. Why behave when it's just going to be a lifetime of punishment. 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

MaterielGeneral said:


> These have been the dumbest comments I have read in a long time.
> 
> You can only push a person so much and eventually the person is going to push back.
> 
> ...


 They already pushed it most of the time a number of times. Give them a second chance yes but not with a gun and voting right they blew it. If they must have that they can rot in prison.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

stowlin said:


> Technology is far better today then when we started paying $80 a month for monitoring. It can be done for $125 a year now pretty easily, and for a good parolee dedicated to turning life around it's not needed for a life time just until we can enable them to reside in our society again. You and me have a different opinion. You are thinking old school implying the way things are, and I'm trying to offer a solution that would not require any change to our constitution. I for one love the 2nd amendment but I recognize the quagmire of extending it to a released felon who is likely to abuse that right and get someone hurt, and I offer a solution that prevents that. A solution that is constitutional because it's voluntary and an agreement between society and an offender. I see the only other choice as execution and our society won't adopt that choice.
> 
> BTW I have long thought criminals ought to pay a higher tax rate, just like student who abuse federal student loans and tax dodgers. It's not taxation with out representation. If you don't want to pay sit in prison. It's an agreement hence a sincere act of representation.


My solution.. have a judge or panel decide if a person gets the right to bear arms back... low tech low cost and could be completed in less then 15 minutes

your solution continues to punish the person long past the time that a NORMAL caring human being would see fit to continue the punishment.... At some point the people will revolt at the heavy handed actions... it happened before in 1776


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Smitty901 said:


> They already pushed it most of the time a number of times. Give them a second chance yes but not with a gun and voting right they blew it. If they must have that they can rot in prison.


OK I will agree that they should not having voting rights..but along with that they should not have to pay any federal or state taxes


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Maine-Marine said:


> OK I will agree that they should not having voting rights..but along with that they should not have to pay any federal or state taxes


 They had their chance. they were given breaks ,chances plead deals, charges drop all together, and they kept coming back for more. Finally they get a DA that says enough and they get convicted of some reduced charge. Then they want it all forgotten. I say no condition of release and another chance is no guns no vote. Other wise what reason does anyone have to follow the basic rules many of us live by?


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Why should voting even matter. If a person has completed their imprisonment why not vote. It's common sense having a process for firearms but I never heard murder by a vote.
Anyone should be allowed to vote as long as they are not incarcerated.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> They already pushed it most of the time a number of times. Give them a second chance yes but not with a gun and voting right they blew it. If they must have that they can rot in prison.


You don't have a clue who are in prison and what charges and if they have a long record. Why are you so bitter?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

MaterielGeneral said:


> You don't have a clue who are in prison and what charges and if they have a long record. Why are you so bitter?
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


 Because I do have a clue. The old wore out line about the guy that got bust with one join in prison for a felony is BS. You find out he had 6 major crimes maybe even shot someone plead it down maybe even turn on someone for the deal. Heck time served around here in many murder cases is often about 4 years. he was a good boy he just made a little mistake. Then you do some home work 14 felonies all let slide. then he kills someone. Don't want to pay the price don't keep rolling the dice.


----------



## Inor (Mar 22, 2013)

MaterielGeneral said:


> Why should voting even matter. If a person has completed their imprisonment why not vote. It's common sense having a process for firearms but I never heard murder by a vote.
> Anyone should be allowed to vote as long as they are not incarcerated.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


By the time they actually get convicted of a felony, they have made a LOT of bad choices. So let's just compound the problem by allowing them vote? Are you mad?!?

If they do their time and learn their lesson, maybe they can redeem themselves. But that is between them and God. Keeping them away from guns and the ballot box is about protecting society from people that have already proven themselves too damn stupid or unstable to live in ordered society.


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

Where in the constitution is that covered? I ask because a liberal anti gun judge woukd never allow a well deserving person his 2nd amendment back.

With my solution a parolee coukd in fact seek the end of their parole and a judge would make that decision.



Maine-Marine said:


> My solution.. have a judge or panel decide if a person gets the right to bear arms back... low tech low cost and could be completed in less then 15 minutes
> 
> your solution continues to punish the person long past the time that a NORMAL caring human being would see fit to continue the punishment.... At some point the people will revolt at the heavy handed actions... it happened before in 1776


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

Maine-Marine said:


> parole for life..... imagine living each day KNOWING that if you get caught doing something wrong you go back to jail. imagine getting caught with a knife while you are fishing, or on a ride with a buddy he has a joint, or you miss a meeting with your parole officer, no drinking a cold beer after work
> 
> parole for life is a very very very very bad idea
> 
> ...


First time offenders, your exactly right especially if it was a non violent offense. When you get to the 2nd or third time being locked up on new felony charges then I have to disagree with you. Its kind of like people throwing a fit when a man faced life in prison for stealing a candy bar which was misdemeanor theft. They left out the part where he had double digit occurrences of being locked up.

