A man who hunted deer on his own property will spend 15 years in federal prison

AP via Boston Glob ^ | 4/30/03 | staff

[CFW]

PITTSBURGH (AP) A man who hunted deer on his own property will spend 15 years in federal prison because he was a convicted felon, and therefore not allowed to possess a gun.

Jack C. Altsman, 43, of Beaver Falls, received the mandatory sentence Friday from U.S. District Judge Terrence McVerry.

[asneditor]

hahahahahaha Right!!!!!!! Just randomly throw a rock out your back door and you'll hit at least one deer and maybe another on the ricochet.

[HairOfTheDog]

Vehicular manslaughter is a felony.... It is foreseeable that a young careless driver could commit a felony that should perhaps not impact their right later as an adult, to defend themself, or vote, for that matter.

I do think a process should be looked at for particular circumstance.

[headsonpikes]

"Fiat justicia, pereat mundus."...Too true....;^)

'Fiat justicia, ruat caelum'....

...works better for me.

[HairOfTheDog]

I didn't say if it was *correct* or not. I am not a constitutional scholar. I said there are *smarter* places to spend our energies RE: gun rights.

[dirtboy]

I said there are *smarter* places to spend our energies RE: gun rights.

I think we can work on both gun rights and due process simultaneously. I have no problem depiving certain felons of gun rights - instead, I agree it's a good idea. But there should be due process instead of having the 2nd A rescinded for someone by the application of federal law without due process. Otherwise, due process can be incrementalized away because we intially applaud the results of ignoring it...

[waterstraat]

If a convicted felon loses his right to bear arms, then he also loses his right to a jury trial on all other offences, he also loses his right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, freedom of speech, religion, etc.

You cant just take away ""one"" of the Bill of Rights, you have to take them all away.

[Catspaw]

In Ohio, if you are convicted of ANY OFFENSE with a potential penalty of one year in prison

You may want to look up the definition of "felony."

[MineralMan]

"Vehicular manslaughter is a felony.... It is foreseeable that a young careless driver could commit a felony that should perhaps not impact their right later as an adult, to defend themself, or vote, for that matter.

I do think a process should be looked at for particular circumstance.
"

I agree with your last sentence. There does need to be a process for regaining those lost rights. It should not be easy to do so, but there should be a process.

However, your Vehicular Manslaughter example is very flawed. Yes, it is a felony. Generally, it is used in the case of drunken driving or seriously reckless driving. Such activities are against the law. If someone is killed, then penalties ensue from the reckless or drunken driving. So be it.

Like most guys, I got my drivers licence at age 16. My father had one rule regarding my driving privileges: Get a ticket for speeding, drunk or reckless driving; lose your right to drive until you are no longer a minor. It was a very simple rule. I knew that my father meant it. What did I do?

I did not speed. I did not drive while intoxicated, and I never drove recklessly. I kept my privileges. I still behave in the same way.

As I said, I have not committed any felonies. Why? Because it is against the law to do so, and I have no interest in doing jail time or losing my rights as a citizen. Further, I recognize those laws as being justified. Reckless or drunk driving _should_ be punished. If someone is killed due to such driving, then it should be a felony. Actions should have consequences.

[ColdSteelTalon]

Well,

Once a convict has been punished his civil rights should be restored. The United States is one of the few modern nations that still revoke civil rights for life from a felony conviction.

If I were a convicted felon in this country, with no hope of getting my rights back no matter how clean I lived no matter how hard I tried, with no abilitiy to get a decent job.

Why should I even try to obey the law when I will pay for it for the rest of my life no matter what.

It seems to me that of you are going to let a person out of prison it is only fair to give them a shot at redemption.

Otherwise you should just kill all felons and be done with it.

We should work to have most criminal records expunged after a certain period of time (not a pardon) so at least ex-cons would have abetter chance at improving their lives and get a chance to live clean. An exception to this would be for very violent crimes.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

If it started Saturday after Thanksgiving, its the 11/24/01. Some articles I saw say it started 11/26/01 in PA - which would mean that he wasn't poaching (got my dates screwed up).

Of course, the December 2002 start date doesn't square with that.

[HairOfTheDog]

If someone is killed due to such driving, then it should be a felony. Actions should have consequences.

