Gun rights after you complete your sentence.

[bowbuild]

By marrying and living with a convicted felon, she should not and does not give up HER constitutional rights.  She obviously takes on higher obligation of responsibility.

"she could have a tazer"  guess who some of you folks are sounding like now?

Bet Obama will endorse the tazer idea..... 

[Smossy]

Thanks Smossy!

I'm just saying from experience. I spent a nice chunk of time incarcerated and I was convicted of a class A felony which prevents me from every owning a firearm. So I've done my talk time with LE and researched enough to know what I'm allowed to have and what I'm not.

[snowpack]

I had a discussion about this with my Father in Law a few weeks back. In my mind, every action taken is a choice and every action has a consequence. In this scenario the felon made the decision to commit the crime. Then the wife made the decision to stay with the felon.

So my short answer is no, a felon's gun rights should not be restored. It's all about actions and consequences/ cause and effect. The individual chose to violate the law, so he/she also chose to accept the consequences that go with it. The spouse chose to stay with the felon, so he/she chose to accept the consequences of that decision.

Andrew

very good answer , choices where made. I don't want any felon living near me to have a gun , what's one more poor choice ( maybe a bullet headed towards and innocent victim ). There are exceptions I'm sure but do we want more government to figure it out and police it ? (not me). It seems to me like these folks just want a gun in the house for some reason. there are plenty of forms of protection other than fire arms . what about a tazzer , alarm , dog. motion lights , billy clubs ex. really if she wants a firearm it sounds like she can have one just not in the house that her felon husband resides in . no reason she cant store them elsewhere.

This country at times seems to just give out felonies like candy.  Here is an interesting story about a man being charged with a felony for releasing hot air balloons for his girlfriend. http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-02-22/news/fl-helium-balloon-environmental-crime-20130222_1_helium-balloon-fhp-trooper-wood-storks  If this was this guy's only felony, I don't think having him next door and armed would be a big deal.

[Smossy]

Even personally being a felon myself, I think gun rights should be restored ONLY if said person could meet a certain criteria.
I'm not just talking "doing your time with dignity and paying back all your fines" That should just go hand in hand with doing your crime whatever it be regardless.
I'm talking no "WEAPON'S" charges period (That show's irresponsibility with weapons), drug testing, employment history, mental disorder testing, full criminal history check's (NO chance for repeat offenders).
Things of this nature. I believe there could be a reasonable balance, But I'm not going to argue with how things are ran now. It is what it is and I'm managing just fine.

[bowbuild]

I had a discussion about this with my Father in Law a few weeks back. In my mind, every action taken is a choice and every action has a consequence. In this scenario the felon made the decision to commit the crime. Then the wife made the decision to stay with the felon.

So my short answer is no, a felon's gun rights should not be restored. It's all about actions and consequences/ cause and effect. The individual chose to violate the law, so he/she also chose to accept the consequences that go with it. The spouse chose to stay with the felon, so he/she chose to accept the consequences of that decision.

Andrew

very good answer , choices where made. I don't want any felon living near me to have a gun , what's one more poor choice ( maybe a bullet headed towards and innocent victim ). There are exceptions I'm sure but do we want more government to figure it out and police it ? (not me). It seems to me like these folks just want a gun in the house for some reason. there are plenty of forms of protection other than fire arms . what about a tazzer , alarm , dog. motion lights , billy clubs ex. really if she wants a firearm it sounds like she can have one just not in the house that her felon husband resides in . no reason she cant store them elsewhere.

This country at times seems to just give out felonies like candy.  Here is an interesting story about a man being charged with a felony for releasing hot air balloons for his girlfriend. http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-02-22/news/fl-helium-balloon-environmental-crime-20130222_1_helium-balloon-fhp-trooper-wood-storks  If this was this guy's only felony, I don't think having him next door and armed would be a big deal.

Someone is starting to catch on! I have been to florida once, and after being there with a friend who lives there......I have NO desire to go back.....they do give out felonies like candy.....Texas isn't far behind!

I was told by my friend that to trespass, and have a pocket knife in Florida was considered ARMED TRESSPASS a felony....whether you know where you are at , or not. I have not confirmed this, but that was enough for me.

The comments I see that say "I don't want some felon living next to me with a gun" ......you scared of a pocket knife carrying felon? The problem can stem from WHAT the felony is for, but I still believe you serve your time...your rights should be restored with a few restrictions that I have already said. Like someone said it won't be solved here, or possibly ever....was just trying to compile opinions.


