How do you feel about pardons?

This is a discussion on How do you feel about pardons? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I think that good people screw up. I did when I was younger. If they are pardoned, give them their gun rights back and don't ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 39

Thread: How do you feel about pardons?

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array luvmyglock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    636
    I think that good people screw up. I did when I was younger. If they are pardoned, give them their gun rights back and don't complain about it.
    EVIL PREVAILS WHEN GOOD MEN FAIL TO ACT.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Really I'd have to understand more about it. It's my understanding that not a whole lot of actual "pardons" from governors are given out in the first place. Also those that are, are more than likely for mistaken convictions and/or are more for non-violent offenses.

    Also with a general pardon, are all your rights automatically restored?

    I know there is a process for convicted felons who are released on parole or for completion of sentence has a petition process they can go through to have certain rights restored like voting and possession of a firearm but I understand that those petitions are often denied even though they have served their time. Does that also apply to those who receive a pardon?
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  4. #18
    VIP Member Array JimmyC4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesnowta
    Posts
    2,036
    Quote Originally Posted by retsupt99 View Post
    A pardon due to an error in the conviction...no problem, but if it were my choice, felons (depending upon the crime) would be serving looooooong sentences and no 'good time behavior' crap.

    Second time offenders wouldn't have to worry about being outside of prison. No A/C, no TV, no weightrooms, no smoking...plenty of hard labor! No work, no food!

    We could make more room in some prisons by clearing out all the death rows...immediately!

    OMO
    Following up to these comments, I think this guy has it right: sheriffjoe.com - RE-ELECT SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO - Where I Stand on the Issues

  5. #19
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,170
    I don't think anybody convicted of a violent crime should ever be pardoned,Posession of meth or crack is a felony if a person gets "clean" and has been drug free for an extended period of time and has no violent felonies then why not pardon them for overcoming their addiction.
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  6. #20
    Senior Member Array kahrcarrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    IN
    Posts
    587

    Talking

    I am against all pardons, except for the ones handed out by Gerald Ford.

  7. #21
    VIP Member
    Array Thumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    7,226
    To me the answer is really is an individual case by case answer. I don't think you can "generalize" whether pardons and gun rights being restored should or shouldn't be granted.

    But that seems to be what others have already said.
    ALWAYS carry! - NEVER tell!

    "A superior Operator is best defined as someone who uses his superior
    judgement to keep himself out of situations that would require a display of his
    superior skills."

  8. #22
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Depends on the case.

    A man in Illinois was convicted of illegally owning a handgun.

    After he was found not guilty of excessive use of force for killing a burglar that broke into his home in the middle of the night, the local prosecutor then charged him with illegal possession of a handgun because city ordinances had banned them.
    He was found guilty and is now serving time...for something that is legal in most citys and because a rabid anti-gun prosecuter was enraged that he lost his case.

    Now we have the Heller vs. D.C. desicion.


    Should he be let out and his rights restored?

    Dang straight.
    The man broke the law. Period. He deserved to be prosecuted and convicted. We, here, are meticulous as to disarming when entering places where firearms are prohibited. Why should we let people who break the law slide because of our sympathy? He knew very well possession was against the law and he chose to break the law anyway. Now he must pay the consequences.

    I am absolutely for the executive power of pardon. It is one way the executive can override miscarriages of justice either by the courts or biased juries.

    I am absolutely against restoring certain rights to convicted felons. The lifelong ban on certain rights such as gun possession and voting is part of the punishment. The fine and prison time are simply other components. Most people go through their entire lives without committing a felony. It is not hard to do.

    I can't think of a single good reason why felons should be allowed the same rights as law abiding citizens.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    2,782
    There have been more than 12 people that have been freed from prison after DNA has proved their innocence, most if not all in Dallas County. The prosecutor did not test the DNA for whatever reason and they have been wrongly imprisoned for many years. Those are definite cases where a pardon would quickly free them from jail.

    I am not one to let criminals go free but I would rather let 3 criminals go free than to convict and imprison an innocent person. The frustration and futility of trying to right a wrong conviction is unbelievable unless you have been through it. Just think of Prosecutor Nifong.
    Yoda, I am, yes.

  10. #24
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,817
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    The man broke the law. Period. He deserved to be prosecuted and convicted. We, here, are meticulous as to disarming when entering places where firearms are prohibited. Why should we let people who break the law slide because of our sympathy? He knew very well possession was against the law and he chose to break the law anyway. Now he must pay the consequences.
    Let me get this straight. An anti gun city council passed an illegal law that runs contrary to the U.S. Constitution. A burglar enters into a mans house, and he kills him right there. He gets charged with use of excessive force by an anti-gun prosecutor and the jury finds him not guilty. Now the Prosecutor finds something to bust him on, so he charges him with illegal possession of a firearm and the jury finds him guilty. The Judge, being an Illinois judge sentences that man to several years in prison.

