3rd Circuit Case - Range v Atty General Non-Violent Misdemeanor as a Prohibitor

[Inigoes]

I dont disaagree with you that way things are currently. I actually agree with you. But what that tells us is 2 things. 1st If someone goes to prison its most likely better for society to keep them there in its current form.
Second and more importantly our system is broken especially prisons and we need to fix that. No its not an easy answer and I havent the slightest clue where to even begin. But this is something we should be looking into. Prison was meant to reform and it doesnt. So what else can we do. Again if we cant trust them with a weapon how can we trust them to walk amongst us and our Wives and Children.

Prison all throughout human history is a way to segregate bad people, from the good.

The term "reform" was created to make the compassionate feel better about putting bad people in a bad place, hoping some good will come from it.

 

[RFBfromDE]

Prison all throughout human history is a way to segregate bad people, from the good.

The term "reform" was created to make the compassionate feel better about putting bad people in a bad place, hoping some good will come from it.

Quakers are crackers!

 

[KingClown]

Prison all throughout human history is a way to segregate bad people, from the good.

The term "reform" was created to make the compassionate feel better about putting bad people in a bad place, hoping some good will come from it.

We are smarter with more Tech now. Maybe we should be looking into ways to actually reform people. Otherwise again if someone is convicted of a particularly violent crime or a violent crime twice we just leave them there.
If we cant trust them with a fire arm we should not be trusting them to walk amongst us. They are still dangerous and deadly even without a gun. The mass STABBING in Autrailia shows us that.

 

[KingClown]

We?

"We" need to preserve the rights of citizens as intended by the Founding Fathers.

The rest is up to The State to figure out how to "reform" prisons.

We as a society. That may be pushing our reps to do something while they still remotely pretend to represent us. WE can change the system. The founding of this country proved it. We didn't like a system so we built an entire country to change it. WE can absolutely push for reform. WE just collectively need to get our poop together.
If WE dont want that then it reverts back to what we have now which I think is pretty obvious none of us are very happy with what we have now.

 

[Inigoes]

We are smarter with more Tech now. Maybe we should be looking into ways to actually reform people. Otherwise again if someone is convicted of a particularly violent crime or a violent crime twice we just leave them there.
If we cant trust them with a fire arm we should not be trusting them to walk amongst us. They are still dangerous and deadly even without a gun. The mass STABBING in Autrailia shows us that.

Are we?

Prison reform needs to change more than what happens inside the gates. Laws need to change to so that those returned to society can work in white collar positions if they possess the credentials, so on and so forth.

 

[BurkeM]

"Reform" was and still is a total myth. Prison reform=

Prisons have only been used as the primary punishment for criminal acts in the last few centuries. Far more common earlier were various types of corporal punishment, public humiliation, penal bondage, and banishment for more severe offenses, as well as capital punishment. All of which occur today in other countries.

The concept of incarceration was presented circa 1750 as a more humane form of punishment than corporal and capital punishment. They originally were designed as a way for criminals to participate in religious self-reflection and self-reform as a form of penance, hence the term penitentiary.

It's never been effective on any sale, despite some individual cases out of hundreds of millions of inmates.

--------------
Perhaps we should emulate the Socialist systems, and put convicted criminals in Re-education Camp, with 12 hours of therapy, social morality training, and hard labor.

 

[BurkeM]

Under the history and tradition of the Second Amendment, non-violent (convicted persons) should not lose their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.


PHILADELPHIA (December 28, 2021) — The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced the filing of an important brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in the case of Bryan Range v. Att’y General of the U.S., a case challenging the government’s lifetime ban on firearms possession as applied to a person who was convicted of a non-violent misdemeanor. FPC’s brief, joined by FPC Action Foundation (formerly named Firearms Policy Foundation), can be found at FPCLaw.org.

In 1995, Bryan Range was convicted in a Pennsylvania state court for making a false statement to obtain food stamps assistance, a class one misdemeanor. And under that conviction for a non-violent crime, he not only served no time in jail, but he made restitution for the crime. Range has been a peaceable citizen since, has been gainfully employed, and a family man, but because of the conviction twenty-six years ago, he is unconstitutionally banned forever from possessing and protecting himself and his family with firearms, a fundamental right protected by the Second Amendment.

 

[Boats]

I’ve always figured that enough would be illegal, trivial things but with raised penalties, so that .gov, at its discretion, could find a way to prohibit anyone. The 3 felonies per day theory.

And the .gov attorney in this case seems to agree with the theory. Jaywalking. What else? next? Now?

and they also note that no other right, speech religion protest search etc, is so limited. Seems Scalia and Thomas view of a 2nd tier right was correct.

I realize that as we talk among ourselves here, we’re all preaching to the choir.

This.