The NRA Wants Ex-Felons To Have Guns But Not Voting Rights

[SecularMotion]

LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY — The National Rifle Association wants convicted felons to be able to purchase firearms, yet its leaders are lambasting efforts to restore voting rights to the same people.

At the NRA’s annual meeting on Friday, Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, the most prominent leader of the powerful gun lobby, criticized recent efforts to end the disenfranchisement of former felons in states across the country. He claimed that the reforms were all made in order to get Clinton elected president:

There’s no limit as to how far the elites will go to put Hillary into the White House. They’re even allowing convicted felons the right to vote, including violent rapists and murderers. Sounds outrageous but it’s true. The Democratic-led Maryland General Assembly did it for 44,000 ex-cons. In Virginia, Democratic Governor Terry McAullife, Hillary’s longtime bag man, did it for 206,000 convicted felons. Tentacles of the Clinton machine are out registering those felons right now. They’re releasing them and then they’re registering them. Heck, when they sign their release papers, they might as well, at the prison door, be standing there giving them a Hillary Clinton bumper sticker. It’s unbelievable.

Chris Cox, the group’s chief lobbyist, also called out Clinton and Democrats who have expressed support for allowing citizens who have completed their sentences to vote.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/05/22/3780685/nra-wants-ex-felons-guns-not-voting-rights/

[gejohnston]

1. I miss the gun part,

although Canada and Germany allow nonviolent felons to own guns once they finish their time. Those are countries that view gun ownership as a privilege and not a right. I also think the Gun Control Act's definition of "mental defective" should be modernized. Someone committed for anorexia thirty years ago should not have a life time prohibition. If you are a danger to yourself or others, then you shouldn't be out of the hospital unsupervised.
Most states allow excons to vote.
Personally? I think Vermont and Maine have the right idea. At least Wyoming is moving in the right direction.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/felon-voting-rights.aspx

As for Wayne's claim, may or may not be something to it. I have seen the claim that felons tend to vote Democratic. I have no idea if it is true or not, since I have never seen a poll on the subject, just claims for partisan sources.

[beevul]

2. Oh this is rich.

Last edited Sun May 22, 2016, 09:21 PM - Edit history (1)

Former inmates who lost their voting rights, many of them for non-violent drug offenses, have told ThinkProgress they feel like “less than a citizen” and “less than human.”

Oh this is rich. Just imagine the absolute fun you'd be having with this, if those former inmates had said the same thing about a constitutionally protected right - gun rights.

They'd go from being the poor disenfranchised former felons, to the "ammosexuals" whos decisions and judgment can't be trusted, all with a switch of the topic.

[jimmy the one]

6. armed ex felons might take guns to the voting booth

beevul: Just imagine the absolute fun you'd be having with this, if those former inmates had said the same thing about a constitutionally protected right - gun rights. .. They'd go from being the poor disenfranchised former felons, to the "ammosexuals" whos decisions and judgment can't be trusted, all with a switch of the topic.

There's a distinction between violent ex-felons & non violent ex-felons. Had it been non violent ex-felons I generally wouldn't care if they owned guns if they passed a background check (ha) and it's legal in their state, I don't think perjury should disallow one from owning a gun. But, felons with past convictions of violent crimes should never be able to purchase a firearm, with scant exceptions on a case by case.

Georgia Says Ex-Cop Convicted of Sexually Assaulting a Woman With His Gun Gets to Own a Gun
Despite Krauss' sexual assault conviction, the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles restored his right to carry a firearm in July 2013.
This is coming to light now {2014} because the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published an exposé of the Georgia courts' tendency to restore gun privileges to convicted felons. The Journal-Constitution counted 358 violent felons who were able to regain gun rights in a six-year period, 32 who killed someone and 44 who were convicted of sex crimes.

So address the problem above rather than giddily tap dance about it, going slappy happy about your specious premise; these violent people should not have access to firearms yet the nra likely will not complain about most all felons gaining back their alleged gun rights, yet nra will have a big problem with them being able to vote. What far right wing hypocrisy.
What are they really afraid of? that these armed ex felons might bring their guns to the election booth?

What does someone have to do in order to lose gun rights in Georgia? Apparently, sexually assaulting a woman at gunpoint—even threatening to anally penetrate her with the gun—is not enough... shocking case of Dennis Krauss, a now former police officer who was convicted of sexually assaulting a woman in 1999 who had called 911 to complain that her husband was beating her .. instead of helping the woman, Krauss threatened to take her to jail if she didn't have sex with him.
Krauss checked them into a motel room while the woman sat terrified, thinking she was under arrest, in the car. "I had to, I was afraid to leave, he, you know, he is a police officer; ?you don't just leave," the victim explained. Once he had her in the motel room, according to the 2003 appeals court decision, "Krauss took his gun from his gun belt and told the victim he wanted to have anal sex with her with the gun." Then he pushed her, pulled off her pants, and raped her. http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/08/25/georgia_restores_gun_rights_to_a_former_cop_convicted_of_sexually_assaulting.html

[beevul]

7. "There's a distinction between violent ex-felons & non violent ex-felons."

There's a distinction between violent ex-felons & non violent ex-felons.

Not in federal law, that I'm aware of. I've never seen an anti-gunner make that claim before.

You would be the first anti-gunner I have seen who would make that claim.

Ever.

Had it been non violent ex-felons I generally wouldn't care if they owned guns if they passed a background check (ha) and it's legal in their state, I don't think perjury should disallow one from owning a gun.

I'm pretty sure few to none of the bansalot regular(s) would agree there.

[jimmy the one]

8. USP (hint, not the postal service)

jimmy previous: There's a distinction between violent ex-felons & non violent ex-felons.

beevul: Not in federal law, that I'm aware of.

