A DUI in Pennsylvania could cost you your Second Amendment rights

[Marine Cpl]

says the guy who’s OK with featureless rifles, get off your high horse

Who said I was okay?

 

[Marine Cpl]

that’s the only intelligent thing you’ve said so far

It’s the only thing I’ve said if you can read and follow along. Look. I get it that you don’t like that I called you out on your hypocrisy for chiding someone for bending over to gun laws like you do. But let’s move past that like men and stick to the issue at hand. And that issue is that free men have rights. Even if they served a prison sentence.

 

[Bigfoot]

As I have been thinking about this a little bit.

I do believe after paying a debt to society or whatever all rights should be restored in most cases.

But, except for repeat offenders. There has to be a line in the sand at some point.
Most everyone is capable of making bad decisions. Shit happens, that's life. If they learn from their mistake, good.

But I do have a problem with repeat offenders. With them, I do not care about their rights to put it honestly.

For example, Both my sister and my friend were killed by repeat DWI offenders.
In my friend's case, the guy's driver's license was revoked at the time because of his previous DWI.

There is a guy that lives down the road from me that went to prison for almost 2 years.
But IIRC it took 5 or 6 DWI convictions for that to happen.

I drink my fair share of beer. Someone might say too much, or I should say too often.
But I never ever under any circumstance drive after drinking. It's not hard to do and I live in a rural area.

 

[Marine Cpl]

As I have been thinking about this a little bit.

I do believe after paying a debt to society or whatever all rights should be restored in most cases.

But, except for repeat offenders. There has to be a line in the sand at some point.
Most everyone is capable of making bad decisions. Shit happens, that's life. If they learn from their mistake, good. But I do have a problem with repeat offenders. With them, I do not care about their rights to put it honestly.

For example, Both my sister and my friend were killed by repeat DWI offenders.
In my friend's case, the guy's driver's license was revoked at the time because of his previous DWI.

There is a guy that lives down the road from me that went to prison for almost 2 years.
But IIRC it took 5 or 6 DWI convictions for that to happen.

I drink my fair share of beer. Someone might say too much, or I should say too often.
But I never ever under any circumstance drive after drinking. It's not hard to do and I live in a rural area.

Repeat offenders should be back in jail. No? After release they should be on probation with no rights for a predetermined amount of time. If they continue to do the same crime, then they shouldn’t be back in prison. No? Or should they be released with all rights restored except gun rights?

 

[Acer-m14]

where are the laws of banning buying alcohol / drugs after a DUI / DWI conviction when your released ??

get out of jail off to Craigslist to buy a car .. cash n drive away

 

[Marine Cpl]

I rest my case.

S-2361A Reported

S-2361A, Categorizes hate crimes as serious offenses in relation to possession of firearms, has been Reported. Based upon the current schedule I believe it will be voted on in the Senate next week.

nygunforum.com

 

[Darth]

Well here is some more appeal to emotion.
A very good friend of mine was also killed by a drunk driver.
He was hit and killed at an intersection while going home on his Harley.

My sister left behind 2 young daughters, my friend left behind 4 of his kids.
Yeah, you know what you can do with your appeal to emotion fucking bullshit.

I hate drunk drivers... I do not care about their fucking rights if they are responsible for killing innocent people
and destroying families. If it were up to me it would be an eye for an eye. Then the other people wouldn't have to worry about the repeat offenders.

Fuck, last spring I come home after work and there is a truck on its roof in my front yard.
Yep, he was drunk...

But I'm just appealing to emotion grrrrr... No, you couldn't be more wrong.
I'm sharing my life experiences and why I do not give one fuck about their rights.
My sister and my friend no longer have rights anymore.

I am known for getting really nasty if I see someone that's hammered thinking they are going to just drive off.
I have gotten into fistfights over it... And I hold my head high for doing so. I know first hand what tragedy may happen and that does sit well with me.

A couple of funerals will have that effect.

I'm not sure if you're aware, but this is strengthening my argument.

"And 26 families from Sandy Hook have no kids anymore. :'( Gun owners can burn in hell."

No thanks.

 

[spat]

Sure enough, Doesn't have to do with anything I've mentioned though, but it's nice to know you agree with him. I've never brought up any specifics other than careless drunk drivers that end up killing people are not people I give a shit about.

