HUGE 2A WIN! Part of 4473 Ruled Unconstitutional!!

Mike_Jones

Kelly Slater status
Mar 5, 2009
9,373
1,235
113

See text links in the description.

It's illegal for our governments to take away any other constitutional rights because we are merely indicted for a crime. Why should 2nd Amendment protections be any difference?

.....Innocent until proven guilty. Now the feds have to change the background check form.
.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Ifallalot

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
22,440
5,316
113

See text links in the description.

It's illegal for our governments to take away any other constitutional rights because we are merely indicted for a crime. Why should 2nd Amendment protections be any difference?

.....Innocent until proven guilty. Now the feds have to change the background check form.
.
why shouldn't criminals be allowed to have guns too? Why are you ok with that limitation?
 

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
22,440
5,316
113
Please name the "criminal" represented in this story. Via our Constitution a "criminal" is someone who has been found guilty in a court of aw.
.
Ah, legal scholar addresses an issue everyone understands. That said, where does the Constitution say that a criminal is someone who has been found guilty lol?

My question was different. Why shouldn't convicted felons be allowed to carry? Are you ok with that limitation?
 

Mike_Jones

Kelly Slater status
Mar 5, 2009
9,373
1,235
113
Ah, legal scholar addresses an issue everyone understands. That said, where does the Constitution say that a criminal is someone who has been found guilty lol?

My question was different. Why shouldn't convicted felons be allowed to carry? Are you ok with that limitation?

"Ciminal" is like "mariage". Its definition has always been in dictionaries, not law books because sane people don't need America-hating. leftists redefining it.

A criminal is someone who has been found guilty in a court of law.
.
 

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
22,440
5,316
113
"Ciminal" is like "mariage". Its definition has always been in dictionaries, not law books because sane people don't need America-hating. leftists redefining it.

A criminal is someone who has been found guilty in a court of law.
.
Again, duh.

Once that happens, should felons keep their guns?

You’re awfully quiet on Drumpf’s DOJ case recently.
 

sussle

Phil Edwards status
Oct 11, 2009
6,267
4,764
113
"Ciminal" is like "mariage". Its definition has always been in dictionaries, not law books because sane people don't need America-hating. leftists redefining it.

A criminal is someone who has been found guilty in a court of law.
.
lol, not at all. i know lots of criminals that have not been caught yet.
 

Duffy LaCoronilla

Duke status
Apr 27, 2016
30,106
17,697
113
I’m trying to decipher why some restrictions are ok and others raise the cry “what about shall not be infringed don’t you understand?”
A reasonable argument can be made for allowing a convicted felon to possess firearms after they have served their time and completed parole.

A reasonable argument can be made that a convicted felon has abdicated their responsibility to be a citizen and has therefore lost some of their rights. For example, people on parole can have their homes searched at any time without a warrant.

Also, convicted felons can‘t vote in some states. It’s fairly well “accepted” in the US that when you commit a felony you lose rights.

Where it get muddy is when a person has served their time and is no longer on parole. In my opinion there should be no legal restriction preventing them from possessing a firearm.

Others disagree and I can empathize with that disagreement.
 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
42,180
15,065
113
A reasonable argument can be made for allowing a convicted felon to possess firearms after they have served their time and completed parole.

A reasonable argument can be made that a convicted felon has abdicated their responsibility to be a citizen and has therefore lost some of their rights. For example, people on parole can have their homes searched at any time without a warrant.

Also, convicted felons can‘t vote in some states. It’s fairly well “accepted” in the US that when you commit a felony you lose rights.

Where it get muddy is when a person has served their time and is no longer on parole. In my opinion there should be no legal restriction preventing them from possessing a firearm.

Others disagree and I can empathize with that disagreement.
always missing the point with a long-winded response to an argument no one was having...
 

Duffy LaCoronilla

Duke status
Apr 27, 2016
30,106
17,697
113
always missing the point with a long-winded response to an argument no one was having...
Was I talking you?

No, I wasn’t.

I was responding to a specific question that was asked, in other words an argument that someone was in fact having.