Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 80 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #32133
    Malgus
    Malgus
    Survivalist
    member8

    @ 74,

    Those are all good examples but not of recidivis.

    The original argument was about having felons have their rights – all of them – restored upon their release.

    You brought up the recidivism rate. I countered that the number of felons in prison would diminish substantially if we stopped making felons out of people for stupid reasons or for violating some regulation instead of violating criminal law where there is a clear victim… which goes directly to the recidivism rate.

    We just aren’t where what you are describing can happen.

    That’s just it. We WERE where what I am describing was happening… prior to NFA34, prior to “The War on Drugs”, prior to “The Immigration Reform Act of 1965″, prior to Prohibition, prior to all the alphabet agencies being established and their resultant mission creep…

    We can be there again. What’s doubly irritating is that we CAN be there, but people don’t want liberty. They wouldn’t know what to do with real freedom. We have been corrupted beyond saving – the only way real freedom and liberty work – the way we had it originally – is if we have a moral, homogenous society… then there would be no need for more and more intrusive laws, regulations, etc…

    And the only way that can happen… is if we do away with the current system…. and the only way that happens, is if something catastrophic happens, along with the resultant bloodshed…

    There is an argument here… not the “YOU SUCK!” kind of argument, but the “What will we do after SHTF?” kind of argument… these things can be reasoned now, before nasty things happen… who knows who will be left after SHTF? Whoever they are, they will be the ones who put everything back together again… and, hopefully, they will use us as an example of what not to do…

    So, discussing this… arguing this… is worthwhile…

    The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1

    #32135
    Profile photo of namelus
    namelus
    Survivalist
    member7

    If you can take away someone rights forever for something they do in the past means you dont think anyone can ever change. look at yourself from your youth…. never done anything that is now illegal? A felony? Whats difference between you and others you seek to take their rights away? Time? change? Are you some person? Never done anything that could be considered illegal now?

    If someone is that dangerous then maybe they should be killed? Take away their rights forever their chance to change after all its not your family not your blood. If you dont think anyone can change then merely thinking of a criminal act should be prosecutable as if you had done crime after all people dont change if they think it they will do it right?

    SO if you have ever thought a violent thought and dont believe anyone can change you should not own gun right? We all change over time through the world around us the interactions we have. yes there are some people who will just be bad, just like there will always be people over doing any questionable thing.
    /
    How we should deal with them is a real issue for now or for later. I am with malgus on the need to re classify crime and criminal tags. I also strongly believe we have gone way way too far with rules and regulations, we do this through government and its okay if it is legal… remember the nazi’s it was all legal too. We do things with government as our shield our our disconnect with our morals and conscience.

    How would you separate crimes in your own village?

    #32143
    Profile photo of Vep
    Vep
    Survivalist
    member4

    Hawaii wasn’t much different than Massachusetts in respect to guns. Some of these arrogant control freaks running a few of these states need to learn what ‘infringed’ means.

    That is why I’m glad I’m on the Texas coast instead of Hawaii. Texas is about to legalize open carry. There is even a bill submitted to do away with any need for in-state licensing for both open and concealed carry. The coast of Texas also isn’t inundated with the Fukushima plume either.

    #32162
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    “The origial argument was about having felons have their rights – all of them –” All their rights or all the felons?

    Letting all felons have all their rights is just a bad idea.

    #32164
    Profile photo of namelus
    namelus
    Survivalist
    member7

    74 you feel that some felons have done something so bad that they dont deserve rights back. What crimes are those? What deeds are so dark one can never see the light again?

    that taking the right to own and use a gun/ i ask you does that really change anything at all other than your preconception it makes you safer? gun crime is not stopped by gun law but by armed citizens since cops are the clean up squad usually way late on the “scene”.

    if someone is to be let into society again and you are not a slaver then it is with full rights. only slaves have masters with more rights than them.

    #32166
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Namelus,
    There are people called psychopaths, most of us probably will be better off if they are not armed. BTW did you see the news tonight where the guy shot and killed at least 6 people outside of Philly? I probably wouldn’t give him gun on his release, would you?

    #32167
    Malgus
    Malgus
    Survivalist
    member8

    namelus,

    How would you separate crimes in your own village?

    I’m fairly Libertarian when it comes to some things, but I’m very much Old Testament when it comes to punishment…

    I’m also probably the wrong guy to be deciding who gets punished for what…

    The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1

    #32169
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    “i ask you does that really change anything at all other than your preconception” namelus

    My perception comes from experience, it is not preconceived as you suggest. If you had experience in this area you would not be suggesting arming psychopaths.

    #32172
    Profile photo of Aayla
    Aayla
    Survivalist
    member1

    I wouldn’t have ANY mercy for a proven child molester. Castrating wouldn’t be good enough! If you can’t kill them, then at least keep them locked up forever. Period!

    #32173
    Profile photo of Aayla
    Aayla
    Survivalist
    member1

    You and me, both.

    #32174
    Malgus
    Malgus
    Survivalist
    member8

    @ 74,

    That’s the whole point – that guy wouldn’t get released in Corriban…

    Upon conviction of his 6 murders, he would be given one appeal. After that, he gets a week to get right with the Almighty – if he so chooses – and then I would:

    Make him dig the graves of the people he’d killed.
    Dig his own grave.
    Then, I’d give the surviving family the options of deciding method of execution.
    Also the opportunity to throw the lever/switch, etc, if they want retribution. If not, a suitable individual will be appointed.
    Any possessions of his will be sold and the funds divided up between the surviving immediate family.

    But, some guy who sells a bag of weed when he’s 18? If he wants to go deer hunting when he’s in his 30’s, you can hardly say that he’s in the same class as dude who just shot and killed 6 people…

    The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1

    #32175
    Profile photo of namelus
    namelus
    Survivalist
    member7

    Arming psychopaths, is exactly what you do with gun control cant you see your flawed thinking? you give
    the man a vote but not a gun? how many can he kill with a gun? how many have been voted to death?

    what you suggest restricting rights is just the path that we are on the path taken, do you like it? do you think it will get better with more control?

    how long will a psychopath last in that society? show me one gun show robbery? why?

    i suggest arming everyone an armed society is a polite one. Everyone armed means everyone equal but for training.

    There are those that deserve death, that is for the village to decide. If deemed able to return then as a full person or call it what it is slavery as it is.

    of those killed how many armed? thats right 0 what would have happened if they where armed citizen, criminal or not.

    would that man have gotten a gun anyways and done what he did? Can you stop that? Can laws or for all your posturing stuck in a rut of thinking that leads nowhere but here.

    #32176
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    “But, some guy who sells a bag of weed when he’s 18? If he wants to go deer hunting when he’s in his 30′s, you can hardly say that he’s in the same class as dude who just shot and killed 6 people…” Malgus

    I haven’t said that. But basicly it is what you have been advocating.

    #32178
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    namelus,
    Well if we vote after shtf, you’re not getting mine.

    #32179
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    My suggestion remains that part of the sentence for those who commit violent crimes or use weapons in the committing of their crimes include no gun rights after they complete the jail portion of their sentence. I’m OK with other convicts (white collar and regulatory type crimes) getting their gun rights back after completing their sentence.

    Otherwise I do agree that we put too many people in jail for too many things. Some offenses should have some form of punishment other than jail.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 80 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.