3 ms·

Too expensive/punitive, and note that there is an option to be restored to full citizenship after time served/restitution is made. My take on it is that if you

Too expensive/punitive, and note that there is an option to be restored to full citizenship after time served/restitution is made. My take on it is that if your judgement is so twisted that you are able to commit a felony and not be able to successfully petition for rights restoration, then you are not suited to deciding by whom the country should be governed.

cbdevidal 8mo ago
It’s political theater. Not intended to actually accomplish much except “See!? We did something! Now vote for us again.” Meanwhile, open source printers can and will just bypass it.
- WillAdams 8mo ago
  Doesn't the law include that devices which fail to implement such checks are barred from sale? >In addition, knowingly disabling or circumventing the blocking software is a misdemeanor. The inobvious thing is that that aspect of the law cannot be applied to felons or persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, since like failing to pay the tax stamp on a Class-III firearm or accessory, it would require self-incrimination, which thus far, is still illegal.
tracker1 8mo ago
Have you actually looked into what it takes to restore full citizenship in many places? In some locations it means having to get the Governor to act on your behalf. Imagine what it would take to even get in contact with the Governor of a largely populated state, let alone trying to convince them that you should have your rights restored. Your judgement is twisted if you think that's a reasonable expectation for anyone who has served their time.
- WillAdams 8mo ago
  Yes, I have experience of this, having known a person for decades who has done this --- if a person can't manage it, they shouldn't be voting, and they shouldn't be allowed to own firearms as I reasoned/rationalized above. Just to confirm your meaning --- if a person has demonstrated such poor judgement as to be convicted of a felony, and then cannot trouble themselves to then recant this judgement and argue that they are now capable of making responsible decisions, then they should be allowed to vote and own firearms despite not being willing to make an effort to state that their character has changed?
  - c22 8mo ago
    You should consider that this process varies wildly in different locales and sometimes even case by case.
  - Brian_K_White 8mo ago
    "such poor judgement as to be convicted of a felony" I think we know all we need to know.
  - tracker1 8mo ago
    So because someone gets railroaded into a plea deal that includes a felony, they should never be able to vote or protect themselves again unless they can form the connections and/or the ultra-wealth to coopt a seated governor of that state? I'd be more inclined to see an English language and American history/civics test as a requirement to vote. Not that I'm advocating for this, but it would be just as justified by your logic. If you've served your time, you've served your time... I wouldn't even mind a reasonable parole term (something up to even a decade) after release... but at least some limit on the restriction(s). I'm also opposed to private prisons for similar reasons... you shouldn't incentivize restricting/removing people's rights. If you're too much of a danger to society, you should remain locked up.
c22 8mo ago
I haven't had my firearm rights restored since I caught my (non-violent, bullied into a plea deal) felony over 20 years ago because I have not yet managed to fully pay restitution to a large insurance company. Despite having paid more than the original judgement, interest is a killer and my current balance stands at over $130k (original judgement for $33k).
- Ferret7446 8mo ago
  I feel like there is important context missing here. I don't think not paying insurance is a felony (if it is, I think it should be changed)
  - c22 8mo ago
    No, but the felony involved damage to property and so there was a civil penalty involved and where I live my criminal status is linked to whether or not I've paid that off. They did restore my voting rights after my parole was up, though, and I don't care to own a gun, so I've made peace with the situation. I was trying to get ahead of the debt for awhile but I realized that's a sucker's game and now I just pay the minimum that keeps them from confiscating parts of my paycheck or other assets.

cbdevidal 8mo ago

It’s political theater. Not intended to actually accomplish much except “See!? We did something! Now vote for us again.” Meanwhile, open source printers can and will just bypass it.

WillAdams 8mo ago
Doesn't the law include that devices which fail to implement such checks are barred from sale? >In addition, knowingly disabling or circumventing the blocking software is a misdemeanor. The inobvious thing is that that aspect of the law cannot be applied to felons or persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, since like failing to pay the tax stamp on a Class-III firearm or accessory, it would require self-incrimination, which thus far, is still illegal.

tracker1 8mo ago

Have you actually looked into what it takes to restore full citizenship in many places? In some locations it means having to get the Governor to act on your behalf. Imagine what it would take to even get in contact with the Governor of a largely populated state, let alone trying to convince them that you should have your rights restored. Your judgement is twisted if you think that's a reasonable expectation for anyone who has served their time.

WillAdams 8mo ago
Yes, I have experience of this, having known a person for decades who has done this --- if a person can't manage it, they shouldn't be voting, and they shouldn't be allowed to own firearms as I reasoned/rationalized above. Just to confirm your meaning --- if a person has demonstrated such poor judgement as to be convicted of a felony, and then cannot trouble themselves to then recant this judgement and argue that they are now capable of making responsible decisions, then they should be allowed to vote and own firearms despite not being willing to make an effort to state that their character has changed?
- c22 8mo ago
  You should consider that this process varies wildly in different locales and sometimes even case by case.
- Brian_K_White 8mo ago
  "such poor judgement as to be convicted of a felony" I think we know all we need to know.
- tracker1 8mo ago
  So because someone gets railroaded into a plea deal that includes a felony, they should never be able to vote or protect themselves again unless they can form the connections and/or the ultra-wealth to coopt a seated governor of that state? I'd be more inclined to see an English language and American history/civics test as a requirement to vote. Not that I'm advocating for this, but it would be just as justified by your logic. If you've served your time, you've served your time... I wouldn't even mind a reasonable parole term (something up to even a decade) after release... but at least some limit on the restriction(s). I'm also opposed to private prisons for similar reasons... you shouldn't incentivize restricting/removing people's rights. If you're too much of a danger to society, you should remain locked up.

c22 8mo ago

I haven't had my firearm rights restored since I caught my (non-violent, bullied into a plea deal) felony over 20 years ago because I have not yet managed to fully pay restitution to a large insurance company. Despite having paid more than the original judgement, interest is a killer and my current balance stands at over $130k (original judgement for $33k).

Ferret7446 8mo ago
I feel like there is important context missing here. I don't think not paying insurance is a felony (if it is, I think it should be changed)
- c22 8mo ago
  No, but the felony involved damage to property and so there was a civil penalty involved and where I live my criminal status is linked to whether or not I've paid that off. They did restore my voting rights after my parole was up, though, and I don't care to own a gun, so I've made peace with the situation. I was trying to get ahead of the debt for awhile but I realized that's a sucker's game and now I just pay the minimum that keeps them from confiscating parts of my paycheck or other assets.