To stop criminals from getting gunsBrand violent felons with anti gun tattoos so they can't buy guns

[pismoe]

VIOLENT , VIOLENCE is the cutoff Camp , not a 19 year old boy having sex with his 17 year old girl friend . Felonies seem to be too all encompassing but everyone knows what Violence is and what it means Camp !! ----------------------------------------------------------- Mental illness , as a start look to the sicko that shot the news reporter and camara man as a model of 'mental illness' . Everyone knows what his sicko , perverted life style was Camp !!

 

[Camp]

The scarlet letter, only a centuries old idea. How original.

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

How do you get around having a brand put on your forehead before you leave prison?
Shouldn't a rapist or murderer be sentenced to a lifetime of public humiliation?

What about people who have a history of mental illness. Do you propose we brand them also? Who will decide what crimes and illnesses qualify for branding?

There are still a few more things I want to discuss……I want to see if anyone thinks of them.

Tattoos can be covered. People do it everyday. There are even TV shows that focus on covering bad or unwanted tattoos.

 

[Camp]

VIOLENT , VIOLENCE is the cutoff Camp , not a 19 year old boy having sex with his 17 year old girl friend . Felonies seem to be too all encompassing but everyone knows what Violence is and what it means Camp !! ----------------------------------------------------------- Mental illness , as a start look to the sicko that shot the news reporter and camara man as a model of 'mental illness' . Everyone knows what his sicko , perverted life style was Camp !!

You are admitting that the branding idea would not help with preventing the mentally ill from getting guns. You are also narrowing the idea of branding felons, to branding only violent felons. The girl in my example who was carrying an illegal weapon of transporting drugs would be exempt in your idea oR this branding law?

 

[pismoe]

The scarlet letter, only a centuries old idea. How original.

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

Thanks for the comments…I am looking for the down side…and ways to discuss it and get around them.

What would you do with the 20 year old girl who got involved with the wrong crowd and got caught carrying a gun or drugs. Would she be embarrassed anytime she went to the beach or swimming pool? Would she be restricted to her clothing? Would she still be required to wear this brand 25 years after she finished rehab, got a job, paid taxes and never had another run in with the law? All for the convenience and benefit of those who sell guns?

and the girl in your example in post number 40 is not VIOLENT Camp . Caught with drugs , carrying a gun , probably shouldn't label anyone as a VIOLENT felon . Maybe catagories of criminals needs to be changed or revised .

 

[2aguy]

The scarlet letter, only a centuries old idea. How original.

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

Thanks for the comments…I am looking for the down side…and ways to discuss it and get around them.

What would you do with the 20 year old girl who got involved with the wrong crowd and got caught carrying a gun or drugs. Would she be embarrassed anytime she went to the beach or swimming pool? Would she be restricted to her clothing? Would she still be required to wear this brand 25 years after she finished rehab, got a job, paid taxes and never had another run in with the law? All for the convenience and benefit of those who sell guns?

Simply carrying a gun is not a violent crime. So probably not. If she was involved in a hold up or other violence with a weapon, then sure. Right now, if you are a felon, I don't believe in most states you get all of your rights back…so a brand like that would do nothing that already being a felon doesn't already do. The key here is to keep violent felons from getting guns, and making it harder for anti gunners to push for licensing, registration and "universal" background checks.

There is this…….what if you are arrested, convicted, and sentenced, and branded….and are later proven innocent? I would say to this concern, you could get paperwork from the state or feds that showed you were cleared and are now allowed to own a gun. This would be a small population of people, and it still wouldn't effect the vast majority of law abiding citizens.

 

[2aguy]

VIOLENT , VIOLENCE is the cutoff Camp , not a 19 year old boy having sex with his 17 year old girl friend . Felonies seem to be too all encompassing but everyone knows what Violence is and what it means Camp !! ----------------------------------------------------------- Mental illness , as a start look to the sicko that shot the news reporter and camara man as a model of 'mental illness' . Everyone knows what his sicko , perverted life style was Camp !!

You are admitting that the branding idea would not help with preventing the mentally ill from getting guns. You are also narrowing the idea of branding felons, to branding only violent felons. The girl in my example who was carrying an illegal weapon of transporting drugs would be exempt in your idea oR this branding law?

The cases of the mentally ill using guns to kill is tiny. And since they have committed no crime, I don't see a way to do this to them. I would think that mere possession of a gun with no prior violent history would not need to be branded, if it was already a misdemeanor……a detail that could be looked at. A second offense….?

 

[2aguy]

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

How do you get around having a brand put on your forehead before you leave prison?
Shouldn't a rapist or murderer be sentenced to a lifetime of public humiliation?

