TTAG Morning Digest: Restoring Felons’ Rights, Effective Thoughts and Prayers and a Symbolic Gun Rights Vote

Florida may restore felons' gun rights

courtesy jacksonville.com

If the’ve paid their debt to society, what’s the problem? . . . New Florida bill could help those with convictions restore voting and gun rights

State Rep. Cord Byrd filed a bill Wednesday that allows those who’ve served prison and probation sentences for felonies to seek to have their voting and gun rights restored by petitioning judges.

Currently, those convicted of felonies have those civil rights revoked unless the governor offers clemency. This bill would allow people to file petitions in court that argue they deserve to have their rights restored; and it allows state attorney’s offices to oppose the petitions.

Judges must determine if the people asking for their rights back have led law-abiding lives since release and if they’re likely to continue to obey the law, if they’re not likely to be a danger to others and if giving back the rights is not contrary to the public’s interest.

Thoughts and prayers would be more effective than national concealed carry reciprocity

OK then . . . National concealed carry law would be less effective than thoughts and prayers

Instead of thoughts and prayers, our nation’s leaders are now responding to gun violence with concrete action. However, if they are successful, more Americans will be in danger of getting shot. That’s because lawmakers are working to expand, not tighten, gun rights.

This goes against the wishes of more than half of America’s citizens, who want stronger gun safety legislation. It goes against the wishes of the nation’s largest law enforcement agencies and mayors, because it would make the jobs of police officers more difficult. It goes against the wishes of advocates for the survivors of domestic violence, who call it a “race to the bottom.” It goes against the wishes of people who sincerely value states’ rights, who question the Constitutionality of this measure. It goes against the wishes of major organizations representing Catholics, Jews, Episcopalians, Methodists, Unitarians, Baptists, Mennonites and Sikhs.

Sightmark's new Element Red Dot Sight

Sightmark Launches New Element 1×30 Red Dot Sight

(MANSFIELD, TEXAS) Delivering tough-to-beat accuracy and a crisp, wide field of view, the new Sightmark Element 1×30 (SM26040) is their update to the popular Tactical Red Dot Sight (SM13041). Enhancements include a smaller, more precise 2-MOA red dot, improved brightness settings and two night vision compatibility modes.

Sightmark has integrated improvements based on customer suggestions, and added more of their own, including a longer range of adjustment for both windage and elevation, battery life (up to 15,000 hours) and an improved IP67 waterproof rating. Notably, the Elements’ windage and elevation caps can now be flipped and used as tools for making adjustments.

Sounds like she can take care of herself just fine . . . Hunter forced to defend her lifestyle after receiving death threats

“Hunting helps maintain animal populations at levels that are compatible with human life/activity. For example, hogs are insanely overpopulated and can cause serious damage to agricultural products, fields, and other vegetation, which can harm livestock. We also hunt coyotes and bobcats for purposes of predator control,” she shared.

Tate has received a lot of support from the hunting community both on and offline, but she still has had her detractors. Some of those morally opposed to hunting have issued death threats Tate via social media. But, Tate continues doing what she loves and trying to teach respect.

“I pride myself in respecting others for their beliefs and practices, regardless of whether I agree with them,” she said.

We’re sure the moms who demand disarmament will be fully supportive of this woman . . . Jacksonville police: Woman shoots ex-husband after he breaks into her home with crowbar, attacks her

The Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office is searching for a man accused of attacking his ex-wife as he tried to break into her home.

The victim told police she shot Randolph Bishop in the face before he ran away.

Police said Bishop tried to break into the victim’s home with a crowbar.

According to a police report, Bishop said he wanted to talk, and when the woman agreed, he attacked her.

The Sheriff’s Office said the woman had a gun and fired at Bishop, hitting him in somewhere in the face.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn is all aboard the Fix NICS train

“legislation that has no chance whatsoever of becoming law” . . . A Gun Rights Vote Only the GOP Base Can Appreciate

A week such as this one — already chockablock with headlines touching the Hill — seemed to the Republicans who run the place like an ideal time for making a bold hiding-in-plain-sight move.

And so it was that the House devoted more than two hours Wednesday to passing legislation that has no chance whatsoever of becoming law and is broadly unpopular with the electorate, but nonetheless fulfills the GOP’s commitment to doing the bidding of an extremely potent force in its political base.

The bill would effectively permit gun owners to conceal and carry their weapons anywhere in the country — which is nothing less than the “highest legislative priority” of the National Rifle Association. Under the bill, for example, people from several states who have violent felony convictions would be free to board the New York City subway with a semiautomatic pistol hidden in their overcoats.

The vote was 231-198. Only 14 Republicans, half of them facing very competitive contests for new terms next fall, voted against the NRA’s wishes. Just six Democrats, two of them expecting a tough 2018 campaign, voted for the bill.

Colorado State Rep Lori Saine was caught with a gun in her purse by Denver TSA

This is why we can’t have nice things . . . Lawmaker says she accidentally brought gun to Denver airport

A Colorado state lawmaker arrested at Denver International Airport had a loaded handgun in her bag that was discovered by an airport security officer, police said Wednesday.

State Rep. Lori Saine “knowingly brought the handgun to the checkpoint” at the airport on Tuesday, according to a report written by Denver police officer Gregory Zimmerman. The report did not explain how he made that determination.

According to police, a Transportation Security Administration agent saw the Kahr Arms 9mm semi-automatic handgun when a bag belonging to Saine went through an X-ray machine, according to the arrest report. It had four rounds in its magazine but none in the chamber.

Saine, a Republican who has advocated for gun rights, was arrested on suspicion of introducing a firearm into a transportation facility and spent the night in jail.

 

BEST GUNS TO FIND UNDER THE CHRISTMAS TREE

comments

  1. avatar Hank says:

    Typical sexist liberals afraid of women that can defend themselves. Nothing says empowerment like 4 slugs from a .44.

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      saving one in case the corpse re- animates?

  2. avatar Geoff PR says:

    For a morning digest bonus, Leftist Senator ‘Touchy-Feely’ Al Franken is expected to announce he is resigning from the Senate today.

    “Amid calls to resign, Al Franken to make a statement”

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/07/politics/al-franken-resignation-decision/index.html

    Buh-by, Al.

    Don’t let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya!

    *snicker* 😉

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Franken’s office said he is scheduled to speak at 11:45 a.m. ET.”

      1. avatar former water walker says:

        Don’t celebrate prematurely. Stewart smalley’s replacement could be worse than that cretin…I’m cool with non-violent felons having their 2A rights restored. Got a son in that boat. I support that young hunting gal!

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          Franken resigned, but it’s a setup to pressure us to dump Roy Moore soon…

        2. avatar neiowa says:

          The POS (with or without the stories from the gals) did NOT resign. He said he WOULD resign. Sometime. Maybe.

          From the state that elected Jesse Ventura comes Frankin.

  3. avatar Omer says:

    Anyone know of a good analysis of the possibility of National Reciprocity getting through the senate?

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      I read something earlier that noted 13 Democrats in the Senate in the past few years have voted for reciprocity, and with *25* of them up for re-election next year compared to our 9, the odds may be better than some realize this just may happen.

      This is *why* the bait of the NICS addition is *crucial*.

      It provides a way for Democrats to save face and tell their voters they voted for stronger background checks…

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        Robert said that. He also said there are 7 of them still in office. The thing is, Senators often vote for things they know won’t pass. The other thing is, they really don’t want to give a victory to Trump.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “Robert said that.”

          If you check the time-stamp just above, you will see I wrote it at 9 AM today.

          RF quoted me for his 12-noon post of Question of the day.

          As for the rest, we will see.

          Strange shit happening in DC is not unknown.

          Besides, the Senate landscape may look lots better for us after next fall, we will just re-introduce it again.

          And maybe then we will add silencers to it…

        2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Let me clarify. I was referring to this quote from Robert: “In 2013, 13 Democrats supported Senator Cornyn’s national reciprocity bill. Seven of those are still sitting Senators. Assuming all 52 Republican Senators are on board, the new bill needs the sevens’ support and two more Dems to achieve the necessary 60-vote majority.” From “BREAKING: House Vote on National Reciprocity/Fix NICS Bill Set for Wednesday BY ROBERT FARAGO |DEC 04, 2017.”

          You said “I read something earlier …” I was pointing to what I think it was that you read. I still don’t see how 52+7+2=60.

        3. avatar TX_Bullsheet says:

          TX_Turd_Cleaner I told you that based on your lies about the Zarate richochet accident and your lack of logical faculties youre banned both from posing as an attorney or remarking on any issue… dont let me see you here again spreading more bullsheet

    2. avatar neiowa says:

      In general the demtards are in trouble.
      https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/senate-democrats-2018-midterms-231516

      Add in some nervious RINOs

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “In general the demtards are in trouble.”

        Trouble with a capital ‘T’.

        *Cautiously* optimistic, here.

        And after next fall, bye-bye Hughes amendment, perhaps?

        *snicker*

        A select-fire Glock in 10mm (or a Ruger 10/22) would be a fun toy…

    3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a good analysis of whether or not something will pass, at least from journalists. Most of the time, for most of the journalists, when they are right it was because the answer was obvious or there were limited options and coins could have as easily correctly predicted the outcome.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        The ‘jurnos’ are so poisoned by their hatred of Trump what they say has little weight these days.

        They are universally ignored by us and most of the center…

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          I haven’t trusted them since I was in short pants as they say. Seriously. I remember losing my trust for the field in elementary school.

        2. avatar TardedUpTLAGBrayers says:

          Dumb folks like yall have many strategies to try to conceal how little you know and can understand when its explained.

          One way is to dismiss anything you dont like as “fake”.

          Another is to talk about feelings instead of substance and issues, and pretend the problem is not Hump regressive policies but that some folks in the media dont like him

          Naturally frequenting this donkey also helps as your surrounded by similarly dimwitted folks and you can take turns posting nonsense and cheerleading each other for being so clever : D

  4. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    I’m good with restoring felons gun rights. Voting rights not so much. The later is far more dangerous.

    1. avatar Big Bill says:

      Thank you!
      Someone else who understands this!

    2. avatar ORCON says:

      I’m not. If a person can’t successfully navigate life without earning a conviction, then they’re not responsible enough to vote or possess arms.

      1. avatar WI Patriot says:

        Hear, hear…

      2. avatar Wandering ninja says:

        Really? So there is no such thing as aggressive prosecution? You are setting a dangerous precedent. Our nations founders were all criminals according to the Church of England. Some felons get married and have children after paying their debt to society. They don’t get to protect their family? Maybe you should try re-reading the second amendment or relocate back to pre-1986 East Germany

        1. avatar ORCON says:

          Maybe you should learn what due process is.

        2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          Criminals elect to be subject to their punishment when they volunteer to commit their crime. They knew the score. No do-overs, especially not for felons convicted at trial.

          They have a right to a trial, of course, but for those who are completely guilty, they’re just abusing the system out of spite. “Not guilty”, my rear end. No guns for you when you finally get released.

        3. avatar Anonymous says:

          Jonathan-houston,

          No guns for you when you finally get released.

          I personally know a felon that has guns, and is protected by his police officer relatives/friends. So it really isn’t anything you have control over. Believe it or not – the government – is not in control. Criminals intent on harming someone can get guns any time they like. Not allowing ex-criminals to protect their families only hurts the innocent. And the innocent are his children and family. You are convicting them as well. But also, at the same time, while he follows the rules so he doesn’t risk his ability to provide for his family, criminals intent on harm are not.

          In other words. Your policy sucks.

        4. avatar Anonymous says:

          Orcon,

          Nazi’s had due process too. There is nothing f****** magical about due process.

      3. avatar Binder says:

        If a person can’t successfully navigate life without committing a crime, they have never left their house (there fixed it)

      4. avatar Mack Bolan says:

        You make the childish assumption that a felon who wishes to possess arms wont, because of the law. Which they care little about since that is how they ended up a felon in the first place. Plus “…shall not be infringed.”

        1. avatar ORCON says:

          I never made that assumption, so dont put words in my mouth. I’m fully aware that a determined criminal can acquire firearms but I’d rather that remain within the realm of criminals doing criminal things than normalizing criminality within the PotG community.

        2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          Well played, Orcon.

        3. avatar Anonymous says:

          Orcon,

          but I’d rather that remain within the realm of criminals doing criminal things than normalizing criminality within the PotG community.

          You don’t know what he going to do with the gun, so your “criminal things” argument is moot. He may have needed it to shoot opossums eating the chickens. Or to defend his family from the thugs he once knew. Regardless, when leftists finally ban all guns, I pray you keep saying the above, after all, you should never be doing “criminal things.” You’re definitely not a “from my cold dead hands” kind of guy. Or you lack the insight to fathom such.

      5. avatar FedUp says:

        Yeah, convicted felons like David Olofson don’t deserve civil rights, especially after they willfully loan semi auto rifles to young adults who express an interest in learning marksmanship.

      6. avatar FedUp says:

        Yeah, convicted felons like David Olofson don’t deserve civil rights, especially after they willfully loan semi auto rifles to young adults who express an interest in learning marksmanship.

        1. avatar WI Patriot says:

          More like a select fire, NOT a semi…better bone up before you make such silly statements…

        2. avatar FedUp says:

          Bullshit.
          You accuse me of making silly statements, but you aren’t silly, you’re outright lying when you say it was select fire.

          It was not select fire, but months after Olofson last touched it, it could be made to malfunction, and on the first round of testing, ATF pronounced it not a machine gun because their testers failed to make it malfunction.

      7. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

        What if you were of Japanese ancestry in the US in 1942? You think trying avoiding compliance with Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066 was something that should have justified stripping you of your rights for life? It was quite illegal not to comply. I think that as long as injustices happen to other people you are fine with them.

        1. avatar Roymond says:

          I’m in the middle of a history of December 1941, and learned something I’d never heard before: the FDR administration intelligence people were certain that there were twelve thousand Japanese agents living near the border and planning to hire thousands of thugs from Mexico to come north and wreak havoc. So weird…..

      8. avatar Scoutino says:

        Felony today is not just violent crime. Most of us commit some felonies without even realizing it every week. When every little thing is punishable by more than year in prison, it’s just lack of enforcement that keeps us all outside. Until someone in power decides it’s your turn.
        But not you, you know and obey ALL laws, thousands and thousands of them. I hope that halo doesn’t pinch your head.

    3. avatar Omer says:

      If an adult who has control of their faculties cannot be trusted with a firearm, they should be incarcerated or executed. If you can’t trust ‘em with a gun then don’t put ‘em back on the street.

  5. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    This is the message (awaiting moderation), that I left in response to the fraudulent claims in the article regarding National Reciprocity…

    ”states who have violent felony convictions would be free to board the New York City subway with a semiautomatic pistol hidden in their overcoats.”.

    This is a LIE. Because it’s so outrageous, I’ll assume it is intentional. “Violent felons”, IN EVERY STATE IN THE UNION, are already prohibited from owning/buying/possessing/carrying firearms, PERIOD.

    This bill does nothing to now allow this to happen. Anyone with a felony conviction (violent or otherwise), is prohibited at the federal level. This would take precedence over any state law that would allow felons to posses, ALTHOUGH THERE IS NO STATE LAW THAT EXISTS THAT DOES THIS.

    This is just a dishonest way for those that seek to usurp the US Constitution and the 2nd Amendment therein, to confuse and mislead those that are uninformed on the subject.

    I’d suggest that the author of this piece be ashamed of themself, but there’d be no point. Folks who lie as their primary point of an argument have no shame.

    1. avatar BLoving says:

      “This goes against the wishes of more than half of America’s citizens, … It goes against the wishes of the nation’s largest law enforcement agencies and mayors, … It goes against the wishes of advocates for the survivors of domestic violence, … It goes against the wishes of people who sincerely value states’ rights, who question the Constitutionality of this measure. It goes against the wishes of major organizations representing…(ad nauseam)”
      You know what most of those same “authorities” also were opposed to a couple of centuries ago? Abolishing slavery. And they were largely members of the Democrat Party.
      Just sayin’… 🤠

    2. avatar Roymond says:

      That caught my eye, too. It’s a sad commentary on the education level in the U.S. that anyone can expect more than a tiny minority to buy such an obvious ad vile lie.

    3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      Not that it contradicts your overarching point at all, but Texas has a law that allows felons to possess a firearm in the home. I think it is five years after they are no longer under state supervision.

    4. avatar Scoutino says:

      Huh, gun grabbers LIE! Who knew?!

      1. avatar Excedrine says:

        I, for one, am SHOCKED! SHOCKED, I tell you! </sarc.exe

  6. avatar Excedrine says:

    I’ve been saying this for a while.

    If they’ve paid their debt to society, they should all of their rights back or they clearly cannot be trusted and should still be in prison. Especially for bullshit like simple possession of the wrong piece of salad.

