Are Murderers And Other Criminals Entitled To Own Firearms?

[Punch The Clown]

Me and Tim have been kicking this one around for a while. Murders, rapists, and all sorts of criminals aren't allowed to possess firearms. Well, why aren't they? If a murderer serves his sentence and is released shouldn't they be guaranteed the same rights as you and I? Shouldn't they be allowed to protect their property, themselves, and their family's?
My brother-in-law was robbed and shot by two underprivileged inner city young men. He died about 2 hours later leaving behind my sister-in-law, my niece and my nephew. The two young men served about 3 years-give or take. Obviously the system feels that they are rehabilitated and paid their debt, so shouldn't they be afforded the same rights as everyone else?

Another thought on the subject.
My sister-in-law has been a total train wreck since the incident but it was partially my brother-in-laws fault. He only had about $80 on him which angered the noble inner city young men. Why don't we pass a law requiring all people to carry enough money on them to satiate muggers? If it saves just one life wouldn't it be worth it?

[dogboysdad]

Perhaps your governor could sponsor such a bill. Maybe the state could issue a coupon to be carried by taxpayers that could be turned in by non-taxpayers for money, cigarettes, and alcohol?

[Punch The Clown]

Eric, you're brilliant! But I am ever more brilliant still. How about we issue jostlers those card swiping devices to fit their free obamasmartphones? That way if we don't have enough cash on us to satisfy the proud inner city princes we can simply pay by credit or debit? If it saves one life...........

[buckshot85]

PTC, I assume your kidding about these thugs having rights??????

[timshufflin]

PTC, I assume your kidding about these thugs having rights??????

If someone has served their sentence, are they not entitled to the Bill or Rights? If they are not deemed to be fit to self protection, why are they released into society and allowed to be your next door neighbor?

[buckshot85]

why are they released into society and allowed to be your next door neighbor?

That is what you should be questioning.

[timshufflin]

That is what you should be questioning.

This is my premise. If someone should not be allowed to the Bill of Rights, they should not be allowed into society. This takes us to the next piece, why do we have background checks for firearms? Everyone in our society is protected under the Bill or Rights, are they not? The only way to deem someone unfit for firearm ownership is if they are incarcerated.

Why are we doing background checks then? Everyone in society is either rehabilitated or a free man right?

[buckshot85]

This is my premise. If someone should not be allowed to the Bill of Rights, they should not be allowed into society. This takes us to the next piece, why do we have background checks for firearms? Everyone in our society is protected under the Bill or Rights, are they not? The only way to deem someone unfit for firearm ownership is if they are incarcerated.

Why are we doing background checks then? Everyone in society is either rehabilitated or a free man right?

I do not disagree with the background check.
People are now being released early from prison, not beacuase they are deemed rehabilitated, because of overcrowding. They are still criminals, just to a lesser degree because of the crime against society that they committed. I am all for, if you commit a violent crime against our society, you are no longer a contributing member, you are a detriment. You should not have the same rights as others. A murderer, rapist, etc... gets out of prison, buys a few firearms, moves next door to you and has his fine, upstanding buddies making your neighborhood home, your completely comfortable with this?

[buckshot85]

I believe and I think you do to that there should be no ammending of the constitution. It is not a living document. What the correct answer is to this topic at hand, I do not know and from what I have seen in my 45 years, our elected officials do not either.

[timshufflin]

I believe and I think you do to that there should be no ammending of the constitution. It is not a living document. What the correct answer is to this topic at hand, I do not know and from what I have seen in my 45 years, our elected officials do not either.

The Constitution was made with an Amendment process in place. I have no problem with amending the Constitution when the required votes are there. To get those votes is a burden and it was meant to be that way.