What about people who have a history of mental illness. Do you propose we brand them also? Who will decide what crimes and illnesses qualify for branding?

There are still a few more things I want to discuss……I want to see if anyone thinks of them.

Tattoos can be covered. People do it everyday. There are even TV shows that focus on covering bad or unwanted tattoos.

That is why I went with a brand, a large one, instead of a tattoo……I have seen those tattoo shows too…..

 

[M14 Shooter]

The scarlet letter, only a centuries old idea. How original.

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

How do you get around having a brand put on your forehead before you leave prison?
Shouldn't a rapist or murderer be sentenced to a lifetime of public humiliation?

What about people who have a history of mental illness. Do you propose we brand them also? Who will decide what crimes and illnesses qualify for branding?

I guess that depends on how serious you are about keeping guns from people that should not have them.
Why not focus on something that deals directly with those who cannot legally have them rather than restrict the rights of the law abiding?

 

[2aguy]

What about teenagers? Violent gun using teenagers in gangs?

 

[2aguy]

The scarlet letter, only a centuries old idea. How original.

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

How do you get around having a brand put on your forehead before you leave prison?
Shouldn't a rapist or murderer be sentenced to a lifetime of public humiliation?

What about people who have a history of mental illness. Do you propose we brand them also? Who will decide what crimes and illnesses qualify for branding?

I guess that depends on how serious you are about keeping guns from people what should not have them.
Why not focus on something that deals directly with those who cannot legally have them rather than restrict the rights of the law abiding?

Exactly…which is why this idea is so great…..

 

[Camp]

The scarlet letter, only a centuries old idea. How original.

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

Thanks for the comments…I am looking for the down side…and ways to discuss it and get around them.

What would you do with the 20 year old girl who got involved with the wrong crowd and got caught carrying a gun or drugs. Would she be embarrassed anytime she went to the beach or swimming pool? Would she be restricted to her clothing? Would she still be required to wear this brand 25 years after she finished rehab, got a job, paid taxes and never had another run in with the law? All for the convenience and benefit of those who sell guns?

Simply carrying a gun is not a violent crime. So probably not. If she was involved in a hold up or other violence with a weapon, then sure. Right now, if you are a felon, I don't believe in most states you get all of your rights back…so a brand like that would do nothing that already being a felon doesn't already do. The key here is to keep violent felons from getting guns, and making it harder for anti gunners to push for licensing, registration and "universal" background checks.

There is this…….what if you are arrested, convicted, and sentenced, and branded….and are later proven innocent? I would say to this concern, you could get paperwork from the state or feds that showed you were cleared and are now allowed to own a gun. This would be a small population of people, and it still wouldn't effect the vast majority of law abiding citizens.

Where this goes is that we will begin making exceptions as to who gets branded. Each time that happens, the proposal becomes less meaningful. We have already moved the bar from felons to violent felons.

 

[2aguy]

The scarlet letter, only a centuries old idea. How original.

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

How do you get around having a brand put on your forehead before you leave prison?
Shouldn't a rapist or murderer be sentenced to a lifetime of public humiliation?

What about people who have a history of mental illness. Do you propose we brand them also? Who will decide what crimes and illnesses qualify for branding?

I guess that depends on how serious you are about keeping guns from people what should not have them.
Why not focus on something that deals directly with those who cannot legally have them rather than restrict the rights of the law abiding?

Imagine….you have a buyer, at a gun store or a private sale…you simply say…show me your left shoulder…done and done……..if they are felons they are shown to be felons..no paper trail, no background check……easy as pie…...

 

[pismoe]

the mental illness , I advised on that Camp . Look at the weirdo that had a history of weirdness and killed the reporter and camera man . Then again , I'm not really concerned with these isolated , rare black swan events in this country of 320,000,000 people Camp . MOST people live their lives in a nice , secure peaceable fashion and people still get killed everyday , see car accidents . You can't stop ALL deaths and murders , see disarmed 'chicago' Camp !!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

Thanks for the comments…I am looking for the down side…and ways to discuss it and get around them.

What would you do with the 20 year old girl who got involved with the wrong crowd and got caught carrying a gun or drugs. Would she be embarrassed anytime she went to the beach or swimming pool? Would she be restricted to her clothing? Would she still be required to wear this brand 25 years after she finished rehab, got a job, paid taxes and never had another run in with the law? All for the convenience and benefit of those who sell guns?

Simply carrying a gun is not a violent crime. So probably not. If she was involved in a hold up or other violence with a weapon, then sure. Right now, if you are a felon, I don't believe in most states you get all of your rights back…so a brand like that would do nothing that already being a felon doesn't already do. The key here is to keep violent felons from getting guns, and making it harder for anti gunners to push for licensing, registration and "universal" background checks.

There is this…….what if you are arrested, convicted, and sentenced, and branded….and are later proven innocent? I would say to this concern, you could get paperwork from the state or feds that showed you were cleared and are now allowed to own a gun. This would be a small population of people, and it still wouldn't effect the vast majority of law abiding citizens.

Where this goes is that we will begin making exceptions as to who gets branded. Each time that happens, the proposal becomes less meaningful. We have already moved the bar from felons to violent felons.

So... why make exceptions?
Did you have your right to own a gun removed thru due process?
Yes?
You get branded.

 

[2aguy]

Do you have a sound argument against its efficacy?

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

Thanks for the comments…I am looking for the down side…and ways to discuss it and get around them.

What would you do with the 20 year old girl who got involved with the wrong crowd and got caught carrying a gun or drugs. Would she be embarrassed anytime she went to the beach or swimming pool? Would she be restricted to her clothing? Would she still be required to wear this brand 25 years after she finished rehab, got a job, paid taxes and never had another run in with the law? All for the convenience and benefit of those who sell guns?

Simply carrying a gun is not a violent crime. So probably not. If she was involved in a hold up or other violence with a weapon, then sure. Right now, if you are a felon, I don't believe in most states you get all of your rights back…so a brand like that would do nothing that already being a felon doesn't already do. The key here is to keep violent felons from getting guns, and making it harder for anti gunners to push for licensing, registration and "universal" background checks.

There is this…….what if you are arrested, convicted, and sentenced, and branded….and are later proven innocent? I would say to this concern, you could get paperwork from the state or feds that showed you were cleared and are now allowed to own a gun. This would be a small population of people, and it still wouldn't effect the vast majority of law abiding citizens.

Where this goes is that we will begin making exceptions as to who gets branded. Each time that happens, the proposal becomes less meaningful. We have already moved the bar from felons to violent felons.

Actually, I always only considered violent felons…someone selling drugs who is not violent…no brand….we want violent criminals to not have guns. I would say a violent felon convicted of a knife, club or empty hand attack gets the no gun brand as well.

 

[2aguy]

I am waiting on the real anti gunners on this one….anyone think they will agree with this…..?

 

[2aguy]

I am actually going to call my state reps on this…..get it noticed…it is a great way to deal with these issues…right?

 

[pismoe]

sure , VIOLENCE is the problem and should be the only qualifier for a brand imo !!

 

[Camp]

Criminals learn how to get around laws. In addition it would be judged as cruel and unusual punishment. It suggest a lifetime sentence of public humiliation.

Thanks for the comments…I am looking for the down side…and ways to discuss it and get around them.

What would you do with the 20 year old girl who got involved with the wrong crowd and got caught carrying a gun or drugs. Would she be embarrassed anytime she went to the beach or swimming pool? Would she be restricted to her clothing? Would she still be required to wear this brand 25 years after she finished rehab, got a job, paid taxes and never had another run in with the law? All for the convenience and benefit of those who sell guns?

Simply carrying a gun is not a violent crime. So probably not. If she was involved in a hold up or other violence with a weapon, then sure. Right now, if you are a felon, I don't believe in most states you get all of your rights back…so a brand like that would do nothing that already being a felon doesn't already do. The key here is to keep violent felons from getting guns, and making it harder for anti gunners to push for licensing, registration and "universal" background checks.

There is this…….what if you are arrested, convicted, and sentenced, and branded….and are later proven innocent? I would say to this concern, you could get paperwork from the state or feds that showed you were cleared and are now allowed to own a gun. This would be a small population of people, and it still wouldn't effect the vast majority of law abiding citizens.

Where this goes is that we will begin making exceptions as to who gets branded. Each time that happens, the proposal becomes less meaningful. We have already moved the bar from felons to violent felons.

Actually, I always only considered violent felons…someone selling drugs who is not violent…no brand….we want violent criminals to not have guns. I would say a violent felon convicted of a knife, club or empty hand attack gets the no gun brand as well.

Well good luck. Let us know when a state legislature passes this kind of law and it doesn't get dismissed as cruel and unusual punishment by the federal courts.

 

[2aguy]

Hmmmmm….I would say it is odd that the usual gun grabbers haven't chimed in…but I am not surprised……this would do everything they say they want….but not harm law abiding citizens…….and those are the people the gun grabbers really want to get….criminals…not so much.