For those who think felons should never have guns...

Status
Not open for further replies.
cassandrasdaddy that's great! A whole raft of people are now no longer committing felonies. Thank goodness laws are not absolute or immutable.
 
Well fiddletown, except it isn't entirely accurate. He skipped Maryland, Tennessee, and qualified on the amounts. I mentioned a "case of wine" on purpose. I'm sure you understand my point about felonies being a moving target whether or not you "accept my claim".
 
via google, it is also looking like there are 5 dry counties in Florida where it is in fact a felony to transport alcohol. So more of cassandrasdaddy's infomation is not quite so accurate.
 
More searching and apparently Kentucky too does still have dry counties where it is a felony to transport alcohol, I guess I wasn't so inaccurate after all.
 
if it were just forgery...are we saying that there are different levels of forgery?
Click to expand...

I would say so. Liken it to stealing, someone loans you a pen, and you realize you've kept it and now you make no attempt to return it, thats stealing. Grand theft--no. However if one steals a car its now a whole different ball game.

But then again Stealing is STEALING!

When does common sense come into play?
 
Did you forget to unload the rifle behind the back seat when you drove through _________ on your vacation? If you forgot, you committed a felony.
 
[1] The OP essentially proposed that one example of a felony prosecution illustrated that some forms of trivial misconduct can be a felony. Even on that point there was considerable disagreement about whether the particular misdeed was actually all that trivial.

[2] The claim is that a whole bunch of insignificant forms of misconduct are considered felonies. Well, one person's trivial misdeed may be another person's heinous crime. That's a matter that gets hashed out by the community's elected representatives in the legislative process, and is therefore subject to influence by interested parties.

[3] And there is really no good substitute for knowing and understanding the law. A thoughtless indiscretion can have far reaching negative implications for one's life -- even beyond a loss of gun rights. A felony conviction (or in many cases even a misdemeanor conviction) can impair one's prospects for future employment, foreclose pursuing some trades or professions, and ruin one's reputation and social standing. But you know what; it was like that long before the GCA of 1968.

SuperNaut said:
...Did you forget to unload the rifle behind the back seat when you drove through _________ on your vacation? If you forgot, you committed a felony...
Click to expand...
Yes indeed. And there are many places in which it would also be a felony to drive with a loaded handgun in the car if one doesn't have a concealed weapons permit. I've never done either. And if someone is going to have a gun, there's no way around needing to know and understand the applicable law -- and acting accordingly. The information is available, and that's just how things are in the real world. Forget it and you may wind up paying a very high price.
 
I know, I'm going through the same thing with my daughter.. she used a friends credit card years ago when they were roommates they broke up over it and she was charged with felony id theft...in her mid thirties now moved back home with me ....by law i don't know if she can even stay in a house with over 30 some guns let alone pass anything down to her but the swords,knives.or bows.,,but we can move multiple sex offenders less then a block away from a playground!!
 
I know, I'm going through the same thing with my daughter.. she used a friends credit card years ago when they were roommates they broke up over it and she was charged with felony id theft...in her mid thirties now moved back home with me ....by law i don't know if she can even stay in a house with over 30 some guns let alone pass anything down to her but the swords,knives.or bows.,,but we can move multiple sex offenders less then a block away from a playground!!
 
My two cents: Once a non-violent ‘felon’ has completed his sentence all gun and other rights should be reinstated. It’s amazing how easily one can be labeled as a felon, terrorist, mentally ill, etc. today.
 
Hi Fiddletown,

Yea, yea, yea. Let's all stand up for the felons, and spouse abusers, and drunk drivers, and child molesters, and drug dealers, and all the other flotsam and jetsam of the world -- as if they are going to stand up for us.
Click to expand...

I stand up for no one, but history tells me the evolution of government is to become more oppressive. Every time there is a new 'cause' there is a new group of those hated.
 
After all the real good is done by legislators and prosecutors the worthy ones are supplanted by the worthless looking for a paycheck or power. They justify their existences with more and more restrictive and baroque laws and enforcement. Eventually the only ones that aren't criminals are the politicians and prosecutors. This doesn't even occur because by plan, only the creeping cancer of worthless servants of the people perpetuating their paychecks and the mindless demands of the public for those parasites in office to "do something".

BTW, since they original topic of the thread have not been convicted they're not felons, yet.
 
SuperNaut & fiddletown

fiddletown, why is it that you dont belive SuperNaut and ask for statutes but take cassandrasdaddy's word for it with out statutes (no offense cassandrasdaddy)?

SuperNaut listed Tenn. Fiddletown asked for statue.
Statue and opinion here
http://www.tennessee.gov/abc/09-15.Fizhugh.Ketron.Feb24.pdf


fiddletown - To be fair, the burden of proof should be applied equally to all. By requiring it from some (that oppose your view) and not others (who support your views), IMO, undermines the valid points you have.



You can thank me later SuperNaut.
 
fiddletown said:
Yea, yea, yea. Let's all stand up for the felons, and spouse abusers, and drunk drivers, and child molesters, and drug dealers, and all the other flotsam and jetsam of the world -- as if they are going to stand up for us. This continual repetition of clever paraphrases of Pastor Martin Niemöller's original 1946 comments describing what had happened in Germany has become a tiresome cliche. It doesn't always mean something, and it doesn't always apply.
Click to expand...

Aside from the snarkiness and your frustrated battle against common sense, how is Pastor Martin Niemöller's "cliché" not relevant here?

