Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 151 to 161 of 161

Thread: Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal

  1. #151
    Senior Member Rep Power: 12
    Reputation: 8991
    Rep Level: PDF Constitution Protector
    Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27th, 2016
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    4,274
    Threads
    79
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    985 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Nakyak little more on this.


    Here is the paragraph that this quote is referring to in the post #91 above the one you quoted.

    From post #91
    "As far as your last statement, I can rewrite it in a way that perhaps you will understand the point I am trying to make. If Trump's bump stock ban helps him beat Joe Biden who made this statement on Tuesday "Joe Biden: Second Amendment Does Not Say You’re ‘Entitled’ to Own a Gun", then yes it will be a good thing he did it. Not because the infringement is good but because a Biden victory would be so much worse in the way of infringements.That also does not mean I think making these concessions is a good idea or will help Trump win and I have made my position known, and if a couple or three million more would do the same, perhaps Trump would change his tactics. One thing is certain, a Biden victory will be far worse for the 2nd Amendment than a Trump victory, and anyone who doesn't believe that has their head in the sand. Of course that is just my opinion and here is some more from the Biden article to confirm my opinion."

    Again I have never said that any infringement is good, just that the infringement would be worse if the Democrat won. I have made this point 4 or 5 different ways, you have made it clear you are not going to understand. I don't really care other than to say that what you offered in your original response to me was nothing more than your opinion because no matter how hard you try to deflect my meaning, you still have not pointed out one post where I said I support or am OK with any infringement of any citizen who has not forfeited his freedom after due process is given him.

    I will never support any restoration of any rights to violent criminals (Rapists, murderers, pedophiles, etc.) who manage to walk out of prison. This view is clearly the view of the Courts, the majority of the public and certainly LE. There is nothing in the COTUS that denies the States from punishing these scumbags with taking their lives and their freedoms. At least there isn't as of now, and in my opinion the COTUS is clear that criminals can lose those freedoms.

    You ignored it so I'll try again.
    The courts, the majority of the public and LE support unlawfully stripping away the RTKABA from a freed felon and in your eyes that renders,the 2a moot?

    Here I was,thinking all this time it would take a constitutional amendment to do that.

    The protection given by the 2a is trumped by majority opinion, court opinion, and LE opinion?

    Really?
    I think you have that backwards.


    And yes you do support infringement though you seem loathe to admit it.

    Yet you defend the infringement of stripping the RTKABA from any citizen who has committed a felony. Something not allowed by the 2a , or the COTUS.

  2. #152
    Senior Member Rep Power: 12
    Reputation: 6133
    Rep Level: PDF American
    Nakyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27th, 2016
    Location
    Under the Twister
    Posts
    4,311
    Threads
    72
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1474 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost1958 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And yes you do support infringement though you seem loathe to admit it.
    I'm glad you see that as well.

  3. #153
    Senior Member Rep Power: 4
    Reputation: 884
    Rep Level: PDF Colonist
    Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27th, 2016
    Posts
    581
    Threads
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    27 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GRCarry View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Apparently, via this discussion, the only penalty allowed for criminal acts is prison. So that, when one is out of prison, no other penalty may be assessed. Why is that?
    Nope not at all, there is the death penalty in several states and it's even used; however a trial happens, a sentence is handed down- that is that, in fact that was the way it's has been for a very long time; not so long ago some decided that OTHER'S rights were not "so important" and violated the COTUS and quite clearly.......

    That is why (the short version)

  4. #154
    Senior Member Rep Power: 10
    Reputation: 5393
    Rep Level: PDF American
    GRCarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 1st, 2016
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    3,151
    Threads
    52
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    781 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Nope not at all, there is the death penalty in several states and it's even used; however a trial happens, a sentence is handed down- that is that, in fact that was the way it's has been for a very long time; not so long ago some decided that OTHER'S rights were not "so important" and violated the COTUS and quite clearly.......

