More gun control in the pipeline. . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clint45

I have heard a few horror stories about guys taking a piss next to a dumpster in an alley behind a pub getting charged with "exposure" or "lewdness" and then being entered into the registry for that. It seems hard to believe that any prosecutor or judge would punish anyone in that way for such a thing. The registry was never intended for people caught pissing behind a pub at 0200. That shouldn't even BE a crime unless it was in the afternoon on Main Street in front of people.

When people are put on the registry for pissing behind a dumpster, you know what that does? It gives sex offenders an "excuse" for being on the registry when they try to get a job or housing. They can say, "Oh, not me . . . I was only pissing behind a dumpster and didn't do anything else" . . . and sometimes they are given the benefit of a doubt. That is bullshit. No-one should ever be put on that registry for taking a leak in an alley away from other people. Misusing the registry weakens it.

---

This is what happened with the RICO act. First 1%ers then St. Albans charity gambling night.
One of my former co-workers did get tagged for public urination. Luckily the ticket writing LE understood the situation and knew it wasn't some guy jerking off outside the sorority house. Which then morphs in to what is happening in the public schools regarding ZERO TOLERANCE.

Separate the violent from NON-Violent felons and things could be simpler.

I don't think felons should be restricted from owning guns, voting, or any other constitutional rights after they've completed their sentence and probation. There's a broad range of felonies that you or I would scoff at even being a crime. If the person in question is so dangerous to society that they'd be a major threat if they owned a gun, then they should be in prison. End of story.

if you have served your time and are released from prison your rights should be restored. If you are too violent to have a gun, you are too violent to be released from prison.

thanks for stealing my thunder Dingo, just because you type faster.

Fine, I will add, when they get out of prison, we should still give them a suit and a rifle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim

Separate the violent from NON-Violent felons and things could be simpler.

---

Personally, I think burglary of a residence or distributing meth should be punished in a similar manner to violent felonies . . . after they do their time, keep them on court mandated supervision indefinitely until they have proven themselves to be "rehabilitated" beyond a reasonable doubt. No-one under court supervision should be allowed to own a gun, ammo, or any sort of weapon. Once you are done with the system, however, all rights need to be restored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clint45

Personally, I think burglary of a residence or distributing meth should be punished in a similar manner to violent felonies . . . after they do their time, keep them on court mandated supervision indefinitely until they have proven themselves to be "rehabilitated" beyond a reasonable doubt. No-one under court supervision should be allowed to own a gun, ammo, or any sort of weapon. Once you are done with the system, however, all rights need to be restored.

---

Distributing meth should end with brain matter on the lawn, after due process of course.

I would otherwise agree, except our prisons have turned into such a bunch of revolving door bullshit. I do think people should get their rights back after a time, but how to determine how that plays out is above my pay grade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dingo

I don't think felons should be restricted from owning guns, voting, or any other constitutional rights after they've completed their sentence and probation. There's a broad range of felonies that you or I would scoff at even being a crime. If the person in question is so dangerous to society that they'd be a major threat if they owned a gun, then they should be in prison. End of story.

---

I agree. If you have paid your time you should reenter the social contract. If not they should stay in prison or die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flan7211

I agree. If you have paid your time you should reenter the social contract. If not they should stay in prison or die.

---

The problem is twofold: First, it costs too damn much to incarcerate inmates for long sentences, especially with overcrowding for petty drug offenses. Second, our government lacks the fortitude to follow through with a hundred thousand executions per year. I agree that armed robbers and rapists proven to be guilty need an immediate bullet in the head, no appeal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clint45

The problem is twofold: First, it costs too damn much to incarcerate inmates for long sentences, especially with overcrowding for petty drug offenses. Second, our government lacks the fortitude to follow through with a hundred thousand executions per year. I agree that armed robbers and rapists proven to be guilty need an immediate bullet in the head, no appeal.

---

Add to that the revolving door policy in place now. A felon picked up in possession of a weapon is back on the street (NYC specifically) within 24 hrs.