Bowbuild

[biggfish]

I don't if everyone here is familiar with tasers some people are just unaffected.  I've been tased it slowed me down but I was still able move and not just writhing on the ground.  Pepper spray is another ineffective deterrent in closed spaces nobody wins and some people who just play through the pain. I also read an argument for a billy club, now you want someone that is defending their home, person, and potentially family to stand within arms reach of an assailant to attempt to defend themselves.  And locking their firearms up somewhere outside the home is just asinine.  Anyone that's carried for protection will tell the number one line of defense is proximity.  A .22 in the hand is better than a .45 in a drawer at home.  Now you want the home defense plan to remove quick access from the equation.  I myself just don't see why you want to punish the family members of a convicted felon. I almost forgot to address the alarm.  If you have standard home monitoring an agent calls your home if the alarm goes off if no answer they call once more if no answer it gets kicked over to police as unknown disturbance. Response time may vary, where I live after 10pm its over an hour for response time 15 minutes for immediate danger.  A lot can happen in the amount of time it takes to respond.  If you have a security guard that patrols your neighbor hood they have to respond and if there is a crime they then contact authorities.  Still with either alarm scenario you've delayed contact by at least 2 minutes, so much can happen in that time frame.

[Knocker of rocks]

I was told by my friend that to trespass, and have a pocket knife in Florida was considered ARMED TRESSPASS a felony....whether you know where you are at , or not. I have not confirmed this, but that was enough for me.

810.08 Trespass in structure or conveyance.--

(1) Whoever, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters or remains in any structure or conveyance, or, having been authorized, licensed, or invited, is warned by the owner or lessee of the premises, or by a person authorized by the owner or lessee, to depart and refuses to do so, commits the offense of trespass in a structure or conveyance.

(2)(a) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, trespass in a structure or conveyance is a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(b) If there is a human being in the structure or conveyance at the time the offender trespassed, attempted to trespass, or was in the structure or conveyance, the trespass in a structure or conveyance is a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(c) If the offender is armed with a firearm or other dangerous weapon, or arms himself or herself with such while in the structure or conveyance, the trespass in a structure or conveyance is a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. Any owner or person authorized by the owner may, for prosecution purposes, take into custody and detain, in a reasonable manner, for a reasonable length of time, any person when he or she reasonably believes that a violation of this paragraph has been or is being committed, and he or she reasonably believes that the person to be taken into custody and detained has committed or is committing such violation. In the event a person is taken into custody, a law enforcement officer shall be called as soon as is practicable after the person has been taken into custody. The taking into custody and detention by such person, if done in compliance with the requirements of this paragraph, shall not render such person criminally or civilly liable for false arrest, false imprisonment, or unlawful detention.

(3) As used in this section, the term "person authorized" means any owner or lessee, or his or her agent, or any law enforcement officer whose department has received written authorization from the owner or lessee, or his or her agent, to communicate an order to depart the property in the case of a threat to public safety or welfare.

A pencil or hammer could be a dangerous weapon.  It is all in intent, and your pen knife argument is specious

[Knocker of rocks]

This country at times seems to just give out felonies like candy.  Here is an interesting story about a man being charged with a felony for releasing hot air balloons for his girlfriend. http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-02-22/news/fl-helium-balloon-environmental-crime-20130222_1_helium-balloon-fhp-trooper-wood-storks  If this was this guy's only felony, I don't think having him next door and armed would be a big deal.

It is unknown how this case ended, if it is indeed over.  A final outcome as a felony does not seem likely

[bowbuild]

I was told by my friend that to trespass, and have a pocket knife in Florida was considered ARMED TRESSPASS a felony....whether you know where you are at , or not. I have not confirmed this, but that was enough for me.

810.08 Trespass in structure or conveyance.--

(1) Whoever, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters or remains in any structure or conveyance, or, having been authorized, licensed, or invited, is warned by the owner or lessee of the premises, or by a person authorized by the owner or lessee, to depart and refuses to do so, commits the offense of trespass in a structure or conveyance.