I don't care about 99% of people, but if anyone in America is having their rights violated, then *my* rights are in danger, and I care very much about that.

Just like this coronavirus. I don't have a great love for the people of Wuhan China, but the idea that the government response to a deadly outbreak might be to lock me in a city with 10 million infected people scares the shit out of me.

And if you think "that's China, it can't happen here" you're fooling yourself.

 

[Elwood]

It’s the only thing I’ve said if you can read and follow along. Look. I get it that you don’t like that I called you out on your hypocrisy for chiding someone for bending over to gun laws like you do. But let’s move past that like men and stick to the issue at hand. And that issue is that free men have rights. Even if they served a prison sentence.

Being forced to comply with an unconstitutional law and willingly doing so are completely different circumstances no matter how you want to twist words over the internet, no hipocracy here pal, and I couldn’t care less over your supposed calling me out, an anonymous person on the internet means nothing in my day to day life, Cheers.

 

[Deplorable Me]

Some of these people who write and pass these laws are drunk or stoned on the job. Others are that stupid.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Being forced to comply with an unconstitutional law and willingly doing so are completely different circumstances no matter how you want to twist words over the internet, no hipocracy here pal, and I couldn’t care less over your supposed calling me out, a blowhard on the internet means nothing in my day to day life, Cheers.

No they aren’t. No one forced you to buy a pistol through a FFL, buy a low capacity magazine, submit through a search, and get permission from the government to carry one. You could have bought one from the back of a truck or buy an 80 percent Glock or 1911 and carried one illegally just like the guy who bought an 80 percent AR lower and built an SBR.

 

[Bigfoot]

Drunk drivers are generally repeat offenders. If you do not believe me just read your home town police blotter.
You will see more times than not it is often their 2nd or 3rd one. That is a big problem I have with them.

When you consider the severe penalty that someone has to pay for a DWI conviction even on the first offense...
Arrested, Court appearances, Loss of driver's license, Fines, Cost of an attorney, GACASA, Interlock devise, Auto insurance rates go up, a criminal record that will negatively affect them in other areas of their lives... etc.
And after all of that, in most cases, they will do it again and again.

What I am getting at is this... When / if someone loses their rights after making poor decisions over and over like that. Which puts the general public at unnecessary risk. I will show as much concern for their rights as they do driving drunk on the same roads that I, my family, and my friends use.

I along with others have grieved hard for the unnecessary loss of loved ones.
So yea, I am biased toward drunk drivers. Fuck them... I am not talking about the guy who has a few after work.
I am talking about the repeat offender that drives when he / she is hammered.

You want to know how I know in this thread who has not experienced what I and others have.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Drunk drivers are generally repeat offenders. If you do not believe me just read your home town police blotter.
You will see more times than not it is often their 2nd or 3rd one. That is a big problem I have with them.

When you consider the severe penalty that someone has to pay for a DWI conviction even on the first offense...
Arrested, Court appearances, Loss of driver's license, Fines, Cost of an attorney, GACASA, Interlock devise, Auto insurance rates go up, a criminal record that will negatively affect them in other areas of their lives... etc.
And after all of that, in most cases, they will do it again and again.

What I am getting at is this... When / if someone loses their rights after making poor decisions over and over like that. Which puts the general public at unnecessary risk. I will show as much concern for their rights as they do driving drunk on the same roads that I, my family, and my friends use.

I along with others have grieved hard for the unnecessary loss of loved ones.
So yea, I am biased toward drunk drivers. Fuck them... I am not talking about the guy who has a few after work.
I am talking about the repeat offender that drives when he / she is hammered.

You want to know how I know in this thread who has not experienced what I and others have.

So why not just revoke their license to drive permanently after a 2nd or 3rd offense? Keep them in jail? Anything else. What does removing only the right to keep and bear arms but leaving other rights intact have to do with anything?

Come on Bigfoot. You are telling me that it’s okay to remove a 2A right for a totally unrelated offense because you were connected to a victim. That’s like me telling you that it’s okay to remove rights to free speech because someone assaulted my wife.

You are admitting that you see no reason to look at this objectively without emotion and god damned anyone else’s rights including mine and your own rights that are being eroded due to setting precedent because you were related to a victim of a crime.

