Replies

felon in possession of a handgun

99 out of 100 ideologues would claim that it is unconstitutional to deprive a proven felon of his right to own the tools to overthrow the tyrannical U.S. Government by violent means.

And that's why you and me have to keep fighting against those idealogues, CJ, and make the case for common sense. While I'm questioning the tactics used by the police in this case, I am firmly pointing the finger of blame at the justice system that lets these violent criminals back out on the street. The criminal himself deserves the bulk of the blame, of course, just so you don't try to twist my comments into some anti-libertarian screed.

99 out of 100 ideologues would claim that it is unconstitutional to deprive a proven felon of his right to own the tools to overthrow the tyrannical U.S. Government by violent means.

No, I'd say that a good number of people would say that if a person is too dangerous to possess a weapon, that person is too dangerous to be let out of prison. A gun isn't the ONLY weapon that a criminal could use you know.

HOWEVER, there are MANY individuals convicted of "felonies" that have never hurt a fly, let alone another human being. As such, they SHOULD have their rights restored when they have served their sentence. There should be a distinction between a violent criminal and one who isn't.

Additionally, you appear to think that all of those who desire to protect themselves, their property, and their families are "out to overthrow the government". Is that what you really think? People wishing to defend themselves does not equate with a desire to "overthrow the government"..

99 out of 100 brain-dead statist control-freaks would not hesitate to fabricate an opportunity to make yet another spurious & specious assertion against a group they absolutely despise.

Perhaps because it's a nagging reminder of their own cowardice & capitulation?