The more I think about probation the more I like the idea especially when you couple it with court orders to correct what caused the crime to occur in the first place. I believe that good people make bad mistakes and you shouldn't necessarily destroy the rest of their lives for a one time mistake depending on what it was.

Reserve prison for serious crimes such as murder, rape, treason, serious assault, etc.


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

Maine-Marine said:


> OK I will agree that they should not having voting rights..but along with that they should not have to pay any federal or state taxes


give me all my taxes back and I'll care less about voting


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> Because I do have a clue. The old wore out line about the guy that got bust with one join in prison for a felony is BS. You find out he had 6 major crimes maybe even shot someone plead it down maybe even turn on someone for the deal. Heck time served around here in many murder cases is often about 4 years. he was a good boy he just made a little mistake. Then you do some home work 14 felonies all let slide. then he kills someone. Don't want to pay the price don't keep rolling the dice.


It's bs is it. Do you work in a criminal justice field? Have you experienced the other side being F'd by a piece of sh*t prosecutor and a lying piece of crap state trooper? I have. When I was a correction officer I went through b.s. and survived because I was lucky enough to get a bitch of an attorney that tore up the courtroom.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Inor said:


> By the time they actually get convicted of a felony, they have made a LOT of bad choices. So let's just compound the problem by allowing them vote? Are you mad?!?
> 
> If they do their time and learn their lesson, maybe they can redeem themselves. But that is between them and God. Keeping them away from guns and the ballot box is about protecting society from people that have already proven themselves too damn stupid or unstable to live in ordered society.


Are you a moron? You can f up once and have a felony. I was a correction officer in a self defense situation and the piece of sh*t procecutor was aiming for multiple felonies. Luckily I had the ability to get a very good defense attorney. What about Joe smoe that doesn't have the money?

You people are so one sided. You don't see the big picture. What does happen and what could happen. Almost every prisoner I talked to had a court appointed attorney. Prosecutors stack charges, anything and everything they can charge you with hoping you will take something but that something ruins your life.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

MaterielGeneral said:


> Are you a moron? You can f up once and have a felony. I was a correction officer in a self defense situation and the piece of sh*t procecutor was aiming for multiple felonies. Luckily I had the ability to get a very good defense attorney. What about Joe smoe that doesn't have the money?
> 
> You people are so one sided. You don't see the big picture. What does happen and what could happen. Almost every prisoner I talked to had a court appointed attorney. Prosecutors stack charges, anything and everything they can charge you with hoping you will take something but that something ruins your life.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


People, particularly the ones that work in law enforcement, do tend to see things on this issue a bit one sided but thats due to the nature of their jobs. I do agree with the notion that some people are given way too many chances and too many slaps on the wrists as I've seen that first hand, especially when it comes to juvenile justice. But I also see things from your point of view where you get "that cop" thats looking to win an award or make a name for himself so he goes out and pulls over every car he comes across hoping to find something he can charge people with.

You above all though being a corrections officer should know that there are some people that are going to get out of prison that should never taste free air again, much less own a weapon as well as people that probably could have been given warning and wouldn't have offended again but had the book thrown at them.


----------



## Inor (Mar 22, 2013)

MaterielGeneral said:


> Are you a moron? You can f up once and have a felony. I was a correction officer in a self defense situation and the piece of sh*t procecutor was aiming for multiple felonies. Luckily I had the ability to get a very good defense attorney. What about Joe smoe that doesn't have the money?
> 
> You people are so one sided. You don't see the big picture. What does happen and what could happen. Almost every prisoner I talked to had a court appointed attorney. Prosecutors stack charges, anything and everything they can charge you with hoping you will take something but that something ruins your life.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


I am a moron?

You were charged with multiple felonies. I never have been. Who is the moron asshat?


----------



## Boss Dog (Feb 8, 2013)

unsubscribing, someone's not having a very good day.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

MaterielGeneral said:


> Are you a moron? You can f up once and have a felony. I was a correction officer in a self defense situation and the piece of sh*t procecutor was aiming for multiple felonies. Luckily I had the ability to get a very good defense attorney. What about Joe smoe that doesn't have the money?
> 
> You people are so one sided. You don't see the big picture. What does happen and what could happen. Almost every prisoner I talked to had a court appointed attorney. Prosecutors stack charges, anything and everything they can charge you with hoping you will take something but that something ruins your life.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


 You are entitled to you option, even if it is wrong most felons had to work really hard to get a conviction that stuck with out pleading down to a parking ticket. Just because you worked in a prison does not mean you know how many crimes that person really committed before getting a real conviction.
So it is a DA's fault for ruining a person by charging them. No wonder we have the society we have now.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

stowlin said:


