• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should someone who commits a crime with a gun be forever banned from owning one?

Should someone who commits a crime with a gun be forever banned from owning one?

  • Yes

    Votes: 46 78.0%

  • No

    Votes: 13 22.0%
  • Total voters
    59
Henrin said:
Don't people live with the consequences of their actions by going to jail?
Click to expand...

Yes, but it continues after they leave. That charge just doesn't magically disappear.
 
joko104 said:
Just about everything in Florida in a felony.

How many on this forum committed a felony - specifically a drug felony - in the past? Yet I would not be surprised that most hypocritically answered this question "yes" - yet think THEY should still be able to own a firearm.
Click to expand...

Felonies with a gun... I'll add any felony involving any deadly weapon, domestic violence or sexual assault even if a deadly weapon wasn't used.
 
Last edited:
Blackdog said:
#1 This issue has nothing to do with abortion, nothing at all. Nice Red Herring for the money though.
#2 Yes the car example is horrible and the red herring abortion thing is worse.
#3 Yes because 18 year old's often make good choices. :roll: So why should it be 18? how about 12 or 11? Why stop there if you are going to pick an arbitrary number to deny someone a right.

Outside of a bunch of bad examples and fallacy arguments you got nothing. I mean really, nothing. :peace
Click to expand...

Fine any age where someone makes a really stupid irresponsible choice, they have to live with the consequences. If they are charged I don't care how old they are, they still got charged.
 
Ikari said:
What does a DUI accident have to do with owning a gun?
Click to expand...

If you kill someone your convicted of a violent offense and voila you can't buy a gun, due to a very irresponsible choice to drink and drive.
 
0bserver92 said:
If you kill someone your convicted of a violent offense and voila you can't buy a gun, due to a very irresponsible choice to drink and drive.
Click to expand...

Yes, the government certainly is interested in restricting the rights of the individual. Yet in the context of this thread should one regain the full exercise of rights? I'd argue that in the DUI case, one shouldn't have lost their right to own a gun in the first place since the accident did not involved firearms. Additionally, once punishment time is over, all rights should once again be recognized. The fact that gun rights are restricted for non-gun related offenses only shows the level to which the government will go to control us all.
 
0bserver92 said:
Yes, but it continues after they leave. That charge just doesn't magically disappear.
Click to expand...

Its one thing for it to follow you around in your everyday life where you can still move on with your life even if it is a bit harder, but when the government comes into the equation you can't move on.
 
0bserver92 said:
Fine any age where someone makes a really stupid irresponsible choice, they have to live with the consequences. If they are charged I don't care how old they are, they still got charged.
Click to expand...

So you would send a 5 year old who accidentally shot a friend to the gas chamber, I see.
 
Blackdog said:
So you would send a 5 year old who accidentally shot a friend to the gas chamber, I see.
Click to expand...

Well considering I don't believe in the deaths sentence no, but should to punished to the fullest extent possible. Though here you can blame the parents aswell.
 
Henrin said:
Its one thing for it to follow you around in your everyday life where you can still move on with your life even if it is a bit harder, but when the government comes into the equation you can't move on.
Click to expand...

That charge will stay on your record and will make things very difficult for that person in the future especially if they want to do anything around children or get a job.
 
I believe we should have less restrictions on guns, but these are the people that shouldn't even be allowed to own them.
 
0bserver92 said:
Well considering I don't believe in the deaths sentence no, but should to punished to the fullest extent possible. Though here you can blame the parents aswell.
Click to expand...

Sieg Heil!

+1 For Godwin's law!
 
Exactly what I was thinking, if it is a violent crime with a gun, yes absolutely. If you are speeding with a gun in the car, uh, no.
ttwtt78640 said:
I assume that you meant a felony was commited (as an adult), a conviction was obtained for it and a sentence of at least one year in jail/prison was imposed. The way you stated the question leads me to believe that a "trick" may be comming. ;)
Click to expand...
 
0bserver92 said:
Why are minors outside of the law? Children are not innocent and are just as capable as adults to commit crimes.
Click to expand...

Minors are not old enough to truly know right from wrong. They can also easily be manipulated by adults. So they can't be held to the same standards as adults. Although in special cases of extreme indifference to their actions, they can be charged as adults.

