Suspended Drivers license

[Unbend]

They have been fooled by the axe.

[Ads-l] Ax/Tree proverb

Original: "Ağaca balta vurmuşlar, "Sapı bedenimden," demiş."
Literal: 'They struck the tree with an axe, and the tree said, "Its handle is from my own body."'

Maybe in this case it is more that the tree is stupid rather than the axe clever

Although, from the book of proverbs reference:
"[It is the most painful blow when it is one's own child or someone you have protected who sets out to harm him.]"

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

Agreed. For the "shall not be infringed" crybabies (I know some will respond typing furiously due to derangement syndrome): this guy is literally the reason background checks exist.

Rights come with responsibilities. Behave like an adult and you get to keep them.

There is a key difference between "Rights" with "Privileges". Many confuse the two.

• Rights: Universal and fundamental. Everyone is entitled to them regardless of background, and they do not need to be earned.
• Privileges: Granted at the discretion of a giver and must often be earned or maintained through responsible behavior.

The 1st, 2nd, and all the "rights" in the constitution are not "privileges". Some argue those rights are "Unalienable" and therefore cannot be taken or restricted in any manor. Different than say "Civil Rights" which can be governed or restricted.

Putting that aside, had there NOT been firearms in the car, the Dude was still an idiot, since he violated traffic laws (which are not rights but privileges), and deserves whatever the consequences are for violating those laws.

 

[Unbend]

Being pro-2A doesn’t mean you own guns. It means you support, defend, and uphold the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Take a moment to reread it, and then tell us if you’re really pro-2A or if you just think you are because you happen to own a gun.

View attachment 220711

*click*

In order to have a well regulated militia, the citizens must be armed in the first place.

Traditionally, when this was written, it was expected that militia members provide their own arms.
Going further, many laws were written requiring men to own and maintain their own firearms and related equipment.

 

[Markbsae]

There is a key difference between "Rights" with "Privileges". Many confuse the two.

• Rights: Universal and fundamental. Everyone is entitled to them regardless of background, and they do not need to be earned.
• Privileges: Granted at the discretion of a giver and must often be earned or maintained through responsible behavior.

The 1st, 2nd, and all the "rights" in the constitution are not "privileges". Some argue those rights are "Unalienable" and therefore cannot be taken or restricted in any manor. Different than say "Civil Rights" which can be governed or restricted.

Putting that aside, had there NOT been firearms in the car, the Dude was still an idiot, since he violated traffic laws (which are not rights but privileges), and deserves whatever the consequences are for violating those laws.

just playing devils advocate, are you in favor of convicted felons having their second amendment rights removed?

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

just playing devils advocate, are you in favor of convicted felons having their second amendment rights removed?

Well there are two sides typically on this.

• One Side - Convicted Felons should lose their 2A rights and most other rights (Voting, Liberty, Protection from Searches, Pursuit of Happiness, etc) while incarcerated, but get all those rights restored EXCEPT their 2A rights.
• Another Side - Convicted Felons should lose their 2A rights and most other rights (Voting, Liberty, Protection from Searches, Pursuit of Happiness, etc) while incarcerated, but get all those rights restored INCLUDING their 2A rights.

I guess it comes down to, "Do you believe ALL Constitutional Rights should be restored after paying your debt to society, or just SOME of those rights?
There are MANY felony convictions for non violent crimes, and there are many convictions for violent crimes that do not involve firearms.

 

[grandpapeepap]

Well there are two sides typically on this.

• One Side - Convicted Felons should lose their 2A rights and most other rights (Voting, Liberty, Protection from Searches, Pursuit of Happiness, etc) while incarcerated, but get all those rights restored EXCEPT their 2A rights.
• Another Side - Convicted Felons should lose their 2A rights and most other rights (Voting, Liberty, Protection from Searches, Pursuit of Happiness, etc) while incarcerated, but get all those rights restored INCLUDING their 2A rights.

I guess it comes down to, "Do you believe ALL Constitutional Rights should be restored after paying your debt to society, or just SOME of those rights?
There are MANY felony convictions for non violent crimes, and there are many convictions for violent crimes that do not involve firearms.

he asked for your opinion on the matter and you just kind of danced around answering it. should convicted felons or otherwise mentally deranged people addicted to smoking angel dust living on the streets be able to own firearms? i mean they are probably in the "need a weapon for defense" area of living a rough life right

 

[NorCALSpeed]

Is that a plate carrier /ammo vest with a fake sheriff star on it? Because that's concerning.

