[RebelBanker]

Response to Neil Smith:

Do you agree that certain people, such as convicted felons and involuntarily committed sociopaths, should not have the right to possess firearms? If so, how can you demonstrate that you are not in fact such a person without showing identification?

I understand the concept of not punishing the innocent with the guilty, but I also understand the need to ensure that the guilty receive the punishment they deserve. Civil rights are not absolute - they may be taken away by a court of law. Otherwise, putting someone in prison would violate his rights to liberty and pursuit of happiness.

[Shooter 2.5]

Anyone enjoying our country's freedoms should have all Rights as a citizen. Break the law and your freedom and Rights are confiscated.

After a person completes their sentence, all Rights should be restored. If a person is still a danger to the community, why would they be allowed back on the street? Our punishments should be exact enough so a person released from prison should be able to walk into the nearest gunshop to buy any firearm they can afford.

[Dead Corpse]

Do you agree that certain people, such as convicted felons and involuntarily committed sociopaths, should not have the right to possess firearms?

If they are that dangerous, why are we letting them back out on the streets? Once your punishment is done, you should get your Rights back.

Also, since recidivism DOES seem to be a problem for certain types of predators, doesn't that just re-enforce the idea that we should all take steps (ie; arm ourselves) to keep from being a victim? Who would a criminal fear more? A judge who sends them to Club Fed? Or the angry homeowner armed with a 12 gauge at point blank range?

80 million gun owners broke no laws yesterday. Vanishingly few will break any law of any type today. Why punish them or treat them like criminals?