    1. avatar WanderingNinja says:

      Right. Especially in light of how corrupt some government officials are. Just read the front page these days

    2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      Let’s start with returning teaching licenses to convicted pedophiles….in YOUR kid’s school….as an experiment. Let we can move on to felons and their gun rights. Fair enough?

      1. avatar Wanderingninja says:

        Okay tough guy. So you are equating all felons as bad or worse than child molesters? Wow. And I wasn’t advocating for all felons to get their guns back. What I’m saying is those who have served their time and demonstrated that they can live amongst the rest of us should have their case heard. You are saying that a pervert should teach where my kid goes to school. I’m trying to allow some reformed felons protect their’s. I’m not the one making asinine proposals to let perverts around kids. The hell is wrong with you

        1. avatar Roymond says:

          WanderingN, you put it more politely than I would have.

          Here’s the big distinction I see: pedophilia is almost always an affliction the individual is stuck with, for which the only “cure” is to never be around prepubescent kids, and some of the time that doesn’t even work and they just have to stop being around any minors at all, whereas being a felon is almost always the opposite, namely the result of a conscious choice that is frequently related to specific circumstances.

          I can’t think of an analogy to illustrate just how bad equating the two is, but it’s very bad!

      2. avatar Raoul Duke says:

        More outrageous hyperbole?

        If a school wants to do that then it is their perogative but that doesn’t mean they are free from the consequences of doing so like lawsuits and public shame that would follow. Just like a gun owner isn’t free from the consequences of his action when a cartridge is fired.

        However your analogy is nowhere on the same level as a “felon” restoring his rights to defend himself especially when everything these days is considered a felony.

        So how are you going to keep yourself off the list? Following the law? Ha, give me a break you probably committed a few felonies without even realizing it since that is how screwed up our justice system is.

        Nah, you are just a hypocrite picking and choosing what suites your flawed argument cause of your feels like an anti-gun libtard.

        Spare me the “association” guilt trip. By your logic every mass shooter represents you because they own a gun as well. No one is forcing you to associate with people you don’t want to and freedom is tolerating things you find repugnant.

        Get used to it.

      3. avatar Anonymous says:

        Let’s start with returning teaching licenses to convicted pedophiles….in YOUR kid’s school….as an experiment. Let we can move on to felons and their gun rights. Fair enough?

        incommensurable terms. The pedophile doesn’t have a right to teach my kid. I can choose whoever I want to teach my kid, or not to teach my kid. There should be a free market on who teaches your kids. And that doesn’t affect their rights or freedom. However. Taking away a family man’s home protection because he was once an ex-criminal does.

        In other words. Your analogy sucks.

  7. avatar don says:

    National concealed carry law. I’m Catholic but the church doesn’t speak for me.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      “It goes against the wishes of major organizations representing Catholics, Jews, Episcopalians, Methodists, Unitarians, Baptists, Mennonites and Sikhs.” – I’ll give you an example of a major organization that represents members of any and all of those groups: the NRA. That sentence doesn’t mean the USCCB is against the bill. And if they are, it’s not like anybody ever listens to them on policy the listener disagrees with.

      The only actual Catholic teaching that touches on guns is that the use of deadly force is justified when it is necessary for the preservation of life (CCC 2264-2265)*. The Catholic teaching is actually that self defense is often a moral obligation and pacifism is wrong. Didn’t stop the bishop in my diocese, who no one likes, from posting a 30.07 sign on the cathedral. (I went the cathedral for the Red Mass). Bishops are often morons who help get things passed into law like mandates that Catholics pay for other people’s contraceptives.

      *2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

      If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful…. Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.

      2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another’s life. Preserving the common good requires rendering the unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. To this end, those holding legitimate authority have the right to repel by armed force aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their charge.

      1. avatar Omer says:

        You should ask the person in charge of your parish to put a sign up on the door stating if you had an abortion please do not enter. Far more people have been killed by abortions in the US than by guns around the world every year.

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          It’s the cathedral with the sign. I don’t go there except for the Red Mass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Mass. A lot of non-Catholics lawyers and judges go to it.

    2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      And by the by, here is another thing that everyone says Catholics don’t believe in:

      “2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.”

      Practicable means more than just practical, but less than absolutely necessary.

  8. avatar ORCON says:

    If you are so irresponsible that you end up convicted in a court of law for a federal crime, you don’t get to vote and you don’t get to have a gun. Sorry, not sorry; when you do what you’ve done, you get what you got.

    Want to argue that there are too many federal crimes on the books? Fine, there’s a case to be made there but that’s a different matter all together.

    1. avatar WanderingNinja says:

      You don’t get to decide that. Plus, there is a federal procedure for some felons to have their rights restored. You really don’t understand the basic rights of Americans do you? Some might think that infringing on someone’s rights might be violating due process. Okay Mr. Goodie two shoes, so you have never broken the law?

      1. avatar Snatchums says:

        The oft stated figure is your average, otherwise law abiding citizen commits 3 felonies a day without even realizing it.

        1. avatar Wandering Ninja says:

          I don’t follow

        2. avatar Snatchums says:

          I wish I knew the source of this but it’s that someone parsed a bunch of the bullshit statutory laws and how easy it is for the average person to run afoul of them, extrapolate to the general public and he came up with a figure of your average person commits 3 felonies a day, without trying.

        3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent Paperback – June 7, 2011
          by Harvey Silverglate (Author),‎ Alan M. Dershowitz (Foreword). Available at https://smile.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229/ref=smi_www_rco2_go_smi_g2609328962?_encoding=UTF8&%2AVersion%2A=1&%2Aentries%2A=0&ie=UTF8 for less than about $10 – $30. Probably through your library as well.

        4. avatar BierceAmbrose says:

          It’s a book, titled “Three Felonies a Day”, developed exactly as you say.

          The notion goes along with the quote attributed to Muller Cardinal Richlieu, various secret police and similar: “Show me the man, I will give you the crime.”

          Rand also made the point, with one of her fictional B Gs going on endlessly (It’s Rand, so of course “endlessly.”) about how laws are there so everyone is guilty of something.

          It’s a form of extortion.

      2. avatar ORCON says:

        Listen here, dingus. There’s what is known as the Due Process clause, it makes its first appearance in the 5th Amendment (regarding the federal government) and later again in the 14th (regarding the states). It states that no one shall be “deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” That’s why you can’t file a grievance against the government when they put you in prison after you’ve been convicted. Maybe before jumping to conclusions on what I do and do not understand maybe you should worry about yourself.

        And yeah, as a citizen in good standing with the law, I do get to decide that felons should remain prohibited persons. Remember that convicts are the perpetrators of crime, not the victims of crime.

        1. avatar Wanderingninja says:

          Got it. The will of the people should submit to the federal government’s final verdict now matter how erroneous. Go ahead and live in that bubble of false security

        2. avatar ORCON says:

          Wanderingninja, the porosity of your argument and the vastness of your ignorance leaves you ill-equipped to win this.

        3. avatar Wanderingninja says:

          Nope. I already won. Even if I physically lost or lost by letter of the law by default… the spirit against tyranny will always win against injustice. Black and white think much? Happy Holidays

        4. avatar ORCON says:

          It’s not tyranny if it’s the direct result your own foolish life choices. You can avoid reality but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.

        5. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          So a “no Baptist” law wouldn’t qualify as tyranny because being Baptist is a choice? Or a law that made using blue ink on a form a felony? Notice of a law does not make a law not tyrannical.

        6. avatar Roymond says:

          Orcon, you miss the point: these days, a conviction has less to do with whether or not someone committed a crime and more to do with how well a prosecutor can bamboozle a jury — or pile up so many accusations that an innocent person, just to salvage their life, will take a guilty plea.

          It baffles me how people who are confident the government can’t be trusted to honor the Constitution can be so willing to believe that outcomes in federal courts have much at all to do with truth.

        7. avatar ORCON says:

          TX, that’s a bullshit analogy and you know it.

        8. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          It’s an extreme analogy, not a bs analogy.

          Dinesh D’Souza is a good example of someone who is a felon because the government wanted to hurt him because Obama is a petty, vindictive, angry, little man. No one in the history of America, other than him, has been criminally convicted for anything similar to what he did. Also, it wouldn’t have been illegal, let alone a felony, if he had done what he did differently. He is a paperwork felony.

        9. avatar ORCON says:

          So did they go after D’Souza because he was a Baptist? I’m not saying that these thing don’t happen but most convictions happen at the local level, it’s not some big federal conspiracy to make criminals generally. Hey, I grew up not too far from where the feds coerced, corralled and murdered people. I’m no fan of that sort of thing. You’re familiar with Ruby Ridge?

        10. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          No, they went after him for using one of the other parts of the 1A.

          You proposed that it’s not tyranny if it is the result of one’s own foolish choice, implying if one knows the law and violates it, that’s a foolish choice. There are places where it is illegal to be Christian/gay/whatever. People knowingly chose to practice those lifestyles in the face of the law. That they are persecuted because of those acts does not make the persecution not tyrannical.

          Fair notice of a law does not make it not tyrannical.

          And what your also suggesting is that everyone has fair notice of the law. You should look into the book “Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent.”

        11. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Fun peeing contest, but isn’t due process the *4th* amendment?

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      If you are so irresponsible that you end up convicted in a court of law for a federal crime, you don’t get to vote and you don’t get to have a gun.

      Maybe you didn’t notice, but plenty of people restricted from voting are doing so. Law didn’t stop them. No one is pursuing them either. But, the people who were ex-criminals and respect the law by not voting – those people aren’t voting. And more than likely, those are the kind of people you would like to have voting, ironically.

      Sorry, not sorry; when you do what you’ve done, you get what you got.

      When you are arrested and take the plea bargain for some firearms legislative technicality passed by democrats in congress, and then lose your gun rights, you sure as hell better be saying the same then.

  9. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

    I love the picture of those candle fondlers. I despise candle fondlers especially anti-gun double beta ones.
    Dan, thanks for what seems like a renewed surge of your writing.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      Your hatred of glorious fire is noted.

      1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

        I like fire. Have a seance and ask my parents;-) It is people that think such trite symbolism has power that bother me.

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Now that’s funny.

        2. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

          a room full of that shit has the power to calm and begin healing. i am a fan of the presbyte taize service.

  10. avatar NateInPA says:

    “It goes against the wishes of people who sincerely value states’ rights, who question the Constitutionality of this measure.”

    Did someone sincerely bring up “constitutionality” of gun rights vs. state’s rights?

  11. avatar Libertarian says:

    Unlicensed public transport and non steril airport is an dangerous felony trap in colorado …….

  12. avatar little horn says:

    “If the’ve paid their debt to society, what’s the problem? ”
    you must be joking. sitting in a cell while we pay the bill is a paid debt? wow. so much cognitive dissonance in that statement i don’t even know where to begin.

    1. avatar Denton says:

      I doubt prison is the cakewalk you seem to think it is. How else should people pay back their debt to society?

    2. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      Yea sitting in a cell cut off from everyone you know surrounded by armed guards and hundreds of other inmates who want to kill or rape you in a sterilized environment constantly being surveiled and searched is just soooo easy. /sarcasm

  13. avatar Vitsaus says:

    Its really not that hard to go your whole life without committing a felony… just saying.

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      it’s really not that hard to go through your whole life without ~being caught~ committing a felony.
      most kid stuff should be expunged, outside of the heinous.
      proof of stupid should restrict voting rights? maybe, but not self defense rights.

      i get a lot of mileage out of telling ol’ girl that my vote cancels hers. but it really would be simpler if “she” didn’t get to.

      1. avatar Omer says:

        Proof of stupid: from the 1600’s through until the progressive era there were laws that stated to vote one needed to have a certain amount out capital, most of the time it was a small amount. The amount varied, but it was to keep people who “didn’t have skin in the game” from voting. Just sayin’.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        A few years ago, here in Austin, there was a TV interview with a prominent judge, who stated that he did not believe he could drive a car down the Interstate from city limits to city limits without committing at least one felony. Pretty sure he would take issue with your statement. At least without the “being caught” part.

    2. avatar Scoutino says:

      Do you really believe you know (not to even mention follow) all the laws that can make a felon out of you?

  14. avatar Wandering Ninja says:

    There is some heavy handed law enforcement here on this page that seems to think all felons have never been at the wrong end of a bad situation and deserve punishment to the grave. God forbid your friend had some pot in his pocket and threw you under the bus at a traffic stop. Way different than a violent offender. I hope reformed felons don’t come to your aid the next time a democrat wins office and calls for a nationwide forced confiscation. Same fear that propelled Lenin

    1. avatar Denton says:

      Hear hear. There are many more felons now that felony level violations are administered to more than just violent crimes.

      Lots of non-violent felons caught in bad situations.

      1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        Meh. Choose better friends. Though, really, at some point personal responsibility should kick in. At some point, “I fell in with the wrong crowd” more accurately is “I am the wrong crowd.”

        Ever notice how these alleged wrong place, wrong time, snafus seem to ensnare the same type of people? When’s the last time you heard of it happening to a young engineering student as he strolled out of choir practice on his way to his appointed rounds delivering Meals-on-Wheels?

        Now go eat your spinach! No guns for you!

      2. avatar Roymond says:

        Denton, FWIW I’ll list the felons I’ve known:

        *a guy who was framed for rape — his alleged victim bragged about it the whole time he was in prison
        *a guy who was framed for child porn — his brother, who actually was guilty, set him up so he could “turn him in” and get a better sentencing deal
        *a guy who was unconscious while others did something to him, but under the law it was his responsibility because they were minors
        *a guy who grew up with violent felons as examples of male behavior, who when he got depressed turned to doing things they would have praised
        *a guy who was trying to keep his kid fed and in desperation turned to robbery (a great argument for food stamps for kids, IMO)
        *a guy who got pissed that a black kid could get a job in his town, so he trashed the black family’s place (he was later found dead in a creek, a murder victim)

        I know almost as many people who should be felons but they didn’t get caught (like a guy with some three hundred sex victims, but all the D.A. could prove was a misdemeanor).

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Sounds like a priest!

        2. avatar Roymond says:

          Ha.

          Just for the sake of truth, school teachers and law enforcement officers engage in sexual activity with minors at the same rate as priests. And as with priests, for many years the “remedy” was to move them to somewhere else.

    2. avatar ORCON says:

      So you’re a felon or associate with felons? Maybe instead of reinforcing poor choices and bad behavior we should promote the opposite. Actions have consequences and facts don’t care about your feelings.

      1. avatar Wanderingninja says:

        No, I am not a felon. Just hate blanket arguments

      2. avatar Roymond says:

        Since the government is in the business of manufacturing felons, it’s hard not to associate with any.

      3. avatar Roymond says:

        ORCON, that’s some immensely sloppy thinking — it sounds like you’re engaging in the fallacy of assuming that since someone disagrees with you he must hold the most opposing view you can think of. It’s usually embraced by people whose thinking is almost entirely subjective rather than rational, and is a huge barrier to any discussion trying to find/reach truth.

        1. avatar ORCON says:

          That’s a fair accusation and I do apologize.

  15. avatar EJQ says:

    I’m thinking all felons in Florida will get their voting rights back, but few will get their gun rights restored. The wording is such that the Bill will pass, but the reality is that there will a lot of felons who can only vote – and will most likely vote Democrat.

    As for the hunter who gets death threats for killing animals, some, like hogs who can be dangerous to humans, gee, anyone else see the irony?

  16. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    I see Pajama Boy can grow facial hair now. He’s still not getting any of that hippy ass though.

  17. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    My pc’s security features blocked me from going to the page with the story under Cornyn’s picture. It’s never done that before, so I figured I’d let everyone know it might be a bad idea to go there.

  18. avatar Docduracoat says:

    If you go on the TSA website, they give a breakdown of the carry condition of the guns they find
    The majority are empty chamber, loaded magazine
    Like the Colorado legislator
    It seems like Americas’ negligent carriers prefer “Israeli Carry”!

  19. avatar dph says:

    Interesting picture in thoughts and prayers article, some guy ready to shoot himself in the crotch. Nice.

  20. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    “New Florida bill could help those with convictions restore voting and gun rights” – I often state “if it’s good enough for voting, it’s good enough for guns.” I’m mostly just trying to annoy my friend, I’d actually love it if that was the standard we played by.

    “National concealed carry law would be less effective than thoughts and prayers” – I told you prayer works.

    “Under the bill, for example, people from several states who have violent felony convictions would be free to board the New York City subway with a semiautomatic pistol hidden in their overcoats.” – Liar or moron?

  21. avatar jwm says:

    Any human being who threatens death to another human being because the other human being is a hunter is severely mentally ill and needs to not be allowed weapons, the vote, or unsupervised time.

  22. avatar Hunter427 says:

    Sorry felony conviction no voter right, Democrats love convicts because they vote for free stuff like cable tv, three meals and housing. Felons take away my right to safety so why should they get theirs back at all.

    1. avatar Roymond says:

      “Right to safety”?

      You have no such right.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email