After a felon serves their sentence

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I don't really know, seems something that you need to look at in a case by case bases.

I don't see how you can universally state that a felon should have his rights fully restored.

You give the example of guns, I'll give the examples of phedophiles. Should someone convicted of something like that be allowed to own a daycare center for instance. I would argue it's a safety issue to not allow it.

Same can be said for gun ownership. Someone with a history of violence no. A guy jailed for a non-violent crime... Probably. The thing is voting has no public safety questions. Gun ownership does.

Umm they are voting on public safety. And many other things that impact everyone.

That's a bit of a stretch don't you think? I can easily see how owning a gun can lead to a guy with a history of violence committing a violent act with that gun. I can easily see how opening an daycare can lead to a phedophile abusing children again. I don't really see how voting can lead to a criminal act. Can you?

Voting fraud

The whole point of voting fraud is voting when you are not allowed to. Don't see how that is influenced by being allowed to vote. Also a pretty big stretch in my opinion.

I think you agree with my phedophile example right? If you do you recognize that when you have committed certain crimes it is justified by society to lay certain restriction on you for public safety.

I think, altough with less certainty that you agree that the crime should fit the punishment and that after a certain time certain rights should be restored?

If you acknowledge both those things than you should acknowledge that it's all circumstancial. And that you can not universally restore all rights to citizens who committed a crime, or conversely universally deprive people of all rights.

In fact by agreeing that the lenght of prison sentences should vary according to the crime a person implicitly agrees with the assertion that the rights of a citizen can be taken away and restored on a case by case bases.

The word is "basis",

 

[DOTR]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

You’ve started with a fallacious argument. They haven’t “served their sentence” which includes a lifetime ban on voting and gun ownership. Felons have those rights extinguished for life. That’s their sentence...part of the punishment and a protection for the rest of us.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

I disagree with your entire premise that there should be an “after the sentence” for Felons. I believe it should be Life w/o parole or death for Felons. No other options.

in reference to your question... He’ll no. Zero rights for ANY convicted criminals, felon, misdemeanor, or otherwise.

Russian forms of punishment are hardly applicable in the real world. That being said, death for convicted felons Paul Manafort, General Flynn, Michael Cohen, et al, sounds good to me. Soon to be joined by Trump, Guliani and Sonderland.

Be careful what you wish for.

If there was a death penalty for morons, you would be in great danger!

 

[strollingbones]

i know its sad that the stupidity of trump voters knows no ends

 

[TRFjr]

rights being restored after release needs to be done on a individual basis after proof of being reformed and becoming a productive member of society doing your time is far from proof of reformation not with a 75% recidivism rate
and there is already a process in place to have rights restored its called a pardon and any one with a record can apply for one

There is no way of knowing when someone is released whether they will become productive members of society or return to a life of crime, even if their intention is to to do so. If the felon has served their entire sentence, they should have all rights restored. If they are being released on parole other form of supervision, they don't get their right to own weapons restored until their sentence ends and they are no longer under supervision.

your are right you dont know if a newly released felon is reformed and with a 75% recidivism rate more then likely they arent so best to err on the side of caution and make the individual prove over time that he is indeed reformed and deserving of rights returned by partitioning for a pardon

 

[forkup]

Umm they are voting on public safety. And many other things that impact everyone.

That's a bit of a stretch don't you think? I can easily see how owning a gun can lead to a guy with a history of violence committing a violent act with that gun. I can easily see how opening an daycare can lead to a phedophile abusing children again. I don't really see how voting can lead to a criminal act. Can you?

Voting fraud

The whole point of voting fraud is voting when you are not allowed to. Don't see how that is influenced by being allowed to vote. Also a pretty big stretch in my opinion.

I think you agree with my phedophile example right? If you do you recognize that when you have committed certain crimes it is justified by society to lay certain restriction on you for public safety.

I think, altough with less certainty that you agree that the crime should fit the punishment and that after a certain time certain rights should be restored?

If you acknowledge both those things than you should acknowledge that it's all circumstancial. And that you can not universally restore all rights to citizens who committed a crime, or conversely universally deprive people of all rights.

In fact by agreeing that the lenght of prison sentences should vary according to the crime a person implicitly agrees with the assertion that the rights of a citizen can be taken away and restored on a case by case bases.

The word is "basis",

Sorry about that. I was on my phone, which is set to Dutch and sometimes the autocorrect plays tricks on me.

 

[TNHarley]

That's a bit of a stretch don't you think? I can easily see how owning a gun can lead to a guy with a history of violence committing a violent act with that gun. I can easily see how opening an daycare can lead to a phedophile abusing children again. I don't really see how voting can lead to a criminal act. Can you?

Voting fraud

The whole point of voting fraud is voting when you are not allowed to. Don't see how that is influenced by being allowed to vote. Also a pretty big stretch in my opinion.

I think you agree with my phedophile example right? If you do you recognize that when you have committed certain crimes it is justified by society to lay certain restriction on you for public safety.

I think, altough with less certainty that you agree that the crime should fit the punishment and that after a certain time certain rights should be restored?

If you acknowledge both those things than you should acknowledge that it's all circumstancial. And that you can not universally restore all rights to citizens who committed a crime, or conversely universally deprive people of all rights.

In fact by agreeing that the lenght of prison sentences should vary according to the crime a person implicitly agrees with the assertion that the rights of a citizen can be taken away and restored on a case by case bases.

The word is "basis",

Sorry about that. I was on my phone, which is set to Dutch and sometimes the autocorrect plays tricks on me.

He is a dick. Dont pay any attention to him. Typos happen.

 

[OldLady]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

If it wasn't a violent crime, why not?

 

[TNHarley]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

If it wasn't a violent crime, why not?

Why not a violent crime?

 

[Rocko]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

depends on the crime committed. If someone murders another then I believe they should permanently have their gun rights revoked.

 

[forkup]

Voting fraud

The whole point of voting fraud is voting when you are not allowed to. Don't see how that is influenced by being allowed to vote. Also a pretty big stretch in my opinion.

I think you agree with my phedophile example right? If you do you recognize that when you have committed certain crimes it is justified by society to lay certain restriction on you for public safety.

I think, altough with less certainty that you agree that the crime should fit the punishment and that after a certain time certain rights should be restored?

If you acknowledge both those things than you should acknowledge that it's all circumstancial. And that you can not universally restore all rights to citizens who committed a crime, or conversely universally deprive people of all rights.

In fact by agreeing that the lenght of prison sentences should vary according to the crime a person implicitly agrees with the assertion that the rights of a citizen can be taken away and restored on a case by case bases.

The word is "basis",

Sorry about that. I was on my phone, which is set to Dutch and sometimes the autocorrect plays tricks on me.

He is a dick. Dont pay any attention to him. Typos happen.

I don't mind admitting to mistakes, even typos. I don't feel it's inappropriate to mention them to people, as long is it not a tactic to avoid talking about the premise of something. Admiral didn't engage the premise with me to begin with, so I took it at face value.

 

[TNHarley]

The whole point of voting fraud is voting when you are not allowed to. Don't see how that is influenced by being allowed to vote. Also a pretty big stretch in my opinion.

I think you agree with my phedophile example right? If you do you recognize that when you have committed certain crimes it is justified by society to lay certain restriction on you for public safety.

I think, altough with less certainty that you agree that the crime should fit the punishment and that after a certain time certain rights should be restored?

If you acknowledge both those things than you should acknowledge that it's all circumstancial. And that you can not universally restore all rights to citizens who committed a crime, or conversely universally deprive people of all rights.

In fact by agreeing that the lenght of prison sentences should vary according to the crime a person implicitly agrees with the assertion that the rights of a citizen can be taken away and restored on a case by case bases.

The word is "basis",

Sorry about that. I was on my phone, which is set to Dutch and sometimes the autocorrect plays tricks on me.

He is a dick. Dont pay any attention to him. Typos happen.

I don't mind admitting to mistakes, even typos. I don't feel it's inappropriate to mention them to people, as long is it not a tactic to avoid talking about the premise of something. Admiral didn't engage the premise with me to begin with, so I took it at face value.

75 percent of his posts are grammar correction. Its annoying lol

 

[TRFjr]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

I disagree with your entire premise that there should be an “after the sentence” for Felons. I believe it should be Life w/o parole or death for Felons. No other options.

in reference to your question... He’ll no. Zero rights for ANY convicted criminals, felon, misdemeanor, or otherwise.