 

[ar15robert]

Well there are two sides typically on this.

• One Side - Convicted Felons should lose their 2A rights and most other rights (Voting, Liberty, Protection from Searches, Pursuit of Happiness, etc) while incarcerated, but get all those rights restored EXCEPT their 2A rights.
• Another Side - Convicted Felons should lose their 2A rights and most other rights (Voting, Liberty, Protection from Searches, Pursuit of Happiness, etc) while incarcerated, but get all those rights restored INCLUDING their 2A rights.

I guess it comes down to, "Do you believe ALL Constitutional Rights should be restored after paying your debt to society, or just SOME of those rights?
There are MANY felony convictions for non violent crimes, and there are many convictions for violent crimes that do not involve firearms.

I’m kind of on the fence with this part can see both sides too. Other part is no matter the crime your debt to society is never paid off whether it’s the small misdemeanor or felony both will prevent you from future jobs or just low paying that won’t make the bills. Have a great talent like fabrication well the past won’t let you get you bus lic or contractor lic to work on your own etc.

Which is one reason I think there’s a lot or repeat offenders. As for gun rights I think it may need to come to case by case basis from the original crime.

 

[treelogger]

There is a key difference between "Rights" with "Privileges". Many confuse the two.

• Rights: Universal and fundamental. Everyone is entitled to them regardless of background, and they do not need to be earned.
• Privileges: Granted at the discretion of a giver and must often be earned or maintained through responsible behavior.

In reality, that's a distinction without a difference. The distinction is mostly used by theoretical arguments for why rights should be absolute. But they aren't. Rights can be taken away: we talked about people in jail having very few rights, in particular not the much more fundamental right to self determination. Rights can be regulated and may require administration. For example, we have a right to travel (it's well hidden in the constitution under interstate travel), but that doesn't mean that everyone has a right to drive: If you're under 16 or have too many DUIs, that will be taken away. We have a right to interstate commerce, but getting a CDL to transport 30 tons of goods to another state is quite difficult, and comes with lots of restrictions. Rights have limitations: While I can travel and transport goods, I can't do so in a supersonic plane, because the FAA doesn't like the noise.

Different than say "Civil Rights" which can be governed or restricted.

No, the word "civil rights" usually refers to rights of participating in civil society, such as voting, taking advantage of "accommodations" (like hotels, buses, restaurants), getting education.

Do you believe ALL Constitutional Rights should be restored after paying your debt to society, or just SOME of those rights?

The theory that punishment after a crime is a payment for a debt to society is only a small part of the theory and philosophy of punishment today. That "retribution" concept is most popular with some groups, often those that are religiously inspired, and it stems pretty directly from "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth". In reality, today's punishment in civilized societies is mostly about general and specific deterrence (also called prevention). Trying to understand why a convicted felon can't vote or can't have guns based on retribution is somewhere between hard and impossible; thinking about it in terms of deterrence at least makes logical sense. Although I don't agree with all the details as implemented today.

 

[compulsivegungrabber]

If you were doing something illegal and driving around with bad tags, you are an idiot. You deserve whatever happens to you..

 

[compulsivegungrabber]

Well there are two sides typically on this.

• One Side - Convicted Felons should lose their 2A rights and most other rights (Voting, Liberty, Protection from Searches, Pursuit of Happiness, etc) while incarcerated, but get all those rights restored EXCEPT their 2A rights.
• Another Side - Convicted Felons should lose their 2A rights and most other rights (Voting, Liberty, Protection from Searches, Pursuit of Happiness, etc) while incarcerated, but get all those rights restored INCLUDING their 2A rights.

I guess it comes down to, "Do you believe ALL Constitutional Rights should be restored after paying your debt to society, or just SOME of those rights?
There are MANY felony convictions for non violent crimes, and there are many convictions for violent crimes that do not involve firearms.

I believe if you did your time, and did it without issue, your constitutional right should be restored. Your second amendment rights, well, I would take that on a case by a case basis, taking into account the crime, the victims, your behavior while incarcerated, and a certain amount of time out in society, where you prove that you are a productive member who can follow the law and work within the system.

At the same time, we need some serious prison reforms. If you show a willingness to reform yourself, you should be given the opportunity and education to do so. If on the contrary, you show a willingness to continue to break laws, perpetuate violence on other inmates and staff, and engage in gang activity, you should be put in a CECOT style prison and treated like the animal you want to act like.

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

he asked for your opinion on the matter and you just kind of danced around answering it. should convicted felons or otherwise mentally deranged people addicted to smoking angel dust living on the streets be able to own firearms? i mean they are probably in the "need a weapon for defense" area of living a rough life right

Well now you are combining "convicted felons" with mentally ill, deranged people, angel dust, homeless, etc.

But to answer your question directly, a first time convicted felon (excluding violent felonies), who has served his or her time, and has been released back into society, should have the same Constitutional Rights as any other person.

It's easy for us to say "Yeah that dude should not own guns after serving XX years for XX". But if it happened to you, would you be OK with losing your 2A Rights?

 

[grandpapeepap]

Well now you are combining "convicted felons" with mentally ill, deranged people, angel dust, homeless, etc.

But to answer your question directly, a first time convicted felon (excluding violent felonies), who has served his or her time, and has been released back into society, should have the same Constitutional Rights as any other person.

It's easy for us to say "Yeah that dude should not own guns after serving XX years for XX". But if it happened to you, would you be OK with losing your 2A Rights?

do those people not deserve to have rights too? i mean living their life they need to defend themselves from rascals just as much as anyone else. but im sure we arent far off.

to the thread topic, dont do something illegal while you are doing something illegal

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

do those people not deserve to have rights too? i mean living their life they need to defend themselves from rascals just as much as anyone else. but im sure we arent far off.

We have elected folks that say "No" they should not. My opinion is meaningless.

• From 1791 to 1938 (147) years there were little to no restrictions on gun ownership
• Then in 1938 we got the FF, so tax on silencers, no machine guns, no short barrel rifles, etc.
• So for 177 or so years most anyone can own most anything.
• Then in 1968 we get the first of of many Gun Control law.

So it's been the last ~58 years or so that the government who we elect is, is squeezing down who gets to own what.
I imagine in the next 58 years firearms will be outlawed and you will have to pass a mental fitness test to own a video game with a gun in it. Or maybe those will be outlawed as well. Lol

But back to the topic of the thread, had this dude not had his firearms in the car, there would be no thread!

 

[chiroken007]

We have elected folks that say "No" they should not. My opinion is meaningless.

• From 1791 to 1938 (147) years there were little to no restrictions on gun ownership
• Then in 1938 we got the FF, so tax on silencers, no machine guns, no short barrel rifles, etc.
• So for 177 or so years most anyone can own most anything.
• Then in 1968 we get the first of of many Gun Control law.

So it's been the last ~58 years or so that the government who we elect is, is squeezing down who gets to own what.
I imagine in the next 58 years firearms will be outlawed and you will have to pass a mental fitness test to own a video game with a gun in it. Or maybe those will be outlawed as well. Lol

But back to the topic of the thread, had this dude not had his firearms in the car, there would be no thread!

Could one argue the current state of gun laws was a result of access to television imagery on the news of terrible acts of violence in our streets? Or maybe something else. That is also about the time America delve into the abyss of obesity, diabetes and all the other metabolic diseases stemming from the FDA permitting corporate food industry to poison us with all the preservatives high fructose corn syrup, food colorings, etc. what if we all had better food supply. Would there be less mental health disease!?! We already know there is a connection there…

Sorry having a fun train of thought. Nothing about it is false though.

If you think about it. Sugar and plastic wrappers are more deadly than bullets.

Almost all the most common causes of death are a result of metabolic disease.

 

[grandpapeepap]

Could one argue the current state of gun laws was a result of access to television imagery on the news of terrible acts of violence in our streets? Or maybe something else. That is also about the time America delve into the abyss of obesity, diabetes and all the other metabolic diseases stemming from the FDA permitting corporate food industry to poison us with all the preservatives high fructose corn syrup, food colorings, etc. what if we all had better food supply. Would there be less mental health disease!?! We already know there is a connection there…

Sorry having a fun train of thought. Nothing about it is false though.

If you think about it. Sugar and plastic wrappers are more deadly than bullets.

Almost all the most common causes of death are a result of metabolic disease.

i remember people getting mad at soda tax and bans of sugary drinks which dont help diseases you are talking about right? sin taxes suck ):

 

[DIYPSCM]

JFC this forum eats its own.

 

[grandpapeepap]

 

[treelogger]

Could one argue the current state of gun laws was a result of access to television imagery on the news of terrible acts of violence in our streets?

When was the NFA again? Your honor, I rest my case.

 

[grandpapeepap]

When was the NFA again? Your honor, I rest my case.

34?