I wholly agree. I have not committed a felony either, and the idea that "most people probably have or might" was absurd. My example was just one particular felony where there may be no specific threat to public safety for a particular person to regain their right to bear arms, later, through a process.

I would be much more loathe to restore felons convicted of Malicious Intent - type felonies that immediately come to mind when considering felons.

[MineralMan]

"If I were a convicted felon in this country, with no hope of getting my rights back no matter how clean I lived no matter how hard I tried, with no abilitiy to get a decent job.

Why should I even try to obey the law when I will pay for it for the rest of my life no matter what.

It seems to me that of you are going to let a person out of prison it is only fair to give them a shot at redemption. "

I have known several ex-convicts in my life. Each of them has found a good job and is living within the law. Of course, I also know that many do not do so.

Yes, there should be some means available to regain one's lost rights. In most states, such means exist, on the state level. It's not easy, but I don't think it should be easy. One of the reasons that rights are removed is as a deterrent. It may be a lousy deterrent, but that's one of the reasons. Losing the right to vote doesn't seem to matter much, since only a minority of eligible voters bothers to vote at all.

Getting the right back of a convicted felon to own firearms, however, should, I believe, be limited to only those who have not committed any violent offense, and I include spousal or child abuse in that category. Frankly, I'm not willing to let violent felons _ever_ own firearms. It just doesn't make any sense.

Of course, the real answer is not to commit any felonies. By doing that, you avoid all the problems, it seems to me.

[MineralMan]

"I wholly agree. I have not committed a felony either, and the idea that "most people probably have or might" was absurd. My example was just one particular felony where there may be no specific threat to public safety for a particular person to regain their right to bear arms, later, through a process. "

But, the example you used of a reckless driver, does pose a specific threat to public safey. Indeed, you used Vehicular Manslaughter as an example.

A better example might be some crime like Fraud, or the like. Since no violence was involved with the crime, it would be a better case for restoration of these rights.

Frankly, a reckless driver who causes a death is not someone I want with firearms, unless he/she can demonstrate that they have learned not to be reckless in their activities. We see enough cases of reckless firearms handling in the paper.

[HairOfTheDog]

Well, I thought about that, but brought in the nuance of youth. I am not the same risk now that I might have been 20 years ago as a college kid. It is the 'life' part of it that seems it would be excessive in enough circumstances to warrant a look at it. We have many stages in a lifetime.

[freepatriot32]

I'm not saying ignore them. If they are going to be a threat to public saftey forever lock them up forever after thier first conviction.If they are safe enough to let out of prison then they should be legally allowed to own a gunperiod.Including fully automatics especially the gang banger s and drug dealers they get shot at in drive bys all the time and according to another articale in the constituiton they have an inalianable right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.So if they have a right to life they have an inalianable right to defend that life if it is in danger from others and you cant defend your life in a gun attack with a slingshot or butterknife you got to use a gun and rember what jesus christ the mesiah said to his disiples "If you do not have a sword sell your garments and get one. " He was also taking about self defence in the scriptures and he didnt make an exeption that everyone should get a sword exept those members of society that have been convicted of felonys and just in case you are wondering no i am not being sarcastic when i say gang bangers and drug dealers should be allowed to own guns and no i am not a gang member or drug dealer or armed robber

[TheDon]

That's what repeat offender laws are for. Free life time room and board, courtesy of the taxpayer. ;)

[ActionNewsBill]

No felony convictions for me. What felonies do you suppose I might have unknowingly commiteed? Give me an example of one of these laws.

Welcome to FFA. No, not Future Farmers of America, that pleasant little relic of the days when America was the land of the free.

I'm talking about Future Felons of America, the club to which millions of us now belong. Our membership is growing by leaps, bounds and midnight kicks on our doors. You may not want to be part of this contemporary American FFA. (Who in their right mind would?) But it's best to face facts; in a country where would-be rulers, elected and unelected, are desperate to regulate every activity, we are all law breakers or soon to become so.

You and I, friends, are likely to end up in prison.

Worse, we're increasingly likely to end up in the custody of the federal prison system. Activities that were once the business of the states-or nobody's business but your own-are being taken over by control freaks in Washington, DC whose favorite masturbatory fantasy is that they can micro-manage every human activity 24 hours a day and punish everyone who deviates from their desires. That means your chances of going to federal prison-or a federal prison camp like the ones described in this book-are getting "better" every day.

