The Felon Gun Ban

Why should people be banned from owning guns for life just for committing a felony?

To begin with, many things that are considered "felonies" are not really violent crimes.  It seems unreasonable to assume that a person convicted of a "felony" that was non-violent is automatically a significantly greater threat to the general public if entrusted with the right to bear arms than any other ordinary person. 

Does it seem reasonable that people convicted of "felonies" with regard to tax paperwork or something else similarly non-violent should be banned from possession of guns for life? Its not like if they have a gun they're suddenly going to go shoot their neighbors... for real.

People who support bans on the possession of guns for felons who have served out their prison sentences will say that these people are a danger to society if entrusted with a gun. 

Really? If they're a danger to society, WHY AREN'T THEY STILL IN PRISON?

And if they are not dangerous enough to be in prison, why are they too dangerous to have a gun?

That said, looking at things from a purely constitutional standpoint, does it make sense that a person released from prison regains their 1st amendment right to protest and speak, but doesn't regain their 2nd amendment right to own the means to protect themselves?

There's a constitutional double standard there.  Regardless of whether or not laws barring all felons from possession of guns are "reasonable" or not, they are clearly not consistent with the constitution. 

So in sum, there's three solid arguments for why felons who have served their prison sentence out and been released from prison should be allowed to purchase guns legally.

1.  Just because they're felons doesn't mean mean they're violent or dangerous people.  Some things are felonies that are not violent crimes.  Is it reasonable to keep murderers, rapists, thieves, and people like this from owning guns for life? That's another issue.  In any case, at the very least, NON-VIOLENT felons should be allowed to own guns.

2.  If a person is too dangerous to own a gun, they should be in jail.  If they are NOT too dangerous to own a gun, they should be free - and should get their rights back as well.

3.  It makes no sense from a CONSTITUTIONAL STANDPOINT that people released from prison are allowed every constitutional right except those mentioned in the 2A when released from prison.  Why is the 2nd amendment any different from a PURELY LEGAL perspective in terms of felons than the 1st? It makes no sense at all.

Wall of text. Look, felons generally have bad judgement. Horrible judgement infact, normally extremely immature, bad decision making skills. They should be able to vote, im friends with quite a few felons that wanted to vote this time. But each and every single one of them, from the people that got busted with a good amount of coke, to the guys that were charged with b&e. Are always, extremely unstable people with awful tempers. Now I realise not all felons are like that, but the ones I know are. I have nothing against guns, I own a few myself. However, I don't want Jimmy the retard that got busted for larceny and meth possession to be walking around with a .45. Now you can whine and scream about 'it not fair dur everybdy shuld have gun!', but it dosen't change the fact that many, many people in our society are not smart enough, or have the judgement, to carry a firearm. Would you give a retard a gun? Well, you probably would and when he shoots someone in the face on accident you would say it's his right.

>>2
Would you deny the fact that a lot of felons are really not bad people though? Felon does not necessarily mean stupid.  It also doesn't mean violent.

The constitution right to bear arms is no longer applicable. This isn't the fucking wild west. There's no longer any theiving indians, bandits or pirates to protect your land wife from. No one should be allowed to own guns except for the fucking cops (and look how fucking stupid they are killing people with tasers), and even then only because other criminals would still have guns. What does the average civilian legitimately have to protect themself from?

Yes, a fatal stabbing is as bad as a fatal shooting. It is also as bad as a fatal beating. But would I rather be a victim of knife or gun crime? Guns do more damage from a far further distance, and offer the facility of multiple targets. When did you last hear of a mass stabbing spree in a school? Or a stab-out across a carpark? You can't run from a fucking bullet.

If the only reason you need a gun is to make you feel more like a man grow a fucking dink or GTFO.

>>4
The constitution right to bear arms is no longer applicable.
Look, LibTard, the ONLY way a part of the U.S. Constitution is "no longer applicable" is through the process of AMENDING the document.  Applicability is not determined by some sort of neo-popular sentiments by a bunch of frightened Liberal FAGS in urban areas.  We are a nation of laws, not a nation of men, and we CERTAINLY aren't a nation of spineless and simpering LibShits hiding in the cities while mounting each other's anuses.

It's amazing that you LibFucks claim to be so highly educated, yet you don't understand the fundamentals of Constitutional law.

>>5
I don't get how liberals can't get it through their dumb heads that the 2nd amendment is THE LAW.  It is in the constitution, which means that if they don't like it - that's okay - but they need to change it the LEGAL WAY.  The meaning of a given law doesn't change with time.  It has a fixed meaning. 

The constitution is not a "living" document, it is a "legal" document.  ITS THE LAW.

That said, ALL Federal gun control laws barring the public from possession of 'light weapons' (handguns, rifles, and yes, automatics) are unconstitutional.

I've been having this argument with a friend of mine recently. That is, the reason for owning weapons. He likes the 'what do we have to protect themselves or that you don't need an assault rifle to hunt.

My reply is simple. It's not about protecting yourselves from marauding brigands, it's about reminding the government who is in charge here.

Plus, handguns make nifty 'go-away' buttons for those who are stupid enough to attack or steal from people.

>>5
"We are a nation of laws, not a nation of men, and we CERTAINLY aren't a nation of spineless and simpering LibShits hiding in the cities while mounting each other's anuses."

Hahaha well, looks like around 52% of America is INDEED spineless and simpering libshits hiding in the cities and ... yeah.  They voted for Obama... lmao.  America is becoming like europe, and half of America is already basically eurofags apparently.

>>5

Wait wait. Libfags are "spineless" and "simpering" but you're the fucking queer QQing about not being able to protect himself.

gb2/men/ dickmouth

The only gun banners I would ever respect would be the ones that would stand by their convictions and put a big sign in their front yards that reads "THIS IS A GUN-FREE HOUSE."

Would they ever do this? NO. Because they're hypocrites and most likely gay and black...

I'm against a ban. I think Felon Gun is a valid religion/life philosophy and China's attempt to ban it reeks of fascism.

Felons should be allowed to own guns if they've committed a non-violent "crime" and serve out their sentences.