    That is why (the short version)
    So, when a pedophile gets out of prison, it's wrong to keep track of him?
    Probation isn't allowed?
    Reimbursement for damages can't be required?
    Not allowing those who committed securities fraud to ever practice again?
    TANSTAAFL - "Moon is a Harsh Mistress"
    OldVet, 30 March 2018: "But being the agreeable sort, I agree."

  5. #155
    Senior Member Rep Power: 4
    Reputation: 884
    Rep Level: PDF Colonist
    Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27th, 2016
    Posts
    581
    Threads
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    27 Post(s)
    Remind me again which of the above are RIGHTS protected by the BOR & COTUS??????

    Should a pedophile be getting out at all? Or a murderer, rapist? IF they Are in fact released, time served that is IT.....and in fact as I explained several time has been for a very , very long time. The fact some decided that other's rights are "lost" (which is asinine on it's very face) is quite recent and not allowed per the COTUS & BOR.

    I suppose some folks simply have trouble understanding Shall NOT be infringed, confuse rights with privileges OR view others as "less than themselves" , that doesn't make it right. The BOR are pre-existing long before the USA or any other country, WE (the founders to be precise) just made sure to codify these rights within the BOR & COTUS

  6. #156
    Senior Member Rep Power: 12
    Reputation: 8991
    Rep Level: PDF Constitution Protector
    Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27th, 2016
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    4,274
    Threads
    79
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    985 Post(s)
    IMO gov does not constitutionally have the,authority execute a person.

    I can find no constitutional authorization for it.

    Though I know,its,been done for a very long time.

    Should thr victim or victims family have,that right? Absolutely. Gov ? No IMO.

  7. #157
    Asst. Administrator Rep Power: 100
    Reputation: 15278
    Rep Level: PDF Bronze Member
    ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27th, 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,043
    Threads
    328
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1594 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GRCarry View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So, when a pedophile gets out of prison, it's wrong to keep track of him?
    Probation isn't allowed?
    Reimbursement for damages can't be required?
    Not allowing those who committed securities fraud to ever practice again?
    Heightened scrutiny going forward -- reasonable search standard (4A).

    Probation -- reasonable accommodation in cases where threat reduced but sentence isn't relaxed.

    Reimbursement for damages -- reasonable recompense for actual harms caused; the bare minimum, really (ie, as in the example of small-claims court for $500 thefts and similar).

    Securities business/practice licensing revocation -- it's a permissions scheme, and permissions can be granted, withheld or revoked.

    All seem reasonable to me.

    It'd be nice, though, if the statute violations for which a person gets convicted would actually specify that X, Y or Z penalties are to be implemented or are on the table. Yet, nearly none specify anything other than incarceration terms and/or fines. But myriad penalties are leveled above and beyond what's statutorily stated. Makes one wonder what wouldn't be tolerated as a penalty, given penalties are leveled above and beyond what's specified. Interesting question. And the answer probably is: whatever penalties they want to impose. Though that should be up to but excluding what's expressly denied to be fiddled with (speech, association, arms, counsel, etc).
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  8. #158
    Senior Member Rep Power: 10
    Reputation: 5393
    Rep Level: PDF American
    GRCarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 1st, 2016
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    3,151
    Threads
    52
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    781 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Heightened scrutiny going forward -- reasonable search standard (4A).

    Probation -- reasonable accommodation in cases where threat reduced but sentence isn't relaxed.

    Reimbursement for damages -- reasonable recompense for actual harms caused; the bare minimum, really (ie, as in the example of small-claims court for $500 thefts and similar).

    Securities business/practice licensing revocation -- it's a permissions scheme, and permissions can be granted, withheld or revoked.

    All seem reasonable to me.

