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.

[MineralMan]

"Oh, it's been brought up before, but it gets no where. Maybe next time."

Sorry. I'm not in Georgia, so I can't do much about laws there. That's up to you folks. I'm sure there's a way. You just have to convince enough folks that you're right. That's the American way.

[yarddog]

No thats not the American way!

Certain rights are God given, or ones we are born with. They are not subject to being taken away by a simple majority. Even if infringed by a majority, they are still rights. We may not be able to exercise our inalienable rights without being prosecuted but that does not make them wrong.

[wardaddy]

You are preaching to the choir.

Until 1968, there were no Federal statutes banning gunrights for felons, it was up to the states...and most Red Zone states automatically granted gun rights back after parole for criminals.

In 1968...the Gun Control Act changed all of that federally in the wake of a rise in urban crime, riots, and assasinations. They did leave it up to states for those convicted on state charges and they claimed domain over federal felons. They also left in an individual apllication mechanism for federal felons to seek redress thru the ATF individually based on merit. The ATF to their credit granted most rights back ...sometimes in a limited way...to those that they viewed as "redeemed". Then in 1992 or so, Congress yanked the ATF's specific funding for that program and effectively killed it. Then a federal felon could apply for a waiver from a sitting Federal judge and that worked until 2002 when SCOTUS ruled that Fed judges did not have the right to usurp the authority of the ATF or Congress and that it was the ATF's job even though Congress had cut off funding....a classic Catch-22...and W supported this.

At the same time, now Federal Prosecutors will take on any state felon in possesion of a firearm that they wish in addition to any federal felon. The 1987 Federal Sentencing Guidelines which have been amped up even more since then carry draconian sentences for such "crimes" from 5 years or so to life in some cases for a class III weapon with other factors considered......and I'm not talkling about murder here.

No felon anymore has any recourse in this matter.

And as we all know, it's not just felons or even those convicted of a crime....restraining orders work as well.

Why bother to outlaw guns when they can slowly outlaw gunowners. I would venture that 10-15 percent of the adult male population of this country are already at risk for a gun felony and many don't even know it.

[fella]

This guy's lawyer was an idiot.

Or just maybe an anti-gun nut who sends his money to support gun grabbers.

[wardaddy]

I think gun rights should be revoked for those in prison or on parole or in halfway house or in the loony bin.

I do not support anything beyond that.

They could make repeated gun related offenses aggravating ....which many jurisdictions probably do....I know the Feds do.

I also would probably support an individual judge invoked restriction on some folks with a case by case determination which could be temporary and very locally determined.

However...we are so far beyond all that now, that we are more concerned about the continually eroding gun rights for normal Joes that no one is going to give any consideration to these issues.

We are already up to our ass in gungrabbing alligators.

[MineralMan]

"I think gun rights should be revoked for those in prison or on parole or in halfway house or in the loony bin.

I do not support anything beyond that.
"

Interesting. I'll bet I could come up with some examples of folks getting out of prison who you wouldn't think should be armed. It's an exercise I'm not going to pursue, but I have no doubt that I could do it.

Problem is that each case either has to be judged individually or there has to be a general law that covers it.

Right now, we have that general law that prohibits convicted felons from owning or possessing firearms. It's no doubt unjust in many cases, and I believe there should be funding for the program to enable a released convict to get the right back. I do not, however, believe that we should simply throw the law out and allow the guy who just got out of prison after serving his sentence to buy firearms. That doesn't seem logical to me at all.

Somewhere, there's a middle ground on this issue. I don't want the convict who has served 20 years for killing someone with a firearm to be able to legally buy one, once released. Sorry, but that's the way I feel about that.

OTOH, I don't think the guy convicted of something like using drugs should necessarily be barred from owning firearms. That would be a case-by-case thing. I don't like the idea of a bunch of cokeheads running round with firearms, but someone who has served his time and is clean...I see no problem there.

[jmc813]

Thoughts?

[Catspaw]

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.

Sure. Larry Singleton and Richard Allen Davis would approve.

[prisoner6sson]

Oh come ON! Then again this is the Great Socialist State of Pittsburgh PA. NOTHING here amazes me anymore.

prisoner6

[Rocky Mountain High]

Actually he doesn't have the right. He's a convicted felon. No gun for him. End of story.

[Rocky Mountain High]

Wrong. Felons can't have guns. End of story. It doesn't matter what should be, that's the way it is.

[The Old Hoosier]

Is the actual punishment of physically being in prison the only way the government can deprive convicts of their rights?

Isn't this just like a probation sentence?

[prisoner6sson]

No flames...you are correct sir.

prisoner6

[ColdSteelTalon]

Sure. Larry Singleton and Richard Allen Davis would approve.

I dont think you read my post... at least not enough of it

[Julliardsux]

No, the United States Sentencing Guidelines must be followed, and that is what went wrong here. The dude should appeal.

[Thumper1960]

On another thread......a man who has 21 drunk driving arrests, and was busted yet again, could receive 5 years for being a drunken driver felon.

OK, so......a guy shoots deer on his own property and isn't charged with being a danger to anyone else gets 15 years......a habitual drunk driver may get 5 years.

Nah, no "disconnect", here.

I wonder if Mr. Lush has been able to hunt all this time?

One wonders......hmmmmmm

[mass55th]

"I find it hard to believe that if the man had used an "evil gun" the "journalist" would have failed to mention it."

Don't count on it, especially if the goal of the journalist was to promote sympathy for this two-time felon.

[MineralMan]

"I wonder if Mr. Lush has been able to hunt all this time?

One wonders......hmmmmmm"

Well, if he's convicted of that felony, he won't be able to after that.

[teeman8r]

he is a convicted felon who served the time designated for his crime... paid the price, and inalienable rights cannot be forfeited or taken away... your argument holds no water other than he is a convicted felon end of story... when the courts make owning a gun a felony, will your argument stand up?

jmt, teeman

[A. Pole]

I'm astonished when I see folks boasting about the 2,000,000+ American men in prison. It's not as if there are more bad people in the US than elsewhere. And it's not as if there are more criminals in jail than outside.

Yes, and this folk have contempt for whimpy French who have only 69 000 people in prisons. They recommend to throw in French jails 400 000 dark skinned "terrorists" to balance things out. This is the solution their minds educated by Jerry Springer can conceive.