The fact I have to tell you this is frighting. The fact you can vote scares me even more.
 
Blackdog said:
Minors are not old enough to truly know right from wrong. They can also easily be manipulated by adults. So they can't be held to the same standards as adults. Although in special cases of extreme indifference to their actions, they can be charged as adults.

The fact I have to tell you this is frighting. The fact you can vote scares me even more.
Click to expand...

That is why they are tried differently, and they should be tried to the fullest extent of the youth justice system. I thought youth justice system was implied. There is a reason it exists.
 
Gipper said:
I'd agree with this if crime recidivism rates weren't what they were, or even if prison was a valuable tool of "rehabilitation".

You give a gun to a guy that just got of jail on a gun felony, and you know 3 things:

1) He's seriously pissed off.
2) Mentally speaking, he's no better off now than he was when he got in.
3) He has documented history of firearm misuse.

I understand the concept of rights and not wanting to infringe upon them, but you would do the public a major disservice to allow for this.
Click to expand...

If someone can not be trusted with his full rights then he shouldn't be released in the first place.
 
0bserver92 said:
That is why they are tried differently, and they should be tried to the fullest extent of the youth justice system. I thought youth justice system was implied. There is a reason it exists.
Click to expand...

No. You said "why are minors outside the law?" You said nothing about implying anything.
 
If its a violent crime. Yes.
 
0bserver92 said:
Why are minors outside of the law? Children are not innocent and are just as capable as adults to commit crimes.
Click to expand...

They're not "outside" the law, but they are certainly treated differently as they are children and not adults.
 
If it is a violent felony with no mitigating circumstances whatsoever, probably yes.

But in Goshinland, such a person would be mighty lucky to EVER get out of prison in the first place...
 
jamesrage said:
If someone can not be trusted with his full rights then he shouldn't be released in the first place.
Click to expand...

That's a legitimate argument. The problem exists because we have a justice system that sentences criminals to serve time in prison, but is not designed to bring any positives to any variable in the equation. All I would want to do is take away the temptation. You may not want to leave an apple pie unattended with a fat kid, but you can't bar him from the kitchen for life because there's a chance that he could eat a forbidden pie sometime in his life.

Maybe an option would be to ban a criminal that's released from prison for a gun-related felony access to a gun for a certain period of time. Make the sentence progressive, essentially two-tiered. I think that structured life out of prison with certain limitations would be a better method of rehabilitation than anything the corrections system could offer.
 
Blackdog said:
No. You said "why are minors outside the law?" You said nothing about implying anything.
Click to expand...

Sorry I thought people would assume to the fullest extent of youth law.
 
Tucker Case said:
TurtleDude said:
if its say

Poaching a deer with a rifle

carrying without a license but with no intent to use the gun against someone criminally

refusal to register a weapon in states with socialist gun laws

smoking weed while possessing a gun
Click to expand...

All of those are great examples of irresponsible gun ownership and I'm absolutely OK with those people being prohibited from owning firearms. as far as I'm concerned, anyone who demonstrates such irresponsibility relinquishes their rights to own a weapon because their irresponsibility causes their right to own a weapon to infringe on everyone elses[sic] right not to have an idiot with a weapon nearby.
Click to expand...

So, really, you are taking the position that merely exercising a right is proof that one is irresponsible, and an idiot, and has proven that he should not be allowed that right. What, then, is the point of recognizing something as a right, if you're going to subject the reasonable exercise of that right to such a ridiculous Catch–22 excuse to deny it?
 
Bob Blaylock said:
So, really, you are taking the position that merely exercising a right is proof that one is irresponsible, and an idiot, and has proven that he should not be allowed that right.
Click to expand...

Of course not. Those examples are not examples of someone "merely exercising their right". They are examples of people knowingly violating the laws associated with that right for selfish reasons, rather than rational ones. That's why it's irresponsible. People need to have more personal responsibility and stop playing the victim. They make a decision to violate the laws, they need to slap on a pair of balls and accept the consequences for it, not play the victim.
 
Yes but I bet the gunnies wont see it that way
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom