can I still have my gun after marrying a convicted felon?

[Drylok]

Did he murder or rape someone? If not and he has served his time his rights should be restored. That's something I think we need to work on as a nation.

[Kramer]

Did he murder or rape someone? If not and he has served his time his rights should be restored. That's something I think we need to work on as a nation.

What about armed robbery, violent assaults that don't led to death, kidnapping, Arson, grand thefts, repeat violent offenders, etc...it's not as cut and dry as you think and it all needs to be taken into consideration.

[marinakorp]

What about armed robbery, violent assaults that don't led to death, kidnapping, Arson, grand thefts, repeat violent offenders, etc...it's not as cut and dry as you think and it all needs to be taken into consideration.

If you served you time... you paid your debt in full.

if you are "safe" to be on the streets and not locked up.... you should have all of your rights restored.

If you did time for a small bag of weed and are out of jail, probation over (etc)...you should have your rights restored.

.025

YMMV

[crlovel]

What about armed robbery, violent assaults that don't led to death, kidnapping, Arson, grand thefts, repeat violent offenders, etc...it's not as cut and dry as you think and it all needs to be taken into consideration.

Kramer, I agree with your position. However, I'll go a step further. I am in favor of executing violent offenders: arsonists, rapists, molesters, people who commit armed robberies, muggers, etc. When the Constitution was written, we used to hang these people. Clearly, it was not considered "cruel and unusual" back then, and nor should it be today. If you commit a violent act against society, you should be removed from society. Permanently.

[GunLawyer001]

If you served you time... you paid your debt in full.

if you are "safe" to be on the streets and not locked up.... you should have all of your rights restored.

If you did time for a small bag of weed and are out of jail, probation over (etc)...you should have your rights restored.

.025

YMMV

From my experience, as a citizen and as a lawyer, some people do reform and do deserve their rights back. Most criminals don't, which is why the recidivism rate is as high as it is, and those are only the ones caught. Keep in mind that juries aren't even allowed to know that the defendant in the current crime was convicted of other crimes before, so almost every trial pretends that the repeat offender has no predisposition towards crime. Our high recidivism rate reflect a fraction of the actual crimes committed by previously-convicted criminals.

I can't think of any way in which someone who victimizes innocent citizens then "pays his debt to society" by spending months or years in prison, consuming taxpayer food and living in taxpayer housing and being closely watched at taxpayer expense. Most felons are without the financial means to come close to paying restitution. So if a thug rapes a girl, spends 5 years in jail, then is released, somehow we're all square? Or you come home to find your one sanctuary on this planet, your home, with the door open, your closets and drawer emptied onto the floors, your valuables stolen and your "safe" place gone, and if they catch the perp he is sentenced to probation (it's just a property crime, after all) ....now everything's fine for you?

That is a sad joke to say that serving part of your sentence "pays your debt to society". Society is diminished by crime, and criminals are unable to make society whole. The fact that they are presumed untrustworthy until and unless they can prove otherwise, is the least that society can demand.

I've helped reformed citizens obtain pardons, I've helped restore the gun rights of clients, because those clients had learned from their mistakes and had become solid, productive citizens, and their improvement meant that being forced to carry the burden of a conviction served no societal purpose. Most convicted criminals can't meet that burden, because they never learned, they never improved, they are still untrustworthy and basically evil.

Now, I do agree that a lot of possessory drug offenses are essentially victimless crimes; on the other hand, the law is the law, and if you're unable to conform your behavior to the law for recreational reasons, it seems likely that you're going to have trouble applying the rules on deadly force in a crisis. Seriously, which is harder, resisting:
- "it's the weekend and I'm tense or bored, so I guess I'll find a drug dealer, purchase some illegal pharmaceuticals and commit further unlawful acts by self-medicating"
-or-
- "I have a gun and that guy is yelling at me AND NOW HE'S IN MY FACE I SHOULD SHOOT HIM."

Adults are entitled to the means to self-defense. Act like an adult. If you don't, you lose some rights, just like when you were a kid and came home late or skipped school. The Constitution contemplates that everyone STARTS with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but the Constitution also contemplates that you can forfeit those rights.

[truecrimson]

Kramer, I agree with your position. However, I'll go a step further. I am in favor of executing violent offenders: arsonists, rapists, molesters, people who commit armed robberies, muggers, etc. When the Constitution was written, we used to hang these people. Clearly, it was not considered "cruel and unusual" back then, and nor should it be today. If you commit a violent act against society, you should be removed from society. Permanently.

The problem with that is that government will make the decision, and once they have that list in place it will grow slowly to encompass all kinds of things. Like those pesky domestic terrorists with Ron Paul bumper stickers.....................

[crlovel]

From my experience, as a citizen and as a lawyer, some people do reform and do deserve their rights back. Most criminals don't, which is why the recidivism rate is as high as it is, and those are only the ones caught. Keep in mind that juries aren't even allowed to know that the defendant in the current crime was convicted of other crimes before, so almost every trial pretends that the repeat offender has no predisposition towards crime. Our high recidivism rate reflect a fraction of the actual crimes committed by previously-convicted criminals.

I can't think of any way in which someone who victimizes innocent citizens then "pays his debt to society" by spending months or years in prison, consuming taxpayer food and living in taxpayer housing and being closely watched at taxpayer expense. Most felons are without the financial means to come close to paying restitution. So if a thug rapes a girl, spends 5 years in jail, then is released, somehow we're all square? Or you come home to find your one sanctuary on this planet, your home, with the door open, your closets and drawer emptied onto the floors, your valuables stolen and your "safe" place gone, and if they catch the perp he is sentenced to probation (it's just a property crime, after all) ....now everything's fine for you?

That is a sad joke to say that serving part of your sentence "pays your debt to society". Society is diminished by crime, and criminals are unable to make society whole. The fact that they are presumed untrustworthy until and unless they can prove otherwise, is the least that society can demand.

I've helped reformed citizens obtain pardons, I've helped restore the gun rights of clients, because those clients had learned from their mistakes and had become solid, productive citizens, and their improvement meant that being forced to carry the burden of a conviction served no societal purpose. Most convicted criminals can't meet that burden, because they never learned, they never improved, they are still untrustworthy and basically evil.

Now, I do agree that a lot of possessory drug offenses are essentially victimless crimes; on the other hand, the law is the law, and if you're unable to conform your behavior to the law for recreational reasons, it seems likely that you're going to have trouble applying the rules on deadly force in a crisis. Seriously, which is harder, resisting:
- "it's the weekend and I'm tense or bored, so I guess I'll find a drug dealer, purchase some illegal pharmaceuticals and commit further unlawful acts by self-medicating"
-or-
- "I have a gun and that guy is yelling at me AND NOW HE'S IN MY FACE I SHOULD SHOOT HIM."

Adults are entitled to the means to self-defense. Act like an adult. If you don't, you lose some rights, just like when you were a kid and came home late or skipped school. The Constitution contemplates that everyone STARTS with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but the Constitution also contemplates that you can forfeit those rights.

^^^THIS^^^

I have to spread rep around.