Oh boy...this one's gonna get ugly

originally posted by: ElGoobero

originally posted by: TheElectricPriest

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: TheElectricPriest

If this young man was on parole, which it definitely sounds that way, he is not allowed to possess a gun.

Case closed in my opinion.

Really, however, the point of this OP was simply my surprise that there was all of this civil rights buzz around this shooting, lumping it in with so many of these senseless shootings of black men by police (which is real and is absolutely abhorrent, so let there be no mistake about my position on this particular topic).

don't give in to the media/democrat hype.
there is no war on black men. the police are not going around shooting black men all over the place all the time. that's a false narrative the democrats and media push.

young black men are at great risk at the hands of other young black men. not the police.

I agree. Hell, the statistic agree. All I meant by that was that it does happen, and if it happens once, that's one time too many. I just wanted to be firm in my position that I find unjust shooting by police to be just as terrible as they are so that the waters of this thread weren't muddied in anyway, because I do find this to be very different and yet seemingly to be treated in a similar fashion by those who call themselves local civil rights leaders. That's all...

If a person shoots at someone, police officer or not, how can it not be expected that the person could be killed by returned shots. When someone attempts to kill someone, the target usually doesn't take it lightly.

a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

So you agree that for some reasons it is fine to take away people's guns?

It might be... What is your opinion on it?

Myself I have a felony DUI... never any crashes, nobody ever hurt just 3 dui's ( I say just, but that is over a 30 year period. Not making lite of drunk driving by any means... ) but a felony none the less and lost my right to keep and bear arms...

Do you think that felony conviction deserves me to lose my right to keep and bear arms?

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey
a reply to: TheElectricPriest
Thanks - changed it.

So you agree that for some reasons it is fine to take away people's guns?

Slippery slope there. They might come for yours if you post crazy things on a conspiracy site....

That is a completely silly attempt and not a slippery slope at all. As punishment for crime you can have all kinds of rights taken away, even be imprisoned. The taking away of rights just has to follow due process. If you couldn't take away freedoms via due process, there would be no punishment possible for crimes.

originally posted by: tinner07
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

So you agree that for some reasons it is fine to take away people's guns?

It might be... What is your opinion on it?

Myself I have a felony DUI... never any crashes, nobody ever hurt just 3 dui's ( I say just, but that is over a 30 year period. Not making lite of drunk driving by any means... ) but a felony none the less and lost my right to keep and bear arms...

Do you think that felony conviction deserves me to lose my right to keep and bear arms?

I am neither judge nor lawyer.
I think though, that you have shown a long-term tendency to make poor choices when it comes to alcohol and the law. I would think that after the first or second time, you would have wised up, and either cut out the alcohol or cut out the alcohol while driving. I am imagining that most of the time you were driving in violation of the dui laws, you did not get caught, and that these were not just 3 really unlucky incidents.
It seems like alcohol is something you value very much in your life. Much more than breaking the dui laws. That might indicate to me that you might not really value laws about hunting/shooting concerning alcohol. I would not want you to have a CCW if you were going to carry after being legally impaired. Nor would I want to be in the woods with you hunting if you were impaired.
Personally, I would not live in a house with you if you had access to firearms, and wanted access to them when you were impaired. That would be my choice, of course.
If you had access to firearms like you did to vehicles, and used them while impaired with alcohol in the same pattern, I would not yell "2nd amendment" from the rooftops if a judge took away your access to firearms.

originally posted by: tinner07
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

So you agree that for some reasons it is fine to take away people's guns?

It might be... What is your opinion on it?

Myself I have a felony DUI... never any crashes, nobody ever hurt just 3 dui's ( I say just, but that is over a 30 year period. Not making lite of drunk driving by any means... ) but a felony none the less and lost my right to keep and bear arms...

Do you think that felony conviction deserves me to lose my right to keep and bear arms?

yes.

a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

If he's served his time, which includes parole, imho, then yes, he should be allowed to own a gun.

If he wasn't off parole, then no he shouldn't have a gun, or any weapon of any sort.

It really is very simple.

originally posted by: roadgravel
If a person shoots at someone, police officer or not, how can it not be expected that the person could be killed by returned shots. When someone attempts to kill someone, the target usually doesn't take it lightly.

Hopefully the suspect's bad actions before the cop shoots justify the cop's actions even though what you say might be correct it is wrong actions followed by even worst actions.

Kind of like if someone hits a person with their car. They can stop and help the person , they can speed away, or they can back up a few times to make sure there are no witnesses...