> Where in the constitution is that covered? I ask because a liberal anti gun judge woukd never allow a well deserving person his 2nd amendment back.
> 
> With my solution a parolee coukd in fact seek the end of their parole and a judge would make that decision.


where in the constitution does it allow for life long parole??????????????????????????????????

currently guns rights are taken away, I am suggesting a way to get them back

I am not talking about the guy convicted for his 8th armed robbery.... I am talking about the folks that get one felony

here are the top 20 felonies in the USA.. are you saying NON of these folks should ever be able to go hunting or have a gun or vote

Top 20 List of Felonies in the U.S. https://www.schatzanderson.com/information-and-resources/20-common-felony-crimes-u-s/

-Drug abuse violations are exceptionally common, often the most common felony offense, with about 2,000,000 violations annually.
-Property crimes include auto theft, burglary, larceny, arson, and theft.
-Driving while intoxicated is so common that every one of the states spends an incredible amount of law enforcement time and expense on preventing and catching DUI offenders.
-Larceny (theft), under the category of property crimes, is by itself one of the most common felony crimes in the U.S.
-Assault is, tragically, tremendously common, with well over 1,000,000 offenses each year.
-Disorderly conduct is a category that includes various crimes that pose a risk to society.
-Liquor laws that limit the sales of alcohol, such as sales to minors, are broken regularly across all of the states.
-Violent crime is another category including manslaughter, murder, robbery, assault, and forcible rape.
-Public drunkenness is still considered a crime and is rather common.
-The next three are individual crimes from the violent crime category: 
Aggravated assault
Burglary
Vandalism
- FRAUD - Due to media raising awareness, most Americans are aware of the commonness of fraud in the business and political arenas.
-Weapons violations include carrying a concealed weapon, or possessing a gun without a license.
-Curfew and loitering laws exist in certain areas for different reasons, such as controlling gang activity.
-Robbery is next in line, which is theft involving direct contact with the victim.
-Domestic violence and child abuse are sadly pervasive crimes in every city in the U.S.
-Stolen property violations include being in possession of stolen property, whether or not the possessor is the one who stole the property.
-Motor vehicle theft is common enough that car alarms are a must-have item in many neighborhoods.
-Finally, forgery and counterfeiting include writing checks on someone else's account and printing fake money.

my favorite "Stolen property"... I am betting a lot of people have broken this law and not even known it...

there was just a case where a retired Army Master Sgt was refused a gun sale because he had a 30+ year old conviction for drug possession when he was 16...and to top it off he was fined for trying to buy a weapon


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

NotTooProudToHide said:


> especially when you couple it with court orders to correct what caused the crime to occur in the first place.


like a restraining order


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

NotTooProudToHide said:


> People, particularly the ones that work in law enforcement, do tend to see things on this issue a bit one sided but thats due to the nature of their jobs. I do agree with the notion that some people are given way too many chances and too many slaps on the wrists as I've seen that first hand, especially when it comes to juvenile justice. But I also see things from your point of view where you get "that cop" thats looking to win an award or make a name for himself so he goes out and pulls over every car he comes across hoping to find something he can charge people with.
> 
> You above all though being a corrections officer should know that there are some people that are going to get out of prison that should never taste free air again, much less own a weapon as well as people that probably could have been given warning and wouldn't have offended again but had the book thrown at them.


Juveniles should be given several chances to be reformed and change. Many juveniles entering the system have not had the family unit or a structured upbringing. Juveniles act on their emotions instead of thinking things out clearly. Juveniles are also very difficult to work with in a correctional setting.

You are right. There are many, many people in prison that should not be released or have their firearm rights reinstalled. Thank the politicians for writing the laws on the books that make it difficult to go thru life without breaking a law. They release people early because of overcrowding. Some people cannot change. Look at someone that has committed the same crimes over and over again like armed robbery or committing assault in the process of a crime. Those individuals would be a good example of not letting them have firearms again.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Inor said:


> I am a moron?
> 
> You were charged with multiple felonies. I never have been. Who is the moron asshat?


You had better hope you never get into a self defense situation because you are going to get arrested and go to jail. Then you will have to pay close to $10,000.00 to hire a good attorney to fight it. Huh, the irony of it. You will then be a criminal. Hope you keep money in the bank or will you be a b*tch and roll over.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

stowlin said:


> M-M the state of parole is fixed to you, and if done the way I suggest it would need to adapt. The correctional institution of probation and parole needs to adapt to our way of life. We can use electronic tracking on new parolees to insure compliance. Later after they've adapted to society they won't need a so called college educated parole officer assigned to them. They can check in digitally along with their tax return. It just does not have to be the way it is, and can in fact be so much more affordable that I would also impose a tax on them to pay for it.


Would you like to just micro-chip everyone, so we can track not only these convicted felons, but also find out what people are committing felonies? If we know people were at the scene of a crime, it increases the likilhood that the commitedhe crime, right. Come on, it is for the good of society, right? It is for the children, man? Right? ...........


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Inor said:


> I am a moron?
> 
> You were charged with multiple felonies. I never have been. Who is the moron asshat?


This is an asinine comment. You could esily be charged with multiple felonies tomorrow. You may not have committed said felonies.


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

Many of the crimes you listed aren't even felonies that impact gun ownership. Those don't require prison nor should they. DUI for example third on your list.

Parole is an avenue of corrections used to integrate inmates to society. We use it to get people out of prison which is far too expensive. I'll repeat it is an agreement between inmate and the system that incarcerated them for THEIR actions. How would an agreement be unconstitutional? We have folks here who believe execution is the answer, and others that want to hand former violent felons a gun after their sentence is over because our constitution doesn't specifically prevent it. Do you see that quagmire? A solution that would be usable is life long parole or at the very least a very long parole of 10-25 years depending on the crime and offender. Informal parole like informal probation costs very little. I don't believe all offenders need this and I don't believe we execute offenders either. (More we should yes). Those who fall in between are the quagmire for which we need a solution. A constitutional solution is one I have suggested, but yours would require an amendment which I don't believe is feasible.



Maine-Marine said:


> where in the constitution does it allow for life long parole??????????????????????????????????
> 
> currently guns rights are taken away, I am suggesting a way to get them back
> 
> ...


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

How did we get from convicted felons who agree to parole to everyone? Microchips are not necessary in the manner in which you specified or seem to imply. Digital tracking is possible with out any kind of insert. Use of it can vary wildly and would from the beginning of their parole to a later point where not required at all.



stevekozak said:


> Would you like to just micro-chip everyone, so we can track not only these convicted felons, but also find out what people are committing felonies? If we know people were at the scene of a crime, it increases the likilhood that the commitedhe crime, right. Come on, it is for the good of society, right? It is for the children, man? Right? ...........


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

MaterielGeneral said:


> You had better hope you never get into a self defense situation because you are going to get arrested and go to jail. Then you will have to pay close to $10,000.00 to hire a good attorney to fight it. Huh, the irony of it. You will then be a criminal. Hope you keep money in the bank or will you be a b*tch and roll over.


$10k is not a good attorney. Try $50k for better than average.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

stowlin said:


> $10k is not a good attorney. Try $50k for better than average.


Well that was around 2002 so rates probably have went up but here in Northern Michigan cost of living isn't that high. The point is your going to have to pay out of your ass in attorney fees to keep from going to prison.

Your lifetime of parole wont work by the way. It will fail. Probation/parole sucks and inmates will take it to get out of prison but once released they will stop reporting. Its to intrusive and frankly a pain the butt to deal with. Short term, a few years people suck it up and deal with it to get away from the system but your talking lifetime. I know I wouldn't do it. Catch me when you can and when caught I guess I go back to prison. Soon enough prisons will be filled back up.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

MaterielGeneral said:


> Well that was around 2002 so rates probably have went up but here in Northern Michigan cost of living isn't that high. The point is your going to have to pay out of your ass in attorney fees to keep from going to prison.
> 
> Your lifetime of parole wont work by the way. It will fail. Probation/parole sucks and inmates will take it to get out of prison but once released they will stop reporting. Its to intrusive and frankly a pain the butt to deal with. Short term, a few years people suck it up and deal with it to get away from the system but your talking lifetime. I know I wouldn't do it. Catch me when you can and when caught I guess I go back to prison. Soon enough prisons will be filled back up.


 Large number don't follow condition of parole anyway. very few are ever revoked.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

stowlin said:


> Many of the crimes you listed aren't even felonies that impact gun ownership. Those don't require prison nor should they. DUI for example third on your list.
> 
> Parole is an avenue of corrections used to integrate inmates to society. We use it to get people out of prison which is far too expensive. I'll repeat it is an agreement between inmate and the system that incarcerated them for THEIR actions. How would an agreement be unconstitutional? We have folks here who believe execution is the answer, and others that want to hand former violent felons a gun after their sentence is over because our constitution doesn't specifically prevent it. Do you see that quagmire? A solution that would be usable is life long parole or at the very least a very long parole of 10-25 years depending on the crime and offender. Informal parole like informal probation costs very little. I don't believe all offenders need this and I don't believe we execute offenders either. (More we should yes). Those who fall in between are the quagmire for which we need a solution. A constitutional solution is one I have suggested, but yours would require an amendment which I don't believe is feasible.


