Of felons and firearms

[subdjoe]

this is in answer to Big Dogs post in Nancy, how about a light, 8/11/08

I know, Big Dog, I go back and forth on it myself. If it were a part of their sentance - you will never be able to legally own or possess a firearm again - I have no problem with it. Or maybe make it so that violent felony conviction, or any felony where a firearm is used, you loose the RKBA forever. But as it is now, it seems to be arbitrary and based on emotion. And emotion makes for bad law, or application of law.

You asked about a felon being able to just walk in and buy a gun because he has done his time - I expect that most if not all gun shops would think hard about selling to someone who answered YES on a 4473 to the question about ever being convicted of a felony. (Can you hear Vic tossing the guy out of the store?)

As it is, they just go down to (Insert favorite ethnic name) Midnight Gun and Drug Sales (cash only, no waiting, no background checks, no records).

[The Big Dog]

It is part of their sentence... it is one of the disabilities that comes with a felony conviction.

While I don't, per se, disagree with you (especially since you embraced my position on lifetime disability for any / all violent felons), not all felony law is arbitrary and based on emotion. Other than the occassional foray into horse manure by the Legislature, most of the crimes in the Penal Code that are felonies, surprise here, should be. And the vast, overwhelming majority of those statutes were passed deliberately and dispassionately, which is what the law should be.

You asked about a felon being able to just walk in and buy a gun because he has done his time - I expect that most if not all gun shops would think hard about selling to someone who answered YES on a 4473 to the question about ever being convicted of a felony. (Can you hear Vic tossing the guy out of the store?)

Actually, I'd kinda like to see Vic tossing someone out of the store like that. With all the "what kind of idiot are you?" invective that can be mustered.

However, on Planet Joe, that question wouldn't exist on the 4473 as you would restore them all immediately upon completion of sentence. Then again, I suspect that on Planet Joe the 4473 wouldn't exist either.

My thinking is that violent felons, any crime against the person felony, has got very little coming. If you want to automatically restore their right to vote, then that's okay with me. But restoring their right to firearms? Nuh-uh.

Non violent felons, through proper petition and a ruling from a competent court... I'm okay with that. However that does put the camel's nose into the tent for all the violent felons to come back and cry foul for equal protection, doesn't it?

As it is, they just go down to (Insert favorite ethnic name) Midnight Gun and Drug Sales (cash only, no waiting, no background checks, no records).

Which is no different than the status quo now. What needs to be altered in the experiment is the strict adherence to maximum sentencing guidelines and enhancements for those predators using a gun, however it was obtained. Until that happens in California we're going to keep having this argument.

I am all for individual freedom, but I believe that (in some cases) public safety can and rightfully does trump. And in the case of allowing convicted felons unfettered access to firearms as if what they did never happened.... well sorry, but in my mind, it trumps.

[subdjoe]

As I said, I go back and forth on this. If it is a stated part of the sentance, I have NO problem at all with it. It still irks me that we let people out who are not considered safe enough to have full civil rights restored, know what I mean? If they are that much of a danger to society, keep them in prison.

I agree that in the case of violent crime the "maximum sentencing guidelines and enhancements for those predators using a gun" need to be applied. It seems like a lot of the time they are the first things that get bargained away. Maybe a good dose of Project Exile would be a good way to start.

Yes, I would like the 4473 to go away. I think you would too. Same with the GCA of 1968 and the NFA, 1934.

[surefire]

VIOLENT felons should not have their firearms rights restored, in my opinion. I would even think twice about restoring rights of repeat violent misdemeanor offenders.

However, I don't see the logic in permanently banning someone from a crime like felony tax evasion (or whatever non-violent crime) from owning a firearm. I think common sense should be used, rather than black or white enforcement.

I agree with Subjoe in that I go back and forth on this.