LTCH Suspended: Administrative Law hearing at the ISP

[Hotdoger]

What was that quote about government ruling free men again? Oh yeah, it has to make them criminals first.

We are ALL just a pen stroke away from becoming felons in the eyes of the state.

Yes. Everything is illegal.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBiJB8YuDBQ[/ame]

 

[serf]

Dear Thread,

You have been hijacked.

Sincerely,

Serf

 

[CTS]

You are apparently part of the group of people who have no compunction with telling others how to live their lives.

If they're safe enough to release into society, they're safe enough to trust with the full compliments of their rights.

You're right, I have zero problem telling people how to live their lives, when their personal choices put the safety of myself and others at risk. I get the distinct impression that you haven't spent a lot of time around some of these "non-proper persons."

I do agree that everyone should have the right to own virtually any kind of firearm they desire, until they've shown evidence that their ownership poses a danger to others. You're perfectly fine with a judge being able to deprive someone of their entire freedom but not their right to own a firearm? That makes no sense whatsoever.

Now some individuals reform and that's why I'm glad we have some second chance laws in place. Actions have consequences though and people who have proven that they're either too stupid or too callous to own a firearm shouldn't be allowed to legally possess one.

What was that quote about government ruling free men again? Oh yeah, it has to make them criminals first.

We are ALL just a pen stroke away from becoming felons in the eyes of the state.

The do something about it! In fact if I recall correctly, you actually are doing something about it and I applaud you for doing it, even if getting into the situation in the first place wasn't really your choice (from what I know of your case on here it's pretty clear you were well into the right). I personally think a lot of laws are crazy and I do what I can as a citizen to protest them. I actually hope some day to be in a good position to actually help facilitate changing them.

 

[88GT]

You're right, I have zero problem telling people how to live their lives, when their personal choices put the safety of myself and others at risk.

So, tell me, EXACTLY, how does someone who has been released put the safety of you and others at risk? Isn't because he's out walking the streets and not because he's had his rights restored? Because no convicted felon EVER broke another law upon being released, right?

So I ask you, is your personal safety at risk because he was released, or because he wasn't denied his full compliment of rights?

Think carefully before you answer.

I get the distinct impression that you haven't spent a lot of time around some of these "non-proper persons."

That's funny, because I get the distinct impression you don't have a clue about how the world works. Thinking that denying them firearms through the law is actually going to stop them from using them.

I do agree that everyone should have the right to own virtually any kind of firearm they desire, until they've shown evidence that their ownership poses a danger to others. You're perfectly fine with a judge being able to deprive someone of their entire freedom but not their right to own a firearm? That makes no sense whatsoever.

I'm perfectly fine with DUE PROCESS. What makes no sense is the notion that a violent offender isn't a threat because some law says he cannot legally possess a firearm. It's the height of stupidity to think that such a law changes the risk to you or anybody else from being the victim of said violent offender once he's released. The fact that he is out is what makes him a risk. Not the fact that he has legal access to firearms.

If he is no longer a threat to others, why shouldn't he have his rights restored? If he is a threat, why did we let him out? Denying them legal ownership/possession of firearms is a feel good measure that doesn't do jack to change their risk of recidivism.

And we haven't even touched on the fact that the law does not distinguish between violent felonies and non-violent felonies.

Now some individuals reform and that's why I'm glad we have some second chance laws in place. Actions have consequences though and people who have proven that they're either too stupid or too callous to own a firearm shouldn't be allowed to legally possess one.

So, you want people to be able to have a second chance, but aren't willing to give it to them? How does that work?

How about this: parents who abuse their children should be rendered sterile. They've obviously proven themselves too stupid or too callous to take care of children. And we can't take the chance that they'll breed after they get out of the pokey for the first (or second, or third) crime. Let's just pretend that by removing them of their natural ability to reproduce, they'll never be around other children again and therefore can't ever cause harm again. That sounds like a good idea, right?

Guilty is not a prerequisite for a felony. Chew on that.

The do something about it! In fact if I recall correctly, you actually are doing something about it and I applaud you for doing it, even if getting into the situation in the first place wasn't really your choice (from what I know of your case on here it's pretty clear you were well into the right). I personally think a lot of laws are crazy and I do what I can as a citizen to protest them. I actually hope some day to be in a good position to actually help facilitate changing them.

Wait a minute! I thought it was "actions have consequences." Wouldn't his "crime" fall under the "too stupid" category?

TF, I hate to say it, but you're getting what you deserved.

 

[CTS]

I know a person right now, who doesn't own firearms because he has a few felonies. He's explicitly said he would love to but doesn't want to get locked up over it. He also beat the daylights out of his girlfriend a few months ago and I'm really glad he didn't have a gun when he did it, he nearly killed her without one. No law is going to stop a criminal intent on breaking it, but even criminals sometimes don't do things simply because they can get in a lot of trouble for doing it and prefer life on the outside.

I actively counsel people fresh out of prison and people with drug addictions. My opinions are based on experience, not some hypothetical fantasy land.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Then do something about it! In fact if I recall correctly, you actually are doing something about it and I applaud you for doing it, even if getting into the situation in the first place wasn't really your choice (from what I know of your case on here it's pretty clear you were well into the right). I personally think a lot of laws are crazy and I do what I can as a citizen to protest them. I actually hope some day to be in a good position to actually help facilitate changing them.

As you stated after the bolded portion, I AM doing something about it.

Wait a minute! I thought it was "actions have consequences." Wouldn't his "crime" fall under the "too stupid" category?

TF, I hate to say it, but you're getting what you deserved.

Am I missing something here? What exactly did I deserve?

 

[CTS]

Am I missing something here? What exactly did I deserve?

I think he was being sarcastic.

To that point, as far as I'm aware TF was engaging in a perfectly legal activity and has been unjustly dealt with by local authorities...that's wildly different than telling a guy who robbed a pharmacy that once his sentence is up he can own any firearms he wants. As far as I see it a portion of the pharmacy guy's sentence was the loss of his 2nd amendment rights as dictated by the state and federal legislatures. So unless he meets the legal qualification to have that right restored, he's still "serving."

 

[actaeon277]

Cts,
FYI 88GT has an innie, not an outie.

 

[CTS]

Cts,
FYI 88GT has an innie, not an outie.

What do belly buttons have to do with anything?

 

[hopper68]

A little lower CTS.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Dear Thread,

You have been hijacked.

Sincerely,

Serf

Tell me about it.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Sorry CIB. I'll behave from now on.

 

[sharkey]

Sorry CIB. I'll behave from now on.

Sometimes, when the facepalm gets that strong, we need a smile tangent to bring things back.

Good luck Cathy.

 

[Ted]

So Cathy, what happened?

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

So Cathy, what happened?

From post #92.

"New LTCH hearing date is March 20 @ 1:00 PM. To be clear, this is finally and actually after my court date of March 8 @ 8:30 AM".

 

[Ted]

From post #92.

"New LTCH hearing date is March 20 @ 1:00 PM. To be clear, this is finally and actually after my court date of March 8 @ 8:30 AM".

Good God, having to wade through the thread and I missed that post?

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Good God, having to wade through the thread and I missed that post?

It was easy to miss.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Bump for imminent day in court. I've got my ducks in a row and have never been more confident of prevailing in court than I am right now. Legal combat ensues tomorrow morning at 8:30 AM.

 

[4sarge]

Bump for imminent day in court. I've got my ducks in a row and have never been more confident of prevailing in court than I am right now. Legal combat ensues tomorrow morning at 8:30 AM.

Best Wishes

 

[mrjarrell]

Kick 'em in the nuts! Hope you beat the snot out of 'em!