jwb

You didn't say it explicitly, but it was implicit in your logic.

They demonstrated themselves to be felons and thus incapable of ever fully retaining their rights and thus they are beyond rehabilitation in a certain regard. Correct me where I'm wrong.

A lot of the rest of what you said relies on the assumption that they pose a unique security risk if allowed to own weapons. I've already stated my case against this and am eagerly awaiting a rebuttal

that's an argument against the 2nd amendment which I agree with. But as long as the right exists it should be granted as widely as possible, and the fact that because it exists this is a country stock full of guns and armed criminals is all the more reason that denying a felon access to guns is an injustice that possibly prevents them from defending themselves.

jwb

this will make you more likely to kill a home invader? Or more likely to senselessly use your legal and traceable gun in a random killing? Or what?

jwb

no

Preventing someone from owning guns because they have a felony = 2nd amendment violated. Unless you can provide a coherent argument why they should be denied that right.

jwb

More likely to go commit a gun crime with the legally purchased gun that can be traced back to them if it is used in a serious crime? You sure about that?

jwb

There's such a thing as ballistic forensics. Cops can trace a bullet to a given gun based on the imprint it leaves. That's why the vast majority of random murders are carried out with illegal weapons with a scratched off serial number that has been scrubbed for prints and thrown in the river.

jwb

That typically happens with domestic it personal shootings, and those offenders have a low enough recitivism rate that the claim they are more likely to shoot someone else is pretty dubious. Is your only reasoning basically once a murderer always a murderer?

OccultHawk

Christ you’re suburban sometimes

__________________

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Member of the Year & Journal of the Year Champion

Behold the Writing of THE LEGEND:

https://www.musicbanter.com/members-...p-lighter.html

jwb

just saw this. I agree.

I grew up in ****ty neighborhoods and know people that were in the same place as me in life at 20 who won't get out for another 10 years. The program I am in takes in/helps people either on parole/probation or with pending court cases. I know someone right now who is looking at 2 years cause he's a felon and got in a fight with his brother.

Lisnaholic

Perhaps this doesn't rise to an actual rebuttal, jwb, so much as an alternative way of looking at the issue. Without any stats to back myself up, yes, I am assuming that a convicted felon is more likely to use a gun to commit a crime than someone without a felony conviction. Perhaps I should've researched that, but if it's true, then my argument is just a simple application of statistical probabilities:-
Motor cyclists statistically run a heightened risk of brain injury, therefore all of them wear helmets. It's not really saying to each individual cyclist, "I don't think you're capable of riding safely." In a similar way, I'm guessing that felons fall into a group that are statistically more likely to be involved in violent crime, so denying them access to guns should statistically lessen that risk to society.

And yes, there are cases of people who have been falsely convicted, and the people like the guy OH mentions who grew up in very tough circumstances. Those cases clearly support your position. Also, (again with no research) there are prob cases of felons who leave jail and subsequently shoot some innocent victim. Those victims would support my case by asking, " Why didn't the authorities do more to protect me if they knew the guy had a record of violent crime?"

Underlying my argument is also the assumption that you can lead a full and active life without owning a gun, that the lack of one doesn't make you a second-class citizen.

__________________
"Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953

Frownland

Helmet and traffic rules are applied universally, as opposed to rules applied exclusively to felons. If our laws were consistent with the idea that felony=violence, I'd be on board but that's not the case. I think it's more realistic to address gun laws and culture than to legislate restrictions against a specific class of citizens. The restrictive nature of the law and the social norms that it influences against ex convicts plays a big role in making them desperate enough to commit crimes again. It's a self fulfilling prophecy, especially if you're told that you can't be trusted to not be violent. When you're told that often enough, it makes violence seem like your true nature.

You can absolutely live a full life without owning a gun, but if you have a separate set of rights from the rest of the populace that inherently makes you an unequal citizen (aka a second class citizen). That applies to gun rights, however dysfunctional American gun culture is.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.