Felons’ Rights to Bare Arms

Felons’ Rights to Bare Arms

Felons’ Rights to Bare Arms

Why is it against the law for a felon to bare arms. The law applies to every criminal that served more than a year in prison ( the statute forbids not only “felons ‘ but any person convicted of “ a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year ‘ to posses a firearm or ammunition, whether the crime in question is classified as a felony or not. ). In my opinion this law should be reverse because most criminal offenders are non-violent ones and they do not have the right to defend themselves. What if a violent burglar breaks into their house and attempts to shoot them, they have no way of defending themselves ( I mean they could struggle for the gun but there I always that tiny risk of getting shot and they also could attempt to stab the burglar then they would go o jail for gun possession. I think that this law is just wrong and should be revaluated, to see if thee is some other way to allow these past offenders to bare arms. This is but just one example of the myraid collateral consequences faced by those who are convicted of a felony. Another right which felons lose is that of voting. I believe that in discussing both of these prohibitions, I agree with some other posters: that the particular crime for which someone was convicted is more important than whether the crime was a misdemeanor or a felony. For example, in some other State, if a person steals something whose value is $499, they can lawfully possess firearms and vote. However, if another person steals something whose value is $500, they cannot lawfully possess firearms or vote. So it is more or less an arbitrary demarcation. It exists because, at common law, there were significantly fewer crimes classified as felonies- they were very serious and all punishable by death. However, more crimes becomes felonies around the time blacks were given the right to vote and many state legislatures made crimes seen as black crimes felonies in order to disenfranchise as many black voters as possible. Anyway, I would say only violent felonies, such as murder, rape, assault, robbery, burglary, arson, mayhem, etc. ought to result in someone losing the rights to possess firearms.

Felons’ Rights to Bare Arms

Your point about the racist origins of many of ours laws, not the least of which include gun control laws, is well taken. But you have to draw the line somewhere. It may seem arbitrary, and to some extent it certainly is but you have to do something to delineate serious and less serious crimes. The problem is there are just to many if’s and’s, and but’s to be dealt wit. You have a million different laws each with a million different circumstances for a million different criminals. In the end there are just too many “what if’s” in every single law. And in the end, who would get to decide whether your robbery is violent or not? A government bureaucrat. While to some there is certainly an unjust outcome, it is much simpler and I believe overall more fair to just draw the line in the sand and say “If you cross this line, it’s a felony and here are the rights you are going to lose.” In the end it’s up to the criminal whether or not they decide to cross it and they should bear the responsibility of their actions. Not only that. But my handgun carry permit is one thing that immediately identifies me as law-abiding citizen to law enforcement officers during a traffic stop.