Replies

I think I might be one of those, until someone can explain to me why a person's private conversations should be monitored by our nanny-state. If they can do this with convicts (and the usually-protected lawyers, oddly enough), it's only a few years until they can do it to all phone lines, all computer lines, and all cell phone traffic. No matter what reason you cite for the convict, the same can be used for the rest of us. After all, the gun laws plainly show that we are to be presumed dangerous until we prostrate ourselves enough to prove otherwise.

Are you stating that convicted felons, serving time in prison have a right to firearms while incarcerated? Or that they have the right to vote while they are in prison? Or that holding them in prison somehow violates their right against involuntary servitude(even though the involuntary servitude clause specifically exempts criminals)?

A convicted felon forfeits rights accruing to an American citizen. Period. This includes privacy rights. As it is, conversations between a prisoner and his attorney, monitored under this close, cannot be used against the prisoner in a court of law. He is not giving up his right against self-incrimination.

HOWEVER, if they learn that the prisoner is participating in a crime by monitoring conversations with his lawyer, they can use that as evidence against anyone else that is participating. (I believe that includes the lawyer, because if the lawyer participates in a crime he forfeits his privilege.)

The Fifth Amendment covers self-incrimination. If your words cannot cause you to go to jail, you cannot refuse to speak.

As it is, conversations between a prisoner and his attorney, monitored under this close, cannot be used against the prisoner in a court of law.

I'm for the law as long as the information can't be used against the guy in court. That would be a blatant violation of the 5th Amendment, and though I don't give a rat's --s about this terrorist scumbag, I care deeply about the Constitution.

A convicted felon forfeits rights accruing to an American citizen. Period.

So we can kill every convicted felon, since he has no right to life? We can use some really cruel and unusual punishments on them, since you just declared their rights forfeit? They lose their rights to see their families, visitors, or lawyers? They lose their right to appeal their conviction? They lose the right to eat?

No, they don't. In other words, the above statement is incorrect. Period.

You also expanded my statement in a classic straw-man argument. Those in prison do not have the right to bear arms. They do lose their right to Liberty, for a specific period of time. However, when they are released from prison, their right to defend themselves, including with a gun, should be restored with all of their other rights.