You are really starting to piss me off, I am not sure if you are stupid or just ignorant!!!!

an agreement between the government and a prisoner... as if the prisoner has ANY ability to negotiate ... state says sign here and we will let you out of prison..but oh by the way you will not be able to sue us, drink alcohol, leave the state, live near a school, own a gun, go hunting, and you will be on parole for 25 years...... OR REFUSE to sign and stay in jail!!!!!!!!!!!

do you honestly think that the people that sign that AGREEMENT will keep it?????? Seriously... offer that deal to everybody and everybody will sign it and 90% will break it within 2 weeks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am done here...

if it was up to me... if you have done your time you should get back ALL your rights!!! If a person is deemed unable to handle those rights being returned and are a danger..leave them in jail. otherwise let them have a chance to get on with life!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> Large number don't follow condition of parole anyway. very few are ever revoked.


You never did answer the question of what experience do you have with the criminal justice system. Please explain your statement, how do you know large numbers don't follow conditions of parole or rarely get it revoked?

I think it was the Georgia prison that I was working at, I had a prisoner released and about a month or two later he was back. His parole was violated. I don't remember the exact reason but it was stupid. He could of lied about the reason but I doubt it. He had nothing to gain by lying.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Maine-Marine said:


> You are really starting to piss me off, I am not sure if you are stupid or just ignorant!!!!
> 
> an agreement between the government and a prisoner... as if the prisoner has ANY ability to negotiate ... state says sign here and we will let you out of prison..but oh by the way you will not be able to sue us, drink alcohol, leave the state, live near a school, own a gun, go hunting, and you will be on parole for 25 years...... OR REFUSE to sign and stay in jail!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> ...


That's what I am saying. Where do I sign?


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

If you need to suggest I'm ignorant because you can't comprehend my point of view then yes be done here and move on. We live in a world where far too much is entitled and taken for granted. We are not about to,change that over night. We can move in the right direction but we'd have to open our eyes and step out of the past. We have 325 million folks enjoying a freedom like no other society. Most would be shocked to know crime rates and violence are actually down from the 60' to 80's. Perhaps our instant access to news makes it all seem worse.



Maine-Marine said:


> You are really starting to piss me off, I am not sure if you are stupid or just ignorant!!!!
> 
> an agreement between the government and a prisoner... as if the prisoner has ANY ability to negotiate ... state says sign here and we will let you out of prison..but oh by the way you will not be able to sue us, drink alcohol, leave the state, live near a school, own a gun, go hunting, and you will be on parole for 25 years...... OR REFUSE to sign and stay in jail!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> ...


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

I didn't envision a parole the way it exist today. After some time it would be more like a blight on the persons record which can legally prevent them from associations (a first amendment right), guns, and even unreasoned search and seizure. In other words it's a status earned by breaking the law. Constitutionally it wouldn't require a change and would be legal. M-M is correct it's an imposed agreement but it's still an agreement and if they don't follow it they return to prison.

We have pre conceived notions of what parole is today because of what it is and what Hollywood says it is, but the state of parole I suggest would be far less intrusive and costly then what we have today.



MaterielGeneral said:


> Well that was around 2002 so rates probably have went up but here in Northern Michigan cost of living isn't that high. The point is your going to have to pay out of your ass in attorney fees to keep from going to prison.
> 
> Your lifetime of parole wont work by the way. It will fail. Probation/parole sucks and inmates will take it to get out of prison but once released they will stop reporting. Its to intrusive and frankly a pain the butt to deal with. Short term, a few years people suck it up and deal with it to get away from the system but your talking lifetime. I know I wouldn't do it. Catch me when you can and when caught I guess I go back to prison. Soon enough prisons will be filled back up.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

MaterielGeneral said:


> You never did answer the question of what experience do you have with the criminal justice system. Please explain your statement, how do you know large numbers don't follow conditions of parole or rarely get it revoked?
> 
> I think it was the Georgia prison that I was working at, I had a prisoner released and about a month or two later he was back. His parole was violated. I don't remember the exact reason but it was stupid. He could of lied about the reason but I doubt it. He had nothing to gain by lying.


 Always excuse for those that refuse to follow any of society rules. That is how they end up in prison in the first place .


----------



## MichaelS. (Sep 4, 2016)

No, I don't want a bunch of ex cons running around with lawful rights to carry and possess firearms. Such ownership is dependent upon good judgement and a sane, ethical ethos. You screw up bad enough to have a felony, no guns for you.


----------



## SGG (Nov 25, 2015)

MichaelS. said:


> No, I don't want a bunch of ex cons running around with lawful rights to carry and possess firearms. Such ownership is dependent upon good judgement and a sane, ethical ethos. You screw up bad enough to have a felony, no guns for you.


Summed up my view


----------



## Jammer Six (Jun 2, 2017)

That's an interesting question, and I'm quite sure there are no numbers, and therefore no answers. I'm also quite sure that anyone who worked there would have anecdotes, not data.

How many prisoners refuse parole because of the conditions of the offer?


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

SGG said:


> Summed up my view


I'm not opposed to it, but how do you reconcile it with our rule of law directed by a constitution that doesn't call for that. Nomwhere in the 2nd amendment does it say men of good morale character.