Here are just a few of the "crimes" that can already land you in the federal system:

• Taking one prescription pill out of its drugstore bottle and carrying it around in a different container. (Just think of all those dangerous, blue-haired old lady felons lurking in your neighborhood with pills stashed in daily-dose containers from their local Wal-Mart!)
• Making a mistake on an Environmental Protection Agency reporting form-even if everyone agrees it was just a mistake and that no pollution was involved.
• Driving past a school with an otherwise perfectly legal gun in your car-even driving a block away from a school you didn't know was there!
• Manufacturing or selling a container that someone might use to store illegal drugs. (Kinda makes you wonder why Wal-Mart doesn't get busted for selling "drug paraphernalia" to those blue-haired ladies, doesn't it?)
• Digging dinosaur bones if you're not a university professor or government employee.
• Putting a picture of a naked lady on a wine bottle label (unless an ATF agent decides it's "art," which automatically makes it okay).
• Sitting in the car while an acquaintance goes into a house to do a drug deal.

This last one comes under the heading of "conspiracy." And conspiracy is one of a raft of ill-defined "crimes" the feds are using as a catch-all for anyone they want to bag. In addition to "conspiring" by doing nothing, you might be accused of "violating someone's civil rights" by punching him in the nose or "participating in organized criminal activity" just for talking about the wrong subject or being in the wrong place with the wrong people.

What organized criminal activity does this latter charge refer to? Don't ask. If the government had an actual crime-like murder or robbery-to charge you with, believe me, they would. "Participating in organized criminal activity" simply means you've gotten together with your buddies and done something a bureaucrat doesn't like.

The feds can always find you guilty of something. If they want to.

More Info HERE

[MineralMan]

"Taking one prescription pill out of its drugstore bottle and carrying it around in a different container. (Just think of all those dangerous, blue-haired old lady felons lurking in your neighborhood with pills stashed in daily-dose containers from their local Wal-Mart!)
Making a mistake on an Environmental Protection Agency reporting form-even if everyone agrees it was just a mistake and that no pollution was involved.
Driving past a school with an otherwise perfectly legal gun in your car-even driving a block away from a school you didn't know was there!
Manufacturing or selling a container that someone might use to store illegal drugs. (Kinda makes you wonder why Wal-Mart doesn't get busted for selling "drug paraphernalia" to those blue-haired ladies, doesn't it?)
Digging dinosaur bones if you're not a university professor or government employee.
Putting a picture of a naked lady on a wine bottle label (unless an ATF agent decides it's "art," which automatically makes it okay).
Sitting in the car while an acquaintance goes into a house to do a drug deal.
"

Nonsense. You're not going to jail, as long as you have a prescription for that medication. Your pharmacist can supply a copy, and you can even carry it with you if you wish. This one's bogus.

I don't fill out any such forms for the EPA. Can you supply a single instance where someone is in prison for accidentally making a mistake on such a form?

I don't carry firearms in my automobile, except when going hunting. My route to the places I hunt does not take me near any schools. Again, show me one case where someone who was driving with a firearm legally stowed or with a CCW permit has gone to jail merely for driving near a school.

I don't make containers for illegal drugs. I don't make containers of any kind. And nobody's busting the WalMarts or the manufacturers of your daily dose packs. Again, as in the first example, your example is purely bogus.

I don't dig dinosaur bones, and don't know anyone who does. Not a serious deal, really. If it's against the law, don't do it. What is your loss?

Naked ladies on wine bottles? I don't make or bottle wine. If I did, I wouldn't put naked women on the bottles. Everything about the labels on alcoholic beverages is subject to ATF regulations, if I remember correctly. Why would anyone flout them?

I don't have any friends who do drug deals. Do you? How does this affect me?

You've offered up a bunch of supposed ways the average person could be convicted of a felony. Except for the one about prescription drugs outside of the original bottle, most apply to almost nobody. Unless you can come up with some case where someone was arrested and convicted for that daily dose thing, I'll consider your list to be bogus.

I don't commit felonies.

[wardaddy]

Sacry stuff...scarier still are the number of FReepers who think this is dandy.

15 calendars..and no parole in the Feds....more than your average homicide perp does.

Something is very wrong here.