(2)(a) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, trespass in a structure or conveyance is a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(b) If there is a human being in the structure or conveyance at the time the offender trespassed, attempted to trespass, or was in the structure or conveyance, the trespass in a structure or conveyance is a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(c) If the offender is armed with a firearm or other dangerous weapon, or arms himself or herself with such while in the structure or conveyance, the trespass in a structure or conveyance is a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. Any owner or person authorized by the owner may, for prosecution purposes, take into custody and detain, in a reasonable manner, for a reasonable length of time, any person when he or she reasonably believes that a violation of this paragraph has been or is being committed, and he or she reasonably believes that the person to be taken into custody and detained has committed or is committing such violation. In the event a person is taken into custody, a law enforcement officer shall be called as soon as is practicable after the person has been taken into custody. The taking into custody and detention by such person, if done in compliance with the requirements of this paragraph, shall not render such person criminally or civilly liable for false arrest, false imprisonment, or unlawful detention.

(3) As used in this section, the term "person authorized" means any owner or lessee, or his or her agent, or any law enforcement officer whose department has received written authorization from the owner or lessee, or his or her agent, to communicate an order to depart the property in the case of a threat to public safety or welfare.

A pencil or hammer could be a dangerous weapon.  It is all in intent, and your pen knife argument is specious

Specious?? Seems we read that much different in (c) paragragh there is NOTHING that say anything about intent. It clearly leaves the owner to the words "reasonably believes" nothing about intent.

[Knocker of rocks]

So sorry, your pocket knife is not a dangerous weapon

   Florida law defines a " '[w]eapon' " to "mea[n] any dirk, metallic knuckles, slungshot, billie, tear gas gun, chemical weapon or device, or other deadly weapon except a firearm or a common pocketknife." §790.001(13). Florida has excepted the " 'common pocketknife' " from its weapons statute since 1901, and the relevant language has remained unchanged since that time. See 833 So. 2d, at 743.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=02-8636

[fastdam]

I have known many felons and trust them all more than cops, judges or lawyers.  I have never been wronged by a felon but have been extorted many times by the others and thats a very common experience.  That being said, I do realize some felons aee monsters, but so are some cops, judges and lawyers   they are all just titles, we are all people and we all make mistakes. Gun laws are screwed up and the justice system is not just. Too bad respect isnt more important to people  it would be if EVERYONE was armed.

[bowbuild]

So sorry, your pocket knife is not a dangerous weapon

   Florida law defines a " '[w]eapon' " to "mea[n] any dirk, metallic knuckles, slungshot, billie, tear gas gun, chemical weapon or device, or other deadly weapon except a firearm or a common pocketknife." §790.001(13). Florida has excepted the " 'common pocketknife' " from its weapons statute since 1901, and the relevant language has remained unchanged since that time. See 833 So. 2d, at 743.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=02-8636

Nice find!! Did you read it all? Seems as though the gentlmen in question WAS convicted for a pocket knife (a weopon charge). For whatever reason although you pointed out the definiton of law on the knife, they still upheld the conviction for weopon while in the act of a burglary. He apparently appealed, and was given the shaft anyway. Finally in the last paragraph it lists a female judge that said she would have reversed that conviction....but it did not say she did??? Am I reading this wrong?

Maybe this is what my friend was thinking of when he made the statement???

Bowbuild

[Knocker of rocks]

The conviction was upheld because because of concern about the application of a 1997 ruling being applied retroactively

   The Florida Supreme Court also rejected Bunkley's claim. It held that the L. B. decision did not apply retroactively. Under Florida law, only "jurisprudential upheavals" will be applied retroactively.

So the definition of a deadly weapon, and the pocket knife exception should not be effected. 

[Knocker of rocks]

Finally in the last paragraph it lists a female judge that said she would have reversed that conviction....but it did not say she did???

It did say

Justice Pariente, joined by Chief Justice Anstead, dissented.

Because she thought the L. B. decision "correctly stated the law at the time Bunkley's conviction became final," she would have vacated Bunkley's conviction.

She is speaking for the whole of the court.  She herself did vote to vacate the conviction

[KillBilly]

Doesn't matter if they get their gun rights back. Criminals will always find a way to get them.

Campmeat, your comment has nothing to do with the topic at hand. The OP is asking about lawfully being able to procure firearms after serving a sentence. Why don't you comment on that, CM?

Ya happy ? I removed my comment !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think Campmeat' s statement was totally appropriate and on topic. It speaks directly to "CATEGORIZED OPTIONS". Since it is a fact that criminals will always get a gun(s) when they want them, why bother excluding them. When judgment fails and rights are returned to a non-violent perpetrator and he then later commits a crime with a gun, what do you say then? OOOPs......
There may be a blessing in this. I don't know for sure but I understand that if you lose your right to vote, you also lose your right to pay taxes.  Gosh what a shame