    It'd be nice, though, if the statute violations for which a person gets convicted would actually specify that X, Y or Z penalties are to be implemented or are on the table. Yet, nearly none specify anything other than incarceration terms and/or fines. But myriad penalties are leveled above and beyond what's statutorily stated. Makes one wonder what wouldn't be tolerated as a penalty, given penalties are leveled above and beyond what's specified. Interesting question. And the answer probably is: whatever penalties they want to impose. Though that should be up to but excluding what's expressly denied to be fiddled with (speech, association, arms, counsel, etc).
    I agree with those things. But, I keep seeing comments that once one is out of jail/prison that all rights should be fully reinstated and that no more restrictions can be allowed. I believe that there can be punishments other than prison or jail.
    TANSTAAFL - "Moon is a Harsh Mistress"
    OldVet, 30 March 2018: "But being the agreeable sort, I agree."

  9. #159
    Senior Member Rep Power: 6
    Reputation: 1865
    Rep Level: PDF Green Dragon
    Siam's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 21st, 2018
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,214
    Threads
    194
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1284 Post(s)

    Quote Originally Posted by GRCarry View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So, when a pedophile gets out of prison, it's wrong to keep track of him?
    Probation isn't allowed?
    Reimbursement for damages can't be required?
    Not allowing those who committed securities fraud to ever practice again?
    The pedophile should be sentenced to jail for life with a possibility for parole. The rationale behind that is that they would only be released if deemed not a threat anymore. Currently, it does not work like that. And the way I understand it, the released pedophile now is not always "tracked" anyway. They are restricted where they can live and associate with. And they should be allowed the RTKBA's.

    Reimbursement for damages is a civil matter more so than a punitive action or criminal punishment.

    The example of securities fraud and being barred from practicing again had more so to do with licensing requirements than a criminal judgment.

    Setting all of that aside, there is a world of difference barring someone from choosing how they can protect their lives, the lives of their families, and their property vs regulatory and licensing requirements to hold a job or limiting civil damages in a settlement resulting from criminal action.

    It is not even the same topic.
    Last edited by Siam; Today at 06:26 AM.

  10. #160
    Asst. Administrator Rep Power: 100
    Reputation: 15278
    Rep Level: PDF Bronze Member
    ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27th, 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,043
    Threads
    328
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1594 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GRCarry View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with those things. But, I keep seeing comments that once one is out of jail/prison that all rights should be fully reinstated and that no more restrictions can be allowed. I believe that there can be punishments other than prison or jail.
    There surely can be.

    Trouble is, NOTHING in the statutes a person gets convicted for state those things.

    And so, in effect, an unspecified litany of punishments above and beyond the statutorily-authorized ones are placed on a table and selected from, in the average sentencing.

    Something we should think about, I'd say. 'Cause, if that's okay, then there's simply no limit to what "the system" might impose upon a person. Even if those things last for the remainder of his/her natural life.

    My key question on that is: By what standard; where is that written?

    It's not. Not done to a standard, and not effectively written anywhere. That's a problem. Above and beyond the question of whether it's cruel/unusual to punish a person for life, for a given, lesser, hardly deadly-damaging thing (which most of the so-called "felonies" these days aren't).
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  11. #161
    Senior Member Rep Power: 4
    Reputation: 884
    Rep Level: PDF Colonist
    Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27th, 2016
    Posts
    581
    Threads
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    27 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GRCarry View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with those things. But, I keep seeing comments that once one is out of jail/prison that all rights should be fully reinstated and that no more restrictions can be allowed. I believe that there can be punishments other than prison or jail.
    Selective reading perhaps?

    What IS being said (over & over again) is RIGHTS and restrictions are polar opposites, you are born with certain rights, they're NOT to be taken away , .Gov had NO authority to do so to any free person walking the streets - period. Tyranny has meaning, rights are RIGHTS, the interesting thing (to me) is that some are totally ignoring the OP and stuck on violent crimes etc. etc. etc. instead of the tens of thousands of other felonies that illegally attempt to steal Rights from freed persons.

    Where does one stand on other's rights? Only when something affects yourselves? Guess what many here unknowingly have probably committed some felony(ies) nothing violent of course or they'd know. Think about that

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •