Only 1 shooting this week so far

Settle down Francis. I haven't made that argument at all. And if you think I have then you havent been listening.
Click to expand...

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I was referring to JollyRoger.

Jolly is basically strawmanning our argument, that is to say that he is trying to say "Well, felons should be allowed to own firearms", but he doesn't really believe that. He's trying to get us to admit that no, that's not a good idea, and then use our own arguments against us to make us admit that we should support gun control for non-felons.

Its brilliant debate strategy, but I wasn't addressing you.

I'm pretty radically pro-gun. I think the NRA is pretty pathetic for, unlike the Gun Owner's of America, not fighting for the right to own automatic weapons (I suppose every movement needs its moderates;)). But I don't think violent criminals, who have already proven they cannot be trusted with arms, should have them. I see no problem with losing that right for some period of time being a punishment for a violent crime anymore than I see a problem with any other form of punishment, in theory anyhow.
 
You are wrong, GW. If someone is dangerous, keep them in prison. If you let them out, let them be as free as anyone else.
 
The point of prison is punishment and rehabilitation. If they can't vote or buy a gun after getting of probation or parole, where does the rehabilitation begin?

VRWCAgent said:
1) " 'violent' and/or 'gun' culture " is not the same as "culture of gun violence" in any way at all, which is what I railed against.

2) I don't care who brings it up.

3) Nothing wrong with a gun culture.
Click to expand...

That's a nice equivocation. I hope you stick to your new standards/definitions in the future; I don't find you to be an unfair person but I really feel that you were applying a double standard. I still get that feeling.
 
I don't really see the point of not letting ex-felons vote, unless its just "Kick em while their down" or something.

As for owning guns, would you rather be free, except not allowed to carry a gun, or imprisoned? That question answers itself.

I definitely think the underlying debate is interesting, but it should be letting people go and lettingg them have guns vs letting them go but not letting them have guns. How long they should be held is kind of a different issue. And I don't think our prisons are capable of rehabilitating all that many people anyway.
 
JollyRoger said:
You are wrong, GW. If someone is dangerous, keep them in prison. If you let them out, let them be as free as anyone else.
Click to expand...

I agree. Most released prisoners have little to no hope of building a life today. I was convicted of a violent gun crime and imprisoned as a felon. Once released I had opportunities through friends and family to rebuild my life.

I started with a manufacturing job and when there was a recession they kept me on because I was willing to do anything...maintenance, janitorial. There were no computers to track the scarlet F. I never lied to get a job. I never had to. Today, despite limiting laws, employers feel required to use the technology to eliminate anyone who might have a blight. Liability and torts play a role.

I became a pillar of the community. Husband, father, businessman, church deacon. This would be almost impossible today. Today, in a world of less opportunity there is a great tendency to try to get ahead of the game by climbing over the bodies of those who fall. This is not what America should be about. We have lost our way.

Back to the topic. Witness say the shootings lasted 20-25 minutes. An armed school guard or administrator might very well have saved that second classroom.
 
32134724.jpg
 
<sigh>
 
JollyRoger said:
So you are ok with being denied a gun just so long as you are not imprisoned?
Click to expand...

Of course not ,but one is clearly worse than the other. Unless you are proposing gun ownership IN prison.

*Satire* which being the little authoritarian you are, you'd never allow *end satire*

MisterCooper said:
I agree. Most released prisoners have little to no hope of building a life today. I was convicted of a violent gun crime and imprisoned as a felon. Once released I had opportunities through friends and family to rebuild my life.

I started with a manufacturing job and when there was a recession they kept me on because I was willing to do anything...maintenance, janitorial. There were no computers to track the scarlet F. I never lied to get a job. I never had to. Today, despite limiting laws, employers feel required to use the technology to eliminate anyone who might have a blight. Liability and torts play a role.

I became a pillar of the community. Husband, father, businessman, church deacon. This would be almost impossible today. Today, in a world of less opportunity there is a great tendency to try to get ahead of the game by climbing over the bodies of those who fall. This is not what America should be about. We have lost our way.

Back to the topic. Witness say the shootings lasted 20-25 minutes. An armed school guard or administrator might very well have saved that second classroom.
Click to expand...

Why do you need to have a gun to become a pillar of your community.

BTW: I think "How long" should depend on what kind of crime you committed. Third degree assault and murder are not in the same ballpark.
 
GhostWriter16 said:
Of course not ,but one is clearly worse than the other. Unless you are proposing gun ownership IN prison.
Click to expand...
When you check into prison, you should be able to turn your weapons in to the prison authorities for safekeeping. Upon release, they are returned to you. Perhaps a bit too libertarian for many of you.
 
GhostWriter16 said:
Why do you need to have a gun to become a pillar of your community.
Click to expand...

I was not responding particularly to the issues of voting and guns but to the changes in attitudes towards offenders. Rehabilitation virtually never happens in the system and today its just so much more difficult for self-rehabilitation to happen.

We have become a less forgiving society. IMO. I feel especially for those caught up with non-serious drug charges and similar minor stuff and the effect it has on their chances to find gainful employment and build a life. Of course today its hard for all. And I am off topic.

Lets go back to discussing the ways the people can remain armed so that they can defend their liberty against the governing tyranny.
 
JollyRoger said:
When you check into prison, you should be able to turn your weapons in to the prison authorities for safekeeping. Upon release, they are returned to you. Perhaps a bit too libertarian for many of you.
Click to expand...

You want to go back to 1850? All you old people always grumbling about the good ole days.

:lol:
 
It is quite interesting how so many who claim the 2nd Amendment gives them the inherent right to own assault weapons and extended capacity magazines for the inevitable upcoming riots frequently have no problem at all depriving ex-cons and many minorities from similarly bearing arms. This is despite them frequently having a far greater need to protect their own families from harm due to far worse police protection.
 
Where is the evidence that having a society awash with guns prevents tyranny?

Tunisia has the strictest gun laws in the whole of North Africa yet they managed to overthrow a dictator.
 
Iraq was armed to the teeth under Saddam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mrt144
Trump is already destroying one industry (Humanity is hilarious)
Replies
13
Views
1K
FriendlyFire
FriendlyFire
Cheezy the Wiz
  • Locked
Man Murders Nine in Charleston Church
45 46 47
Replies
934
Views
55K
Senethro
Senethro
Formaldehyde
Tennesee Terrorism
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
civvver
civvver
Kyriakos
Father of the century: Pete Lanza
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
Bulldog Bats
B
AlpsStranger
Moronic Anti-Videogame hit piece
3 4 5
Replies
82
Views
4K
AlpsStranger
AlpsStranger
Back
Top Bottom