For clarification you support level 3 pedophiles and violent felons being the given the right to firearms?
If the offenses are heinous enough that someone is concerned about them being a danger, they should still be in prison. Then this fails to be a problem.
A stupid gun law is not going to prevent a diddler or a violent felon from getting a gun anyways; it's only going to block others who mostly intend on obeying the law.
EX: guy gets convicted of stupid horseshit 900 years ago (say a bar fight) doesn't even know he is DQed. He buys a shotgun out of uncle henrys for home
defense. A few years go by and he shoots some prick trying to break into his house where he lives with his kid and girlfriend. He gets off on self defense but
still has to eat a FELONY for felon in possession because he was ineligible to have his shotgun.
Is society's interests really served by prosecuting this guy?
I have an old internet girlfriend from 900 years ago that got busted by the feds as an accessory to bank fraud because she was used as a pawn by her abusive boyfriend and his half
brother- they needed women to cash certain checks, so they conned the ladies into being part of the scam. She fully cooperated and sent the two guys down the river, went to danbury a
couple of years. After getting out she is doing pretty well and sells real estate and practices yoga, and works for dog foster orgs and that kind of thing. So you're saying that she
shouldn't be legally entitled to defend herself with a firearm? (she is federally prohibited). She's never had a violent offense on her record, not even once.
There are thousands of people prohibited that really are no threat whatsoever, but "the lawr is the lawr".
The system is f***ing retarded.
-Mike