Politicians

simplify this argument to fit their own little world view

Click to expand...

zoostation said:

I'm not here to engage in personal grudge matches, but again, if you can't act with civility and exchange ideas without sarcasm or snideness I really don't see what you get out of participating here. Other people aren't going to agree with you on everything, that doesn't make them bad. You need to be a little more tolerant of other people's views IMHO.

Click to expand...

zoostation said:

Right after NICS was instituted there was a federal appeals case of a guy who was denied a purchase because he was convicted of a simple DWI in Massachussetts 20 years before in 1975. In MA at the time a first-time DWI carried a potential jail term of up to 3 years in prison, even though nobody ever got it. He lost the case, lifetime ban. I'm not defending drunk drivers, just giving an example of why I agree, the punishment should fit the crime.

The federal lifetime ban does not apply only to felonies, it also applies to any misdemeanor conviction which carries a potential sentence of greater than one year. It also applies to all minor common law offenses without a specified punishment, of which Maryland had many until they finally codified common law several years ago.

For instance, telephone misuse in MD carries a potential penalty of up to three years in prison. Now I'm not defending people who make prank or annoying phone calls, just saying that I don't think banning them from firearms ownership forever fits the offense.

But this is where we've gotten to. We seem to have this slow creep of regulation, expanding the lists of people who can't own guns while shrinking the list of guns people can own. It only heads in one direction.

Click to expand...

Scott7891 said:

I may be extreme, but the last time I checked the 2nd Amendment stated "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Click to expand...