nm, how many Dui's are excusable? One or two? Or do we wait till the offender actually kills some one? Then should we arm them?
I know a few people who were bagged for DUI in their distant past. None of them killed anyone. Two of them have unrestricted LTC-As. (because it happened way before the may 94 cutoff). IMO it is a really stupid thing to do, but I don't think anyone should be stripped of their rights for it, particularly not on their first offense.
The problem with prohibited person is it applies punitive punishment. The courts cannot opt out of applying that punishment on a case by case basis, either, unless they drop the whole case. It's basically a form of extrajudicial punishment that has minimal due process attached to it- and it's basically a life sentence, unless you get pardoned, and if it's a federal offense, you're basically screwed. (Did you know selling whale oil is a federal felony? Do you think guys selling whale oil should be prohibited persons?)
The NRA bulletin about this crap discussed gems like this...
-A licensed private investigator in MD who legally bought and own guns (or so he thought) for over a decade got busted by MD state police after they somehow or another found out that he got into a bar fight like 20 years ago and that conviction rendered him prohibited.
-A woman got bagged under lautenberg amendment because she ripped the pocket of her husband's jeans during a spat. The husband did not want to press charges but the state (VA?) had a mandatory DV law, so when the cops showed up and heard the story they were basically compelled by the law to arrest her. She got convicted of a "misdemeanor of domestic violence" and like a $50 fine or some crap. Because of lautenberg she can never legally own a firearm ever again.
There are other gems, too. BATFE trashed a family's house because they thought the prohibited person that also lived in the same house might have access to the firearms. (and the guy didn't, but they didn't care).
These laws enable abuse by government, period. All that s**t should be abolished, but I think the best gun owners can hope for save for a revolution is to get that garbage pared back so it only applies to known violent felons- eg, people who have actually hurt other people with a knife or a gun.
If the goal is to protect people from violent felons then why the f**k are the states letting these guys out in a year? Why should free people have their rights limited because of the actions of a minority?
If we don't believe in free people having rights we might as well just apply the death penalty to everything, or mandatory
deportation, because it's otherwise pointless to live in the US at that point.
-Mike
) so I thought to myself "That SOB is trying to catch people that have been drinking by seeing if they're dumb enough to stay behind him at 25MPH under the limit!" so I passed him. I got pulled over, he smelled the JD on my breath, and I told him what I drank, how many, and that I was going through a tough divorce. He followed me home and told me to be more careful in the future. Now, if that cop wanted to, he could've easily nailed me for a DUI. That ONE lapse in judgement could've caused me to lose my current job in the Air Force, I would have lost all my benefits, and I would have lost my right to own firearms. Do you honestly think that's fair? IMO, people should never be punished for what "could" happen in such a severe manner.
