of "firepower" for civilian self defence. There will soon be a DA Cap and BAll 6 gun, which can be Fed Exed to ANYONE, and felons can own it. The way that I will show owners to load it will make it one bad assed choice for defence, too. The cylinders will be proofed for use with smokeless powder, you see.
oh, no, regular black powder primers is the design. However, if I see some advantage to 209's, I might switch. Probably not, tho, due to felons not being able to have such primers.
As a marketing gimmick to said demographic I can see it.
But were I in a similar situation with a record I would simply illegally carry a conventional pistol.
It's not like any carry permits would be issued for use outside your residence, and NO self defense shoot will ever be justified for a felon, so why bother trying to work within the law?
I can see where you might be able to make a buck or two off the chumps who don't know any better.
Of course it would be justified. I can use a club or a knife, justifiably, so naturally can do same with a gun that's legal for me to own. how many CCW now, as vs keep it in car, biz, or home, hmmm? Why risk a 10 year bit, when you can have FINE performance, legally. Felons can LEGALLY carry OPENLY, cap and ball, in MANY states, too. Can legally carry concealed, cap and ball, in Alaska and Vt, ya know. If you kill, even if self defense, while committing a felony, that's MURDER ONE, should the prosecutor choose to charge you with it, and most probably would.
More like millions of $, bud. There's 10 million felons who are done with their "paper", 3 million more on paper, 2 mill in prison, 1 mill in county jails, and 1/2 mill more get arrested every year. There's also the MISDEMEANOR guys who can't have a gun, due to domestic violence convictions. There's also the guys who have a nut jacket, who have dishonorable discharges, who ain't 21 yet, foreign nationals, etc. My cut will be 5% of retail, and the price, in stainless steel will be $500 for the DA, $400 for the side by side, $600 for the o/u rifle shotgun combo. $175 for the single shot, in rifle or 12 ga, and $75 for the interchangable barrel.
There's 10 million felons who are done with their "paper", 3 million more on paper, 2 mill in prison, 1 mill in county jails, and 1/2 mill more get arrested every year.
Actually Andy I have no beef with ex-cons who have done their time having cap-n-ball guns. And as long as they behave themselves that’s fine. And yes, you can get quite good with a BP revolver.
In fact Andy, you could do well at the cowboy games if you practice a lot. They have a cap-n-ball section and that would be a good avenue for you to practice and get some notary again. Nothing wrong with that.
I actually don't have a problem with ex-cons having even regular firearms. I know that's going to be seen as crazy by some, but I honestly believe that if a man is considered safe enough to be restored to society, he should be completely restored. One of my brothers took a joyride in a corvette in 1966, and hasn't been able to legally own a firearm, vote, etc, for nearly half a century now because of it. To me, that's excessive by a long ways, and frankly there's no doubt in my mind that he'd be a better citizen if we'd just restore his full citizenship.
My take on it is simple - if a man shows such a pattern of violent behavior that he can't be trusted in society with a firearm, he can't be trusted in society at all. The way we do it now, with the resulting millions of "partial" citizens, we've ended up with millions of people that, even if they want to, can't have a real stake in the american dream. Sounds trite perhaps, but when we make someone a lifetime outsider, we shouldn't be surprised when they spend their life acting like an outsider.
Too many guys made felons for no reason but the "man" wanted to charge higher fines than what is legal for a misdemeanor.
I had one such come out and tell me once that since he was forced to commit a felony to even be able to defend his family, what reason does he have to not commit other crimes (like snort coke, which was his big no-no)?
Problem is he's not a law abiding citizen. With him mentioning that he's willing to shoot an innocent person in the back I don't think I would feel comfortable allowing him to carry even a toothpick.
Well, looking a bit into his background, he's been a naughty boy. But I did not see any violent offenses (though I may have missed some), and even his arrests for gun-related charges, and his last one, which judging by the statements given he could have been charged with terrorism, in all those cases, despite all the talk of shooting it out with the cops, shooting down police helicopters, and the fact he had stolen quite a few of his wife's guns, he was quite meek.
I'd say he is a nonviolent offender with a bad case of battleship mouth/rowboat ass disease.
I'm in agreement with John in AR on this one. If you've done your time and have been released, then you should be a free man. If you can't be trusted, then why are you not still locked up?
Regardless of my personal feelings about Gunkid, if he did the time, then he should have all his rights back - including the right to bear arms. Even though I personally would prefer he did not have that right. (based on the empty threats and all) But you have to remove the personal feelings from the equation.
Either he's done his time and deserves to be out and is not a threat, or he should still be in jail. It really is that simple.
Though, I do believe, at some point behavior does establish a pattern that should result in permanent lock up. Habitual repeat offenders should run out of second chances at some point and be permanently locked up - or worse.
I apologize if I used the wrong wording in my post, my ignorance of the proper term runneth over.
So just for the sake of debate most here believe since someone has been released from incarceration then they should have complete freedom and full rights restored.
This brings up some interesting subjects, what about pedophiles, perhaps they are a different matter all together.
Just wondering out load.
Not at all, really. I'm in agreement with Aslan on this part of it - if they're not safe enough to be released into society, they shouldn't be released into society; whether they're a rapist (pedophiles included), murderer, whatever.
If I were king, parolees would initially live in designated housing - halfway house or whatever we want to call them. And the kicker would be this: the parole board members would live at least part time (one week a month, or whatever) in that same housing. They're the ones saying that these parolees are safe to be out among us, so let them back up that stance by sharing their own living space with them. If they're not willing to live with the parolees, they shouldn't force the rest of us to.
But once an ex-con is deemed not a threat and been released, let them really be that, an EX-con. As long as they don't hurt anyone, let them have their lives back. We'd have more examples of genuine rehabilitation, and one less category of "us vs. them" at that point, and that'd be a good thing imo.
No problem. Discourse/discussion is one of the things that separates us from the lower animals, and a big part of what shows us the flaws in our logic & assumptions (mine included); no ruffled feathers here. :beer:
whatver happened to rule of LAW and Contitution, hmm? nothing in US law allows you to hold a man in prison once he's done the time. no holding him cause you THINK he's a danger. change the sentencing laws if you don't like it. go ahead, get more cops shot. when guys know that they'll never get out, many more of them will kill to escape.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Firearm Forums - Arms Locker
168.3K posts
4.9K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to all firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!