Find below the prisons which would hold violent criminals vs those convicted only of perjury. Then burg3 (burglary 3rd degree) and generally property crimes.

Most United States Penitentiaries (USPs) are high-security facilities, which have highly secured perimeters with walls or reinforced fences, multiple and single-occupant cell housing, the highest staff-to-inmate ratio, and close control of inmate movement. The most notable facility in the federal prison system is Florence ADX, the federal supermax prison in Florence, Colorado, which holds inmates who are considered the most dangerous and in need of the tightest controls.
USP Atlanta, USP Leavenworth, USP Lompoc, and USP Marion are medium-security facilities. USP Hazelton is in the process of adding a medium-security facility to its existing high-security unit. USP Marion contains a highly restrictive Communication Management Unit, which holds inmates under stricter controls.
Many USPs include minimum-security satellite camps on the same property and under the same administration as the higher-security unit(s). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._federal_prisons

beevul: I've never seen an anti-gunner make that claim before. You would be the first anti-gunner I have seen who would make that claim. Ever.

So? I'm sure there's a solid proportion of gun control advocates who feel about the same way I do. It's not granting exfelons any individual rkba, just that they could own a gun if they wanted, if they were reformed citizens with civil rights restored.

beevul's premise: Just imagine the absolute fun you'd be having with this, if those former inmates had said the same thing about a constitutionally protected right - gun rights. .. They'd go from being the poor disenfranchised former felons, to the "ammosexuals" whos decisions and judgment can't be trusted, all with a switch of the topic.

[beevul]

9. Context is important, james.

Find below the prisons which would hold violent criminals vs those convicted only of perjury. Then burg3 (burglary 3rd degree) and generally property crimes.

James, when I said "Not in federal law, that I'm aware of", I was referring to the fact that whether a felon is of the violent variety or the non-violent variety, there seems to be no distinction in federal law, when it comes to how ones civil rights are curtailed after one serves ones sentence.

I wouldn't have thought that context needed explaining to you given the topic of discussion, but you responded with an irrelevant blurb about how and where they're kept, and here we are.

So? I'm sure there's a solid proportion of gun control advocates who feel about the same way I do.

I dare you to put your money where your mouth is, and go ask in bansalot how they'd feel about it. I woupld do it myself, but I got blocked from the group for a deleted post, the content of which was never seen by the host that hours later deleted it.

[jimmy the one]

12. con about cons

beevul: Context is important, james... when I said "Not in federal law, that I'm aware of", I was referring to the fact that whether a felon is of the violent variety or the non-violent variety, there seems to be no distinction in federal law, when it comes to how ones civil rights are curtailed after one serves ones sentence.

You whine about context - where in secmo's OP did he delimit to federal offenders &/or policy? His OP clearly stated VA & Md having restored voting rights to a quarter million ex-cons.

beevul's strange premise, aka con about cons: Oh this is rich. Just imagine the absolute fun you'd be having with this, if those former inmates had said the same thing about a constitutionally protected right - gun rights.
They'd go from being the poor disenfranchised former felons, to the "ammosexuals" whos decisions and judgment can't be trusted, all with a switch of the topic.

beevul: You realize you're addressing a statement by me, about federal law, with a screed about state law, right?

You refined it to federal law only after my first post. You noted only to alleged constitutional rkba but did not refine it.

[jimmy the one]

10. addendum to rkba by exfelons

previous me: There's a distinction between violent ex-felons & non violent ex-felons.

beevul: Not in federal law, that I'm aware of.

From another thread, idaho, all seem like felonies to me, except maybe reckless discharge of a firearm, since could be accidental:

What convictions can result in a lifetime ban on carrying a firearm?

Idaho Code 18-310 lists many crimes that prohibit a person’s civil right to bear arms from being restored. Those crimes are Treason; Aggravated Assault, Aggravated Battery, Assault with the intent to commit a serious felony; Battery with the intent to commit a serious felony; Burglary; Domestic Battery (felony); intimidating a witness; injury to a child; Sexual abuse of a child; lewd conduct; enticing children (felony); forcible sexual penetration; crime against nature; indecent exposure (felony); sexual exploitation of a child; rape; kidnapping; child abuse; cannibalism; mayhem; unlawful possession of a firearm; rescuing prisoners; escape; robbery; felony level drug charges; threats against state officials of any branch of government; discharging a firearm at a home or occupied building or vehicle; possession or using a bomb or explosive; manslaughter or murder. Attempts, conspiracies or solicitation for any of the named crimes is included.

Can I get my firearm rights back?

A person can apply to have their firearm rights restored after five years of completion of all prison time, probation or parole. This application goes to the Commission of Pardons and Parole. That commission will not consider a person’s civil rights to possess a weapon if they’ve been convicted of treason, murder or voluntary manslaughter. http://cdapress.com/article_89d9b050-257f-11e6-8f71-738e07944ea5.html

[beevul]

11. You realize you're addressing a statement by me...

You realize you're addressing a statement by me, about federal law, with a screed about state law, right?

[sarisataka]

3. So you believe

Felons should have gun and voting rights restored?

[Straw Man]

4. "Paying your debt to society" rings hollow ...

... on both ends, apparently. The gist of the accusation seems to be "Why, they're just as hypocritical as we are!"

This is what the NRA-ILA says about restoration of gun rights:

"Members prohibited from possessing firearms and ammunition seeking advice regarding the restoration of their rights/pardons may be able to have their rights restored depending on the nature of their conviction and the state in which they reside, but should keep in mind that the process is difficult and will likely require the assistance of local legal counsel."

--https://www.nraila.org/articles/20111209/restoration-of-firearms-rightspardons

[ileus]

5. If you've paid your debt to society you should have all your rights.

It's the progressive thing to do....and support.