----------



## Jammer Six (Jun 2, 2017)

MichaelS. said:


> No, I don't want a bunch of ex cons running around with lawful rights to carry and possess firearms. Such ownership is dependent upon good judgement and a sane, ethical ethos. You screw up bad enough to have a felony, no guns for you.


That tells me you don't understand what a right is.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

OK. Let's think about this.

One your debt to society is paid, it is paid. I'm talking about paid in full, parole and all. I'm also NOT talking about extending parole beyond the sentence to prevent gun ownership.

I worked as a correctional officer at a state pen, and most of them would be a threat to anyone if they had a weapon. Before that, I was a city jailer. Same goes with most of our "visitors." The again, I've ran into quite a few people with no record at all who, if I were king, wouldn't allow own a B-B gun.

Those who killed someone? As a veteran detective/professor told me, he'd let out the murderers before anyone else. They already dealt with their biggest problem. They are the ones you'll probably never see in prison, again.

Now, what about the fact that prison isn't just for justice for the victim but also to reform the individual. If reformation is not there, if there is no reason for the convict to change, or at least alter his lifestyle, one might consider it is because prison isn't tough enough. My time as a correction officer leads me to believe the high recidivism rate has something to do with the prison store, the cable TV, and all else that makes prison life comfortable.

What about those who have a genuine change of heart? Get saved, find internal justice, whatever? They served their time, they are now integrated back into society and are productive. Because of their past misdeeds, these people, people who would be by your side when the chips are down, aren't allowed to gun-up?

Sorry. The constitution is still supposed to be the law of the land. A free man is entitled to his rights, wouldn't we all say?

Now, is there a societal problem? Damned skippy, there is. Who's fault is it? Those of us who allowed the secular-humanists dictate policy for decades.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Jammer Six said:


> That tells me you don't understand what a right is.


Thank you,

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Double post


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Denton said:


> Those who killed someone? As a veteran detective/professor told me, he'd let out the murderers before anyone else. They already dealt with their biggest problem. They are the ones you'll probably never see in prison, again.


Buddy of mine got in fight in a bar over a girl. My buddy walked away--UNTIL The guy followed him outside and attacked him, my buddy hit him with a beer bottle that broke and he ended up cutting the guys neck. he was sent to prison for attempted murder... pretty good chances that he would never be a threat to anybody ever again if he was released

Another guy shots his daughters rapist.. chances are he would never be a threat again

women shots and kills her exhusband who was trying to hurt her and ends up getting convicted... chances are she would never be a threat again.


----------



## csi-tech (Apr 13, 2013)

I think non-violent felons who have had a 5 year period without re-offending should be able to petition the court for a review. I think with violent felons and violent sex offenders your debt in this regard is not paid in full until you are dead.

There are alot of people out there who have lost their right to carry/possess because of a simple domestic assault. Push your significant other and that's it. I do not agree with that. I think the assault should be felonious in nature


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Maine-Marine said:


> Buddy of mine got in fight in a bar over a girl. My buddy walked away--UNTIL The guy followed him outside and attacked him, my buddy hit him with a beer bottle that broke and he ended up cutting the guys neck. he was sent to prison for attempted murder... pretty good chances that he would never be a threat to anybody ever again if he was released
> 
> Another guy shots his daughters rapist.. chances are he would never be a threat again
> 
> women shots and kills her exhusband who was trying to hurt her and ends up getting convicted... chances are she would never be a threat again.


I agree with you with maybe the exception of the women, LOL. Women are sneaky, they manipulate and use there charms against men to get what they want. Do they get abused, yep there are a lot of scumbag men out there but there are a lot of women who do the hitting, bitching and esculate fights into control is lost and then they cry abuse. Been there and done that and will be very observant of the women my son(s) bring home. I am also trying to train them in the warning signs and when to run. Look up MGTOW Men Going There Own Way


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

MaterielGeneral said:


> I agree with you with maybe the exception of the women, LOL. Women are sneaky, they manipulate and use there charms against men to get what they want. Do they get abused, yep there are a lot of scumbag men out there but there are a lot of women who do the hitting, bitching and esculate fights into control is lost and then they cry abuse. Been there and done that and will be very observant of the women my son(s) bring home. I am also trying to train them in the warning signs and when to run. Look up MGTOW Men Going There Own Way


I like that woman (Dr. Helen Smith) and fully agree with what she has to say.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

John Galt said:


> I like that woman (Dr. Helen Smith) and fully agree with what she has to say.


Yes, she did give a good message.


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

MaterielGeneral said:


> You people are so one sided.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


What do you mean "you people"?

Just kidding... I'm with you, I know exactly what you mean...


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

6811 said:


> What do you mean "you people"?
> 
> Just kidding... I'm with you, I know exactly what you mean...


He means, Y'all." right?