    And you are telling me that justice prevailed?

    Wrong. That right there is a classic case for the jury to nullify. Had I been on it, it would have been.

    I am absolutely for the executive power of pardon. It is one way the executive can override miscarriages of justice either by the courts or biased juries.
    Ok. This man would be pardoned by me if I were the governor.

    I am absolutely against restoring certain rights to convicted felons. The lifelong ban on certain rights such as gun possession and voting is part of the punishment.
    A felon convicted of an illegal/immoral/unconstitutional law should have his rights restored. That is not hard to grasp is it?


    The fine and prison time are simply another components. Most people go through their entire lives without committing a felony. It is not hard to do.
    That is correct. It is not hard to do. However...lets say that some politician gets ticked off by his wife and she leaves him for a lover that she found on the Internet. As a result, he passes a law that outlaws the Internet so as to save others the pain that he experienced. He passes a law...buried in the back of some obscure bill that no body has read or even cares about, but it gets passes because no one offers any argument against it.
    Self Defense is caught responding on a bulletin board and gets charged with breaking the law. It goes to trial and people that think like Self Defense convict him, because after all, the Law is the Law.Event though you were made a felon by the stroke of a pen is it a crime worthy of jail and ruining your life?

    I can't think of a single good reason why felons should be allowed the same rights as law abiding citizens.
    I can think of dozens. But you have to be able to think out of the box.
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  11. #25
    Distinguished Member Array SubNine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Anchorage Alaska
    Posts
    1,969
    As stated before, I think pardons should be given on an individual basis. If a convicted felon was wrongfully convicted, and did not commit the crime he/she was charged with, then they should have all rights restored. If a convicted felon serves their time, their rights should be restored over a lengthy period of time, and they would have to work honestly, say 3-5 years of honest labor under close observation. I know there is no fail safe way to restore rights to felons, but why should ALL felons have their rights stripped for life?
    USMC rule # 23 of gunfighting: Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet.

    I am the God fearing, gun toting, flag waving conservative you were warned about!

  12. #26
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,817
    Anyone can be instantly turned into a "felon" by the stoke of a pen.

    To us, the good guys, we tend to think of a felon as someone that raps,plunders or pillages or someone that acts without conscience.

    Fact of the matter is, a felon can be someone that has missed paying his taxes past a certan amount of time, or forgets to renew his buisness liscence or simply owns a gun that someone on a city council decided to ban because someone might get killed with it. Handing a person some of your medicine can make you a felon.

    These people become felons by administration, and those crimes are not worthy of punishment or the loss of rights. Although some may advocate that felons NEVER get their rights restored, it is only because they dont have the mental ability of being able to think past their noses.
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  13. #27
    Member Array Texian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    West Texas
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by havegunjoe View Post
    . . .I don't feel Martha Stewart is a threat and should be denied the ability to defend herself with a gun if she wanted to do so. Her crime was not one of violence.
    I am not going to comment about the different viewpoints expressed on this thread but I would like to say that I think the example given above was not the best choice. From a CNN news article in 2004, Stewart found guilty on all counts in obstruction trial - Mar. 10, 2004 you can read this about Stuart's conviction.

    The conviction [for obstruction of justice and lying] to the government about her sale of ImClone Systems Inc. stock in December 2001.came exactly a week after U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum threw out the most serious charge against Stewart -- securities fraud -- which carried a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $1 million fine.

    The charge -- which the judge had called "novel" during the trial -- accused Stewart of using her own statements that she was innocent as a ploy to mislead investors in her company, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia.
    So here is a person (who may be guilty) which the government could not prove in a court of law that she was guilty, who was then convicted of charges that her plea of innocence was a lie and therefore "obstruction of justice."

    The judge called that "novel." I call it bizarre and one that made a travesty of our system of jurisprudence. What I see here is absurd. If they could not prove Securities Fraud against her then how then could her plea of innocence be proven a lie and therefore rise to "obstruction?"

    The government's reasoning seemed to proceed like this:

    A. You are guilty of Securities Fraud, but we can't prove it.
    B. You won't confess and keep maintaining that you are innocent.
    C. Since we know you're guilty (but can't prove it) then your plea of innocence has to be a lie and therefore constitutes obstruction.

    A government that can imprison people without proving their guilt (by using this kind of reasoning) is one to be feared.

    Was she guilty? I don't know. Can we lock people up for what we know they did even if we can't prove it? I hope that is never so. Nevertheless, how is what they did here end up being anything but that?

    I think that all laws federal and local must not violate constitutional protections and beyond that if they do not effect a society of good order and safety, then they should be changed through a democratic process and not by fiat.
    "The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." G.K. Chesterton

  14. #28
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Let me get this straight. An anti gun city council passed an illegal law that runs contrary to the U.S. Constitution. A burglar enters into a mans house, and he kills him right there. He gets charged with use of excessive force by an anti-gun prosecutor and the jury finds him not guilty. Now the Prosecutor finds something to bust him on, so he charges him with illegal possession of a firearm and the jury finds him guilty. The Judge, being an Illinois judge sentences that man to several years in prison.

    And you are telling me that justice prevailed?
    Yes. He knowingly broke the law. I don't like the fact that I can't carry in restaurants. I may get killed some day while eating because I am not carrying. But I'm not going to break the law because I respect the law.

    And just because you think a law is unconstitutional does not make it so. And your belief should not provide you lenienc or any mitigation of your crime (not that you would commit a crime.) That is why it is imperative to elect people who pass laws that are aligned with the values of the United States of America. And to remove from office those who pass laws inconsistent with our values.

    Wrong. That right there is a classic case for the jury to nullify. Had I been on it, it would have been.
    You would nullify any law you don't like!

    Ok. This man would be pardoned by me if I were the governor.
    He was indicted and found guilty. I would follow the law and he would serve his sentence. I see no miscarriage of justice here. Bad law? Absolutely. Change the law and make the change retroactive. Then, and only then, would I consider a pardon.

    A felon convicted of an illegal/immoral/unconstitutional law should have his rights restored. That is not hard to grasp is it?
    And who is the judge to determine whether the law is illegal/immoral/unconstitutional? Anthony Kennedy? The law must be respected if we are to live in a civilized society.


    That is correct. It is not hard to do. However...lets say that some politician gets ticked off by his wife and she leaves him for a lover that she found on the Internet. As a result, he passes a law that outlaws the Internet so as to save others the pain that he experienced. He passes a law...buried in the back of some obscure bill that no body has read or even cares about, but it gets passes because no one offers any argument against it.
    A lot of assumptions there. A politician cannot pass a law by himself. So now you make a bunch of assumptions that have a probability of close to zero.


    Self Defense is caught responding on a bulletin board and gets charged with breaking the law. It goes to trial and people that think like Self Defense convict him, because after all, the Law is the Law.Event though you were made a felon by the stroke of a pen is it a crime worthy of jail and ruining your life?
    It is my obligation to know the law. I never saw where ignorance of the law was a significant mitigating circumstance. The fact is there are very few ridiculous laws that catch people unaware. Sure, we can trot out the old legends of not driving cattle through downtown during Sunday afternoon but, by and large, most laws are quite reasonable.And those that are not get extraordinary media coverage.

    I can think of dozens. But you have to be able to think out of the box.
    We are a government of laws, not of men.

  15. #29
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    To us, the good guys, we tend to think of a felon as someone that raps,plunders or pillages or someone that acts without conscience.
    someome that raps...

    These people become felons by administration, and those crimes are not worthy of punishment or the loss of rights. Although some may advocate that felons NEVER get their rights restored, it is only because they dont have the mental ability of being able to think past their noses.
    If you think some crimes have penalties inconsistent with the societal damage then the law should be changed. Sentencing guidelines are established in statute. I would have no problem with certain crimes that the perpetrators might have an opportunity to have their rights restored. But a blanket amnesty for felons is not something to be considered.

  16. #30
    Member Array treksouth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Thomasville, Ga
    Posts
    108
    wow. some of you are hard on felons. I wish you were in office.

    I think if you do the time and are truly rehabilitated, or, better yet, learn from the one or two stupid mistakes you made when you were young then you should be allowed forgiveness by the state.

    In Georgia to get a pardon you must complete all conditions of your sentence and wait 5 years after your sentence is completed, and to get your gun rights you have to submit 3 letters of reference and of course not have been in any additional troubles.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. Presidential pardons
    By Coder in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: November 25th, 2011, 08:08 AM
  2. not a mod, but I feel it needs to be said.....
    By 64zebra in forum Forum News, Feedback, Problems & Comments
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: May 24th, 2010, 07:34 PM
  3. I did it and I don't know how I feel about it. . .
    By elrey718 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: January 20th, 2009, 12:05 AM
  4. Another Round Of Presidential Pardons And Guess Who Didn't Make The List?
    By CT-Mike in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: December 30th, 2008, 10:03 AM
  5. Oh man I feel bad
    By Longbow in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: October 23rd, 2007, 03:04 PM

Search tags for this page

can a convicted felon defend himself with a weapon in tx in any sircumstance

,

home protection for felons

Click on a term to search for related topics.