 

[Bigfoot]

So why not just revoke their license to drive permanently after a 2nd or 3rd offense? Keep them in jail? Anything else. What does removing only the right to keep and bear arms but leaving other rights intact have to do with anything?

Come on Bigfoot. You are telling me that it’s okay to remove a 2A right for a totally unrelated offense because you were connected to a victim. That’s like me telling you that it’s okay to remove rights to free speech because someone assaulted my wife.

You are admitting that you see no reason to look at this objectively without emotion and god damned anyone else’s rights including mine and your own rights that are being eroded due to setting precedent because you were related to a victim of a crime.

No that's not what I am saying. I am not copping out I just am having a hard time trying to get at what I am trying to get at. I said in a previous post that "ALL" rights should be restored IMO after the debt to society has been paid.

You are right about "totally unrelated offense" I agree with that.
WTF does one have to do with the other? facepalm.

I just despise drunk drivers... Not necessarily the ones that made a wrong decision got caught and learned from it.
My problem is with the repeat offenders that just keep on keeping on.

No, I will repeat, NO I do not think that someone should lose their 2a rights because of a DWI conviction.
Now if it is a felony DWI conviction. As you know that makes them a restricted person regardless of what the felony
they committed.

1.) No, a person should not lose their 2A rights or any other rights because of a first offense DWI... IMO

2.) If it is a felony DWI they lose their right to own a gun or vote as with any other felony.
IMO, once their debt is paid ALL rights should be restored.

3.) Do I hate repeat DWI offenders who will continue to put innocent lives in danger? ... Absolutely.
Do I give a crap about the consequences someone has to pay if they kill someone because of their repeated breaking the law? ... Absolutely not.

I have never been charged with a DWI and have been driving for 40 years now.
I would most likely be considered somewhat of a heavy drinker.
It's not hard to do your thing and not drive intoxicated. I manage to do just that.

There it is in a nutshell.

In addition, as much as I despise drunk drivers. I do think that the BAC is to low.
I used to stop at the bar and have a couple of beers on the way home from work.
I do not agree that 2 or 3 beers makes a person impaired.

I do think that sobriety checkpoints are unconstitutional and should not be a thing.

Do I see things a little differently than someone that has not suffered at the hands of a drunk driver.
Of fucking course I do... How could I not... I'm fucking human... I'm not perfect.

 

[Marine Cpl]

No that's not what I am saying. I am not copping out I just am having a hard time trying to get at what I am trying to get at. I said in a previous post that "ALL" rights should be restored IMO after the debt to society has been paid.

You are right about "totally unrelated offense" I agree with that.
WTF does one have to do with the other? facepalm.

I just despise drunk drivers... Not necessarily the ones that made a wrong decision got caught and learned from it.
My problem is with the repeat offenders that just keep on keeping on.

No, I will repeat, NO I do not think that someone should lose their 2a rights because of a DWI conviction.
Now if it is a felony DWI conviction. As you know that makes them a restricted person regardless of what the felony
they committed.

1.) No, a person should not lose their 2A rights or any other rights because of a first offense DWI... IMO

2.) If it is a felony DWI they lose their right to own a gun or vote as with any other felony.
IMO, once their debt is paid ALL rights should be restored.

3.) Do I hate repeat DWI offenders who will continue to put innocent lives in danger? ... Absolutely.
Do I give a crap about the consequences someone has to pay if they kill someone because of their repeated breaking the law? ... Absolutely not.

I have never been charged with a DWI and have been driving for 40 years now.
I would most likely be considered somewhat of a heavy drinker.
It's not hard to do your thing and not drive intoxicated. I manage to do just that.

There it is in a nutshell.

In addition, as much as I despise drunk drivers. I do think that the BAC is to low.
I used to stop at the bar and have a couple of beers on the way home from work.
I do not agree that 2 or 3 beers makes a person impaired.

I do think that sobriety checkpoints are unconstitutional and should not be a thing.

Do I see things a little differently than someone that has not suffered at the hands of a drunk driver.
Of fucking course I do... How could I not... I'm fucking human... I'm not perfect.

You are contradicting yourself. Either someone who paid their debt back gets their rights back or they do not.

 

[Bigfoot]

You are contradicting yourself. Either someone who paid their debt back gets their rights back or they do not.

One more fucking time...

1.) If someone loses "ANY" rights because they were convicted of a felony.
In My Opinion, those rights should be restored after that person is done serving their sentence.
Including parole or probation.

