Perhaps MSNBC’s Michael Smerconish is in Favor of Giving Firearm Rights to Convicted Felons

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

[h/t Sean Newby]


  1. avatar Curzen says:

    I never understood the reasoning why a felon shouldn’t vote.

    1. avatar rosignol says:

      The idea was that a felony was such a huge transgression against the community that the person had forfeited their right to participate in certain decisions.

      This was long before the political types decided that the way to deal with crime was to up the punishments and re-classify many offenses as felonies.

  2. avatar GS650G says:

    Smerconish has been on the radio in Philly for years, he was considered a conservative at one time but has since drifted left. A lawyer by trade, he led a campaign to get Ira Einhorn back from France for prosecution. Overall he’s a decent fellow with moderate views. But he’s wrong on this, it’s a state’s rights issue and some states, like Delaware, allow felons to vote. Are they courting criminals with that?

  3. avatar Pascal says:

    “Michael Smerconish is in Favor of Giving Firearm Rights to Convicted Felons” — LOL! If you ask them, they would say no. This is 100% politics and about votes. The democratic party in many states, NJ I personally know of, will pay the homeless to go vote a certain way. The democratic party is not against stuffing the ballet boxes if required. The political machines in Chicago know how to do that well. The democrates will stuff the polls with illegal immgrates if they can get away with it. I am sure the stats that Holder talked about in that video are also BS.

    Despite the “they paid their debt to society” rhetoric, they would say no to giving any felon a gun.

    If you should or should not is another story, but the BS was just politics for this Falls elections.

  4. avatar GS650G says:

    The Left doesn’t want anyone to have a firearm, much less felons. The gun ban on Felons convicted of non violent crimes just accomplishes that goal a little easier.

  5. avatar Sam C says:

    If you don’t trust them with firearms, perhaps they should still be in prison.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      They should be kept in prison — but how can we keep them there? Sooner or later, they’re getting out, and then we’ll have to deal with them again. And again. And again.

      If there’s any person in the world that you can never trust, it’s an ex-con.

      1. avatar Don says:

        The people you REALLY can not trust are the criminals clever and powerful enough not to get caught. Like politicians and bankers.


      2. avatar Don says:

        The least trustworthy and most dangerous people in the world are criminals who are clever/powerful enough not to get caught. For example, politicians and bankers.


  6. avatar Mike OFWG says:

    Interesting that Robinson keeps talking about voters impersonating someone else. He gets it, but won’t dare admit that it is the non citizen attempting to vote that is the issue.

  7. avatar Silver says:

    Considering felons would almost exclusively vote democrat, I’d think leftists would love to give felons back the vote.

    And I don’t see what giving firearms rights back to felons would accomplish; chances are, a felon knows how to get a gun anyway.

  8. avatar gej88 says:

    Why not? Canada does. A Canadian lawyer (seems like half of Ontario comes to my neck of the woods when winter comes) once told me a ban on non violent felons owning guns once they are off parole would violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Not being a Canadian nor a lawyer, I really don’t know. I do know the guy was not an NFA member or a gun person by any stretch of the imagination.
    But the right wants to look tough on crime and the left wants to look tough on guns, so don’t look for that changing any time soon.
    The states control voting laws. Once you do your time, all civil liberties and rights should be restored.

  9. avatar Josh says:

    When the Constitution was written, ex-felons weren’t an issue… back then, violent crimes, grand theft, etc was a hanging offense. We’re entering uncharted territory now… and yet again the Constitution’s age is forcing us to argue it out among ourselves. Ex-Felons shouldn’t vote, and they shouldn’t be allowed to carry weapons.

  10. avatar Greg Camp says:

    If we prosecuted only real crimes–violence, theft, and similar–and stopped putting people away for drug “crimes,” we could keep dangerous criminals in prison until we can trust them back in society. Once the sentence is served, the person needs to be back in full citizenship. The power of voting is in many ways as dangerous as the power of having a gun.

  11. avatar Ex-Felon says:

    I am a felon. Or was. I asked the sentencing judge to restore all my civil rights. So now I am allowed, by law, to possess deadly weapons. Felons are not allowed to have ANY deadly weapons. How are they suppose to protect themselves? With a stick? The police have no duty to protect. (They should be forced to remove that from their mottos. Cuz it’s a lie. Oh, I forgot, police are “allowed to lie.” But it’s a felony if you lie to them.)
    The constitution does not say you have the right to bare arms except if you live a life style the government doesn’t “approve” of. It says “shall not be infringed.” What part of that do people not understand?
    My crime was pursuing happiness. What makes me happy may not make you happy but my pursuit of happiness should not be a felony. If I am not violating your rights I should be allowed to be left alone.
    What is the reason for not allowing a felon to vote? Are felons somehow too incompetent to vote? They obviously make bad decisions.
    Being an ex-felon it’s almost impossible to get a job. (Even if there were any.) But I can run for public office and hang out with real criminals.

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