----------



## SGG (Nov 25, 2015)

Denton said:


> He means, Y'all." right?


All yall


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

Denton said:


> He means, Y'all." right?


Is this an Alabama thing? Cause in Baltimore it's "you's guys"...


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

6811 said:


> What do you mean "you people"?
> 
> Just kidding... I'm with you, I know exactly what you mean...





Denton said:


> He means, Y'all." right?


Its frustrating. Good people do stupid shit and have to pay for it and society as you can see from these comments are so very prejudice and unforgiving. Yeah, there are a lot of scum bags but there are a lot of people that made a mistake and just want to go home to be with family and move on. Been there and done it. First time I was assaulted was from an inmate with 3 life sentences, 2nd assault was by an inmate POS sucker punched me with a 40 year sentence for attempted murder or something like that. 3rd time I was assaulted was by a young man with mental health problems. He had been in solitary confinement for a very long time. I used to be of the mentality of thug huggers were pieces of Sh*t(case workers and others).

I had a very stern mentality and I have seen and possibly done things that I am not proud of. It started to change when I got to the point of no longer getting the flight or fight adrenaline rush when it came to a use of force. I started to take notice and volunteered for camera duty so newer ERT members could get into the fight. It wasn't just not getting the rush but I had no feeling about it. If I wanted I could beat the crap out of someone and I would have no emotion at all. I decided to try and go active duty guard during this time period. Throughout this time period I was changing and getting a better understanding about prisoners and then I went thru my own experieces with the criminal justice system with a self defense incident. It aint no joke. If they are trying to get you they will and you will pay a lot of money to overcome it.

One of the biggest faults with the criminal justice system is that their are to many laws on the books. 2nd fault is there is nothing to protect citizens against bad cops or prosecutors. 3rd is that our prison system is nothing more than a warehousing system. Inmates are not rehabilitated.


----------



## Inor (Mar 22, 2013)

Denton said:


> OK. Let's think about this.
> 
> One your debt to society is paid, it is paid. I'm talking about paid in full, parole and all. I'm also NOT talking about extending parole beyond the sentence to prevent gun ownership.
> 
> ...


You make two assumptions that are fallacies:

1 - That a criminal somehow has a debt to society that can somehow be repaid. Felons do not. How do you "repay" a rape victim? How do you repay the 16 year old kid working at the gas station that was held up? How do you repay the family of a manslaughter victim? Felons do not have a "debt" to society and even if they did, by the time they reach the point of a felony conviction, there is no way to repay any "debt".

2 - That our criminal justice system exists to "reform" criminals. It does not. Our criminal justice system exists for only one purpose - to keep criminals from being predators on law-abiding citizens for some period of time. We lock them up for a period of time based on how dangerous we (as a society) believe they are. But being locked up in prison does not make a bad guy turn good. - More often it is the opposite. Do some of them find redemption? I sure hope so. But, as I said in a previous post, that is between them and God.

Our criminal justice system was intentionally created to make it very difficult to convict somebody in the first place. Beyond that, they have many chances to have their conviction overturned if it really was unjust using the appeals process as well as through executive branch. If after being convicted by a jury, failing in the appeals process and having the Governor and/or President fail to overturn a conviction, I am fully in favor of denying a dirt-bag felon the right to own a gun, vote or have a passport.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Inor said:


> You make two assumptions that are fallacies:
> 
> 1 - That a criminal somehow has a debt to society that can somehow be repaid. Felons do not. How do you "repay" a rape victim? How do you repay the 16 year old kid working at the gas station that was held up? How do you repay the family of a manslaughter victim? Felons do not have a "debt" to society and even if they did, by the time they reach the point of a felony conviction, there is no way to repay any "debt".
> 
> ...


1- I don't make assumptions. Between the whole criminal justice degree thing and corrections training (POST'd and everything!) I'm making no assumptions.

2- Refer to response #1.

Response to the third paragraph, refer to my previous reply. Meanwhile, you take my neighbors. They've never been convicted of any felonies. In trade, I take a few felons I know as replacement neighbors. Trust me; you'll be taking the short straw.

But, what do I know?


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

We need to make sure these two get their gun rights back asap.

Hero homeowner holds escaped Georgia inmates at gunpoint until arrests | Fox News


----------



## MichaelS. (Sep 4, 2016)

Deleted. 

It is a folly to argue with the foolish.


----------



## MichaelS. (Sep 4, 2016)

Deleted.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> We need to make sure these two get their gun rights back asap.
> 
> Hero homeowner holds escaped Georgia inmates at gunpoint until arrests | Fox News


This one of the most stupid comments I have heard yet.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

MaterielGeneral said:


> This one of the most stupid comments I have heard yet.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


 Why there is always a chance they will get out. Most murders do get out. So we must ensure they get all the rights back. We have people on the streets right now that have commit more than one murder.
Manson would have been out except he messed with Hollywood elite. That is the only reason he has been denied parole.
Beat some one half to death while committing others crimes, back on the street in a few years. Give them a gun.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

csi-tech said:


> I think non-violent felons who have had a 5 year period without re-offending should be able to petition the court for a review. I think with violent felons and violent sex offenders your debt in this regard is not paid in full until you are dead.
> 
> There are alot of people out there who have lost their right to carry/possess because of a simple domestic assault. Push your significant other and that's it. I do not agree with that. I think the assault should be felonious in nature


Agreed!


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

@Smitty901 No one that I am aware of has suggested that this type of criminal, inmate, felon get their gun rights back.
You and a few others painted all felons with a broad brush.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

The silly little thing. If a felon wants a gun he or she can have one. No paperwork involved and it doesn't take a meeting in a dark alley.

If a felon wants a gun then all they have to do is pick up the local paper and look in the sporting goods section or get on one of these gun classified websites. 

Want a pistol (s)? Just temporarily move to a state that doesn't have handgun registration that way there are no hoops to hurdle. 

Because of our defense of the second it makes it easier for a criminal to obtain a weapon. If all felons were so evil then why aren't they packing? Not all but most are playing by the rules and are just trying to survive and get on with their lives raising a family.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

MaterielGeneral said:


> @Smitty901 No one that I am aware of has suggested that this type of criminal, inmate, felon get their gun rights back.
> You and a few others painted all felons with a broad brush.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


 That is what this has all been about. Bubba or Homie guns someone down they get 4 to 8 years and out. There is a movement that wants them to have their guns back. I say NO. 
As far as petty ass crimes being a felony, I am open to correcting that. Most violent criminals do get out many several times.


----------



## Jammer Six (Jun 2, 2017)

The move from "all rights, all the people, all the time" to "this person should lose his rights because he's a killer" is a huge step.

The step from "this person should lose his rights because he's a killer" to "this person should lose his rights because he's a rapist" is a tiny one.

The step from "this person should lose his rights because he's a killer or he's a rapist" to "the people on this list should lose their rights" is even smaller.

At the end of that list is the fact that you should lose your rights because I don't like you because you look different from me, and I've been elected in a free election in which you weren't allowed to vote.

Only fools permit any movement down that garden path.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

I also believe there is a difference between habitual offenders including non violent ones and one time offenders. What I mean by habitual is multiple arrests, trials, convictions, and sentences, not multiple charges from a single arrest. As I've said, anybody out there can make a terrible mistake or a pretty easy one given the tax laws and drug laws and end up with a felony conviction. It is rare because usually you have to royally screw up to end up with a felony conviction but as @MaterielGeneral said, there are people in the criminal justice system that don't mind stepping on people especially during an election year and they want to look tough on crime so it does happen. Like what @csi-tech said if its a single non violent offense after say 4 years or so let them petition to have all their rights restored and if they've kept their noses clean then let it happen. If they've chosen to continue down the path of crime then f em. In all honesty only the people that are worth saving would be the ones that would apply to have their rights reinstated anyways because the career criminal don't care about voting and are going to get a gun regardless of what the laws say.


----------



## MaterielGeneral (Jan 27, 2015)

Jammer Six said:


> The move from "all rights, all the people, all the time" to "this person should lose his rights because he's a killer" is a huge step.
> 
> The step from "this person should lose his rights because he's a killer" to "this person should lose his rights because he's a rapist" is a tiny one.
> 
> ...





NotTooProudToHide said:


> I also believe there is a difference between habitual offenders including non violent ones and one time offenders. What I mean by habitual is multiple arrests, trials, convictions, and sentences, not multiple charges from a single arrest. As I've said, anybody out there can make a terrible mistake or a pretty easy one given the tax laws and drug laws and end up with a felony conviction. It is rare because usually you have to royally screw up to end up with a felony conviction but as @MaterielGeneral said, there are people in the criminal justice system that don't mind stepping on people especially during an election year and they want to look tough on crime so it does happen. Like what @csi-tech said if its a single non violent offense after say 4 years or so let them petition to have all their rights restored and if they've kept their noses clean then let it happen. If they've chosen to continue down the path of crime then f em. In all honesty only the people that are worth saving would be the ones that would apply to have their rights reinstated anyways because the career criminal don't care about voting and are going to get a gun regardless of what the laws say.


I have never understood the voting issue. Several people have commented on that condemning it but didn't give a reason why. All it is, is a vote. You cant kill, assault or rape with a vote. If your going to take away voting then why not the freedom of speech or hell just take away all of the rights. When it comes right down to it do you really care if a person can vote. Hell in an election a large portion of people don't vote anyways. They are to comfortable sitting in front of the TV.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

No less than 5 cases right now in the news and some once these criminals get out and they will, want to give them guns again.


----------