2.) Re read number 1

3.) If that someone (continues) to break the laws and racks up multiple felony convictions.
AT THAT POINT I no longer care about their rights or whatever happens to them.
If they lose their rights permanently to vote, own a gun, or whatever... I do not care.
I am not saying that they should or shouldn't... I am saying that I DO NOT CARE if they do.
For someone with multiple felonies. Going through the revolving door of justice.
The only right that I would concern myself with for someone like that is the right of due process.
Other than that I do not care if their rights are restored or not.

4.) Re read number 3

5.) If someone gets convicted over and over of a DWI 3, 4, 5 times.
At that point, I DO NOT CARE what happens to them. I do not care if they get their rights back or not.
I do not care what their future holds for them in any respect.

6.) Re read number 5

That is my opinion on this subject.
If you do not agree with that opinion.
Well, that's just fucking tough shit... Get the fuck over it.

An important point in my previous posts that you seem to be ignoring is the (REPEAT OFFENDER) point.
But that's how you roll... I have seen it on this forum time and time again.

 

[Marine Cpl]

One more fucking time...

1.) If someone loses "ANY" rights because they were convicted of a felony.
In My Opinion, those rights should be restored after that person is done serving their sentence.
Including parole or probation.

2.) Re read number 1

3.) If that someone (continues) to break the laws and racks up multiple felony convictions.
AT THAT POINT I no longer care about their rights or whatever happens to them.
If they lose their rights permanently to vote, own a gun, or whatever... I do not care.
I am not saying that they should or shouldn't... I am saying that I DO NOT CARE if they do.
For someone with multiple felonies. Going through the revolving door of justice.
The only right that I would concern myself with for someone like that is the right of due process.
Other than that I do not care if their rights are restored or not.

4.) Re read number 3

5.) If someone gets convicted over and over of a DWI 3, 4, 5 times.
At that point, I DO NOT CARE what happens to them. I do not care if they get their rights back or not.
I do not care what their future holds for them in any respect.

6.) Re read number 5

That is my opinion on this subject.
If you do not agree with that opinion.
Well, that's just fucking tough shit... Get the fuck over it.

An important point in my previous posts that you seem to be ignoring is the (REPEAT OFFENDER) point.
But that's how you roll... I have seen it on this forum time and time again.

Starting at number 3, repeat offenders should be in jail so that they cannot repeat again. No?

Allowing them to be released again and taking away their right to own a gun in hopes that that punishment will not make them drive drunk again is foolish.

I’m not sure why you aren’t understanding that point. You should care if a repeat offender is released from jail when he isn’t supposed to be and a gun right is infringed upon. Because that right opens up or has already opened up the door for your rights to be infringed upon.

Now they want to pass laws that prevent you from owning a gun if you use your 1st Amendment right if you say the N word. Had people cared and fought for felon’s rights, there wouldn’t be a precedent to further make other actions a reason to take away gun rights.

Basically what I’m saying is fuck that repeat offender. I do not care about that repeat offender either. But I do care that my rights will be violated because his rights are violated.

 

[Bigfoot]

Starting at number 3, repeat offenders should be in jail so that they cannot repeat again. No?

Allowing them to be released again and taking away their right to own a gun in hopes that that punishment will not make them drive drunk again is foolish.

That's not how it works and you know that.

I have already posted that, "one has nothing to do with the other..." We agree on that.

The rest of your post I didn't bother to read.

 

[Marine Cpl]

That's not how it works and you know that.

I have already posted that, "one has nothing to do with the other..." We agree on that.

The rest of your post I didn't bother to read.

The rest of the post is the meat and potatoes. But whatever.

 

[Bigfoot]

The rest of the post is the meat and potatoes. But whatever.

The first part is why I did not bother to read any further.

 

[Bigfoot]

As I have posted... A big problem that I have with drunk drivers is the recidivism rate.
The highest is in Pennsylvania at 69%

https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/811991-dwi_recidivism_in_usa-tsf-rn.pdf

This is a big reason that I do not care what situation may befall them by their own actions.

 

[Marine Cpl]

You should care. Their infringements become yours.

 

[Bigfoot]

You should care. Their infringements become yours.

Go on...

 

[Marine Cpl]

Ahh.