Clean slate laws

[Boats]

****This is actually a really good point. A person who wants to murder or cause mayhem will not be deterred from doing so with other or whatever tools they have at their disposal, if a firearm is unavailable.

I don't have the link handy but I believe one of the greatest mass murders in our history was a person with a gas can who lit a big fire in a building and killed a LOT of innocent people.

I think the biggest mass murder in history used airplanes. But your point is valid, I'm just trying to one-up you.

 

[Matlack]

MDS has changed my mind on this.

If that's how dangerous you are, don't let them out of jail.

They paid the price. Restore their Right.

These are the only two correct answers on this topic. End/

 

[Vile Shadow]

I'll also be a quasi outlier here. I'm ok with non-violent felons having their rights restored. Martha Stewart comes to mind! Tax evaders, and many other non-violent felonies out there.

Violent Felons is another story for me.

Does “violent felons” include somebody defending hisself in a state that disapproves of that?

 

[MaxVO2]

I think the biggest mass murder in history used airplanes. But your point is valid, I'm just trying to one-up you.

****Yea, you’re right, duh, 9/11 killed so many more than the factory fire I was thinking about that happened I believe in like the 1930’s or so. I think that incident the guy chained or barred the doors shut and lit the place on fire burning a lot of people alive.

A few years back some crazy guy killed a bunch of people in I think Norway with just knives, no guns involved.

Also the big box car driver who ran over all of those people in France I think just plowed people over. Almost 200 killed I think.

 

[Blacksmith101]

****This is actually a really good point. A person who wants to murder or cause mayhem will not be deterred from doing so with other or whatever tools they have at their disposal, if a firearm is unavailable.

I don't have the link handy but I believe one of the greatest mass murders in our history was a person with a gas can who lit a big fire in a building and killed a LOT of innocent people.

You are thinking of the Happy Land Fire:
"The Happy Land fire was an act of arson that killed 87 people on March 25, 1990."

Happy Land fire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Biggfoot44]

It all depends on how you define your parameters, in the USA it is variously :

Bath Consolidated School , Bath MI
Happyland Social Club
Oklahoma City

For one person mass murders . Depending your opinions on Timothy Mc Veigh acting alone .

9/ 11 was a team effort.
Triangle Shirtwaist Factory was a disaster , undoubtedly involved culpable negligence , but it was a tragic accident , not a deliberate mass murder .

Added - Notice it was fertilizer, motor fuel , and fertilizer & motor fuel , not firearms .

 

[Allen65]

I think the biggest mass murder in history used airplanes. But your point is valid, I'm just trying to one-up you.

Stalin pretty much takes the record for body count, and starvation was his weapon of choice.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Stalin pretty much takes the record for body count, and starvation was his weapon of choice.

Stalin for raw numbers.
Pol Pot for per capita .

 

[TheOriginalMexicanBob]

Sounds like another Democrat voter drive.

Practically this sounds like huge trouble in the real world. The governments…local and federal…are often unable to keep arrest, disposition and expungement records taken care of in a timely basis. Adding another function can only fvck up an already fvcked up system.

I’m not demeaning the principle involved…just it’s practicality.

 

[Growler215]

I'm good with permanently stripping 2A rights from violent felons, and voting rights from all felons.

I think we should automatically charge all violent felons found in possession of a firearm federally, and sentence them all to the 7 year max for that charge. This sentence to be served after any other sentence for any other charges associated with their arrest.

Could they commit murder or mayhem with a knife or a bat? Of course. But are they as likely to be effective as a criminal armed with a gun? Probably not - especially if their potential victim is armed.

I don't believe in these "clean slate" laws, either. People who have committed a crime are more likely to commit another crime than a non-offender is to commit their first crime, and no amount of wishful thinking is going to change that. There is no reason for the government to have a hand in hiding a person's history from those with a legitimate reason for wanting to know.

I also think prisoners should all serve their full sentences. None of this "sentenced to 25 years for 2nd degree murder, paroled after 8 years." It just lets judges look tough for voters when the reality is a heinous criminal gets a much lighter sentence than the public realizes.

I'm also in favor of anyone sentenced to life (or given the death penalty) becoming an involuntary organ donor. One kidney and part of a liver from the lifers, and anything and everything from the death row inmates.

I have plenty of unpopular opinions.

 

[krucam]

Does “violent felons” include somebody defending hisself in a state that disapproves of that?

Nope. A legit Self Defense will not likely make one a criminal in most states.

 

[JPG]

It should be you do the time and when you get out of prison and/or finish your sentence, ALL rights should be restored. If someone shouldn't be on the streets then let them serve their whole term and not let them out early.

Here is the problem.

Over time, consequences have been minimized in jail sentences. 20 year terms are over in 7 years. Capital crimes are no more in most states. "let people out sooner" is the current mantra.

If "wiping the slate clean" becomes a problem, legislatures will go back to requiring longer sentences for crimes to keep future gun owners off the streets.

 

[Occam]

Nope. A legit Self Defense will not likely make one a criminal in most states.

You're right. But the issue that "legit" is - in some states - a bar you can slip under all too easily. So sure, they won't send you to prison for legit self defense as described by that jurisdiction's statutes and choices made by prosecutors. But they'll happily send you to prison for acting in self defense in a way that would be cheered, not just not prosecuted, by many other states.

 

[scottyfz6]

First I only read page one.

My feeling is after all time served including parole and probation and a cooling off period you should get your rights back. Say 5 years from non violent crime felony included, and if violent 10 years. If you can stay out of trouble for 5 or 10 years then your pretty likely not to do something again.

I would rather they go thru the legal channels to get a gun, then to buy one from the street. I feel if they are willing to do it the legal way they will be far more likely to not do something illegal with it.

 

[adit]

First I only read page one.

My feeling is after all time served including parole and probation and a cooling off period you should get your rights back. Say 5 years from non violent crime felony included, and if violent 10 years. If you can stay out of trouble for 5 or 10 years then your pretty likely not to do something again.

I would rather they go thru the legal channels to get a gun, then to buy one from the street. I feel if they are willing to do it the legal way they will be far more likely to not do something illegal with it.

No. If they can justify a cooling off period of 5 or 10 years for a felon they can do the same for you, the law abiding citizen.

Legal channels? The only criminal buying a gun through legal channels is one who wants to go back to jail.

Shall not be infringed means what it says.

If you "feel" they may commit another crime then they should remain incarcerated. Why do we need to live amongst criminals?

Prison should be so miserable that you don't want to go back. That is reformation.