Woody
 
danez71 said:
...fiddletown, why is it that you dont belive SuperNaut and ask for statutes but take cassandrasdaddy's word for it with out statutes (no offense cassandrasdaddy)? ...
Click to expand...
Because based on past dealings with cassandrasdaddy I have found him to be generally diligent about his research and to historically have provided accurate information. He has thus established a measure of credibility with me. He also provided some citations to his sources.

danez71 said:
...fiddletown - To be fair, the burden of proof should be applied equally to all. By requiring it from some (that oppose your view) and not others (who support your views), IMO, undermines the valid points you have....
Click to expand...
True enough. But from a practical perspective, sometimes one might have to exercise some judgment.
 
fiddletown said:
True enough. But from a practical perspective, sometimes one might have to exercise some judgment.
Click to expand...

True enough.

There'is some legitimacy in judging a book by its cover. (no offense SuperNaut)

There's also the risk of not benefiting from its contents.
 
ConstitutionCowboy said:
...how is Pastor Martin Niemöller's "cliché" not relevant here?...
Click to expand...
Because he was talking, after the fact, about honest folks having failed to speak up for other honest people being subjected to amazingly cruel and inhuman oppression, and being sent to death camps, being tortured, starved and murdered, all without any hint of due process, because of their political party, religion or occupational affiliation (Communists, Jews and trade union members).

What does that have to do with persons determined to have committed criminal acts through an ordered process, with the availability of legal representation, and with multiple levels of appeal?

I know it's fashionable among some folks here to analogize our circumstances to those that obtained in Nazi Germany. But we are so far from Nazi Germany that the comparison is ludicrous.

danez71 said:
....There'is some legitimacy in judging a book by its cover. (no offense SuperNaut)

There's also the risk of not benefiting from its contents....
Click to expand...
Agreed, but one can only really benefit from its contents if those contents are credible. There are plenty of books filled with inaccurate or unsubstantiated information.
 
fiddletown said:
Agreed, but one can only really benefit from its contents if those contents are credible. There are plenty of books filled with inaccurate or unsubstantiated information.
Click to expand...

True. Let me come full circle here. Here's my tie-in to keep this on topic.

However, that book's contents are/were credible and provided benefit but was discounted because of past experience.

Just because someone has "a felony", doesnt mean they should be "discounted" solely based on past experience.

(This isnt directed towards you; mearly using this part of our conversation to demonstrate. Im not claiming you stated otherwise.)
 
gbw said: "It's an individual choice. In choosing to do any crime, one has the sole responsibility to undestand that there will be consequences, and what those may be. That includes the possibly, however remote, of a completely wrong and unfair lifelong result. "

See this is what I have a problem with. Does anyone here, even lawyers, know all of the felony laws of his state?

Here is just an example:
Up to a felony charge can be levied for promoting the use of, or owning more than six dildos.
http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/alabama

Want more? Now I don't know how many of these are felonies, but they are still on the books according to the site in the link.
http://www.squidoo.com/strangelaws


* Alabama - It is illegal to maim oneself to escape duty.
* Alabama - Bear wrestling matches are prohibited.
* Alabama - Boogers may not be flicked into the wind.
* Alabama - It is legal to drive the wrong way down a one-way street if you have a lantern attached to the front of your automobile.
* Alabama - You cannot drive barefooted.
* Alabama - It is illegal to sell peanuts in Lee County after sundown on Wednesday.
* Alaska - you can't look at a moose from an airplane.
* Alaska - Anchorage -You cannot tie your pet dog to the roof of your car.
* Alaska - Even though it is legal to shoot a bear, it is illegal to wake a bear for the purpose of taking a photograph.
* Alaska - Anchorage - Persons may not live in a trailer as it is being hauled across the city.
* Arizona - you can't walk through a hotel lobby in spurs.
* Arizona - You could get up to 25 years in prison for cutting down a cactus.
* Arizona - If you commit a misdemeanor while wearing a red mask, it is considered a felony.
* Arizona - Hunting Camels is prohibited.
* Arizona - It is illegal to manufacture imitation cocaine.
* California - some Community leaders passed an ordinance that makes it illegal
for anyone to try to stop a child from playfully jumping over puddles of water.
* California - law prohibits a woman from driving a car while dressed in a housecoat.
* California (San Francisco) - there is an ordinance, which bans the picking up and throwing of used confetti.
* California - More than 3000 sheep cannot be herded down Hollywood Blvd. at any one time.
* California - a law created in 1925 makes it illegal to wiggle while dancing.
* Colorado - a pet cat, if loose, must have a tail-light
* Colorado - You cannot mutilate a rock in a state park.
* Connecticut - you can be stopped by the police for biking over 65 miles per hour.
* Connecticut - you are not allowed to walk across a street on your hands.
* Connecticut - A man cannot write love letters to a girl whose mother or father has forbidden the relationship.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Convicted Felons and Self Defense. What do you think?
2 3 4 5
Replies
116
Views
7K
Jorg Nysgerrig
J
O
  • Locked
Should non-violent felons be allowed to own firearms?
Replies
5
Views
662
Spats McGee
Spats McGee
Y
  • Locked
Rapper arrested for machine guns
2 3
Replies
61
Views
5K
Pigspitter
P
Y
  • Locked
NC Supreme Court: Felon wins the right to own a gun!
Replies
9
Views
2K
Zoogster
Z
U
  • Locked
Is this a felon who shouldn't own a gun?
Replies
22
Views
883
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top