On the other hand, nothing in the Constitution would have forbid the government from imposing sufficient punishment to ensure that they don't get back out on the street.
Do you dispute my statement that nearly all people who would pose an unacceptable danger to society if allowed to acquire a firearm would pose an unacceptable danger to society even if forbidden from acquiring one?
I would suggest that while there probably are a few convicted felons for whom a prohibition on firearm ownership would significantly reduce the danger they pose to society, such people are dwarfed in number by those who either would not pose a danger with or without being allowed firearms and by those who would pose a danger with or without firearms.
We agree completely on that.
Do you dispute my statement that nearly all people who would pose an unacceptable danger to society if allowed to acquire a firearm would pose an unacceptable danger to society even if forbidden from acquiring one?
Not at all, but the acquisition of a firearm certainly exacerbates that danger.
I would suggest that while there probably are a few convicted felons for whom a prohibition on firearm ownership would significantly reduce the danger they pose to society, such people are dwarfed in number by those who either would not pose a danger with or without being allowed firearms and by those who would pose a danger with or without firearms.
I think any felon convicted of a violent crime will always pose a danger to society and should therefore always be prohibited from owning a firearm.