Lol right? A person that gets convicted for receiving 50 bucks for sucking a dick should lose all rights!
Dumbfuck

In fact by agreeing that the lenght of prison sentences should vary according to the crime a person implicitly agrees with the assertion that the rights of a citizen can be taken away and restored on a case by case bases.

The word is "basis",

Sorry about that. I was on my phone, which is set to Dutch and sometimes the autocorrect plays tricks on me.

He is a dick. Dont pay any attention to him. Typos happen.

I don't mind admitting to mistakes, even typos. I don't feel it's inappropriate to mention them to people, as long is it not a tactic to avoid talking about the premise of something. Admiral didn't engage the premise with me to begin with, so I took it at face value.

75 percent of his posts are grammar correction. Its annoying lol

then dont read them

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Russian forms of punishment are hardly applicable in the real world. That being said, death for convicted felons Paul Manafort, General Flynn, Michael Cohen, et al, sounds good to me. Soon to be joined by Trump, Guliani and Sonderland.

Be careful what you wish for.

I guess you don't have the self-awareness to see the irony in your own post. You describe capital punishment for genuine serious criminals as “Russian forms of punishment”, and oppose that; and then go on to call for the use of capital punishment as a way to eliminate political opponents, which is very much in line with the sort of abuses for which the Soviet Union was notorious.

Be careful what you wish for, indeed. If your principles were put into policy, you could very well find yourself on the wrong political side, and as such, a target for the methods that you advocate.

It seems that LIbErals, in advocating for allowing extreme abuses of power when they are in control of government, never think about what would happen when their opposition is in control of government, and able to exercise the excessive powers for which they called.

 

[Wyatt earp]

To answer TN's question: Yes, all of the rights and liberties of felons should be restored after serving their time.

Would you still call them felons?

 

[TNHarley]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

I disagree with your entire premise that there should be an “after the sentence” for Felons. I believe it should be Life w/o parole or death for Felons. No other options.

in reference to your question... He’ll no. Zero rights for ANY convicted criminals, felon, misdemeanor, or otherwise.

Lol right? A person that gets convicted for receiving 50 bucks for sucking a dick should lose all rights!
Dumbfuck

The word is "basis",

Sorry about that. I was on my phone, which is set to Dutch and sometimes the autocorrect plays tricks on me.

He is a dick. Dont pay any attention to him. Typos happen.

I don't mind admitting to mistakes, even typos. I don't feel it's inappropriate to mention them to people, as long is it not a tactic to avoid talking about the premise of something. Admiral didn't engage the premise with me to begin with, so I took it at face value.

75 percent of his posts are grammar correction. Its annoying lol

then dont read them

Thanks for the enlightenment

 

[Bob Blaylock]

depends on the crime committed. If someone murders another then I believe they should permanently have their gun rights revoked.

A murderer should permanently have his •LIFE• revoked.

 

[OldLady]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

If it wasn't a violent crime, why not?

Why not a violent crime?

Because they're violent.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I will slightly disagree. There can be instances where life in prison is neither warranted, nor practical, but where some degree of depravation [sic] of freedom is still warranted. The problem is that it should be done judicially, on a case by case basis. If an individual has multiple felony convictions for gun violence, I'm fine with the sentence itself including a lifetime prohibition against possessing weapons. But what we currently see with gun and voting rights are statutory wet blankets that serve only to add secondary punishment.

There's your problem.

You think that someone who has “multiple felony convictions for gun violence” should ever be allowed to go free, to where it would be an issue what rights he may or may not exercise as a free man.

I say that such an individual is the strongest example of someone whose sentence should be served at the end of a rope.

Not all violence is murder. Robbing a Quik Mart with an empty pistol is a form of gun violence. It hardly warrants a death sentence.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Should they be able to own guns?
I ask because them being able to vote is all the rage now.
Shouldn't we be consistent in policy? Meaning all rights restored?

I disagree with your entire premise that there should be an “after the sentence” for Felons. I believe it should be Life w/o parole or death for Felons. No other options.

in reference to your question... He’ll no. Zero rights for ANY convicted criminals, felon, misdemeanor, or otherwise.

Lol right? A person that gets convicted for receiving 50 bucks for sucking a dick should lose all rights!
Dumbfuck

What they should be convicted for is setting such a low bar. She ought to be collecting at least a grand.