Felons Right to Purchase Guns

[armaborealis]

For a guy who's going to go out and commit armed robbery or attempt a murder, I can't imagine that the threat of being caught with a HiPoint is really going to deter him.

That is true, but in this case the law is not a deterrent, period. Does this mean we should just get rid of all laws as the law will not deter the true criminal anyway?

No. We should get rid of laws which are evil, stupid, and useless, however. For example, I'd argue that a law which removes a fundamental natural and constitutional right from someone because they dared to marry someone of a difference race in the 1960s is evil (laws based on people's physical appearance tend to be), stupid (the law would fail to meet the limited legal bar of even intermediate scrutiny), and useless (as it does not deter actual violent criminals and diverts limited law enforcement/justice system resources away from violent offenders).

I can think of many other "prohibited persons" combinations which result in evil, stupid, and/or useless results. For example:
- Retroactive prohibitions against firearms ownership for people who were charged with misdemeanors carrying a potential jail sentence greater than two years back in the sixties or earlier, perhaps as juveniles, who had no right to legal representation to fight the charges and perhaps no reason to.
- In SC, if someone inadvertently carries a CCW into a TGI Fridays they incur a misdemeanor with a potential jail sentence greater than two years and become a prohibited person for life, even if they cut a deal with an understanding prosecutor and never spend a single day in jail.
- An elderly couple faced a SWAT raid and was convicted of felonies for improperly shipping orchid flowers.
- An importer was charged with a felony for shipping lobsters in clear bags rather than boxes (search "Huang"). THe US Lacey Act makes it a felony to violate OTHER country's laws, even unknowingly.
- Driving within 1000 feet of a school, even if on a main thoroughfare, with a firearm that is not secured in a locked case in the trunk is a felony. Even if you're a LEO. The main exception is if you have a CWP permit for that state -- no reciprocity accepted. I'm guessing that at some point in your life you've traveled outside the state of SC with a firearm, even if it was just a hunting rifle or shotgun. Do you always lock your weapons in a container in the trunk?

THere's a great book called "Three Felonies a Day." It appears to have a website as well (http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo ... fault.aspx). I suspect that you have committed many disabling offenses (felonies or misdemeanors with sufficient potential sentences) but haven't been caught. Why not turn yourself and your neighbors in?

I don't understand why someone would feel compelled to provide a defense of laws that are evil, stupid, and useless. I find it reprehensible that anyone would support a law disarming older interracial couples, or elderly gardeners who imported orchids without filling out the right paperwork in triplicate, or business people who unknowingly packed lobsters in the wrong packaging. Would you also support a law that removed their ability to peaceably assemble, to worship as they chose, to have protections against self-incrimination, or any other specifically enumerated rights? Such laws are evil, stupid, and useless. One can comply with them but that doesn't mean anyone has to support or defend them.

Also, think about how insulting such a law is to people whose lives are affected by violent crimes. You can think of the felon-gun prohibition as a sentence enhancer for violent criminals... Or, flip it around. Imagine one of your loved ones was killed by a thug with a knife (or a hammer, or a car...) and the prosecutor explains to you that the thug gets 10 years off his sentence because he set the difficulty to "hard" by not using a nasty evil gun. How would that make you feel? The violent crime is the problem, not the specific tool used.

 

[Tigerstripe]

so lets string-em up.