[dragnet2]

I have a thought...In my opinion it should be any, "Non-violent" felon who's served their time for their crime should have the same rights as anyone else. This would obviously not apply to those who've been convicted of violent type crimes.

I see taking away someone's ability to protect/defend themselves as a really big deal. Life and death level serious.

[TigersEye]

I agree with you. That is just the position I have held for many years now.

It may be different from state to state but here in CO a “felon” can appeal to the governor to have their rights restored after seven years. IIRC. Make that the case for violent felons and your recommendation for non-violent felons. That should be fair to all including a regard for security for the community.

[RubinBoomer]

I see taking away someone's ability to protect/defend themselves as a really big deal.

It is a very big deal. If it was me that would be eternal punishment. So, when is punishment enough? As Christians we are taught to forgive those who trespass against us, so we may be forgiven. Don't we need to forgive all convicts, particularly if they paid their debt to society? Maybe that's barking up the wrong tree. It just seems continued punishment beyond prison, beyond parole, makes it very difficult for an ex-con to assimilate into society. And it still doesn't stop a motivated ex-con to break the law and steal a gun so he can continue to break the law my committing a violent crime with the stolen gun.

[Osage Orange]

I agree with that....