jshuberg wrote:The theory is that everyone is potentially a law-breaker at some point in their lives. There are so many BS laws on the books, it's almost impossible to not break some obscure law at some point. By making a person ineligible to own firearms for lesser and lesser crimes, they effectively ban them from the majority of the population.
LarryFlew wrote:BTW I believe it became part of law on July 1 of this year
jshuberg wrote:LarryFlew wrote:BTW I believe it became part of law on July 1 of this year
No, it was referred to Judiciary a year ago and nothing has happened since. See the link above.
jshuberg wrote:This appears to be one of the tactics the anti-gun cultists are trying. Since they can't win a straight on attack, they're coming at us sideways. They're trying to make as many people ineligible as possible.
They're starting with criminals who currently can still possess firearms. The thinking is that we'll look bad defending the rights of scumbags to own guns. If it succeeds, they'll move on to people late on their taxes, or on their toll card, or have traffic violations, or who don't shovel their sidewalk on time, or who have ever seen a shrink, etc.
The theory is that everyone is potentially a law-breaker at some point in their lives. There are so many BS laws on the books, it's almost impossible to not break some obscure law at some point. By making a person ineligible to own firearms for lesser and lesser crimes, they effectively ban them from the majority of the population.
jshuberg wrote:
Regardless of where a person stands on the gun control issue, allowing the system to be abused this way is completely reprehensible to any standards of justice, and those that allowed it to happen should be ashamed of themselves.
photogpat wrote:The idea that "taking away someone's guns" while they're awaiting trial is going to somehow protect women is asinine. If they're that big of a threat, deny bail and keep them in custody through trial.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests