In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
I believe that the vicious animals that infest prisons ought to be put to death.
I further believe that a prisoner that is raped, murdered, or otherwise savaged while paying his debt to society out to be protected much as any other citizen...swift, sure execution for the guilty.
Washing your hands of prisoners ..allowing rape, murder, gangs, ect. to operate in prisons is a sure indictment of an extremely sick culture, and a very warped, perverted mindset.
You people just cannot come to grips with the main idea here.
Make damn sure that animals are executed;
Make damn sure that lesser criminals pay their debt to Society.
As for the Gun Controllers among us that insist somehow that prisoners are allowed weapons under the second Amendment....
BWAAHAAHAHAHHHHH..heheheh.
You think we Second Amendment supporters are as...slow....as YOU ???
You people just cannot come to grips with the main idea here.
I would say, sir, that it is you that just cannot come to grips with the main idea.
The main idea is that the second ammendment reads "shall not be infringed." While pretending to advocate a position that fully embraces that, you are instead demanding the same carve outs that you criticize your opponets for seeking. You favor full gun rights except in this case, and except in that case, and so forth.
Allowing those within the crimminal justice system to carry weapons makes sense for a variety of reasons.
1. "Shall not be infringed." It's a universal statement, with no qualifications.
2. While the police, courts, and juries work hard, innocent men and women do go to jail. To place an innocent person amongst true crimminals and then to deny him access to his weapons is obscene.
3. Prisoners have rights. They are allowed access to attorneys, to telephones, to books, etc. The Constitution does not end at the jailer's gate, and the second amendment is part of the Constitution.
4. The same arguments used to deny prisoners second amendment rights are those used to deny citizens second amendment rights. "Something bad will happen," the gun grabbers say, as if a potential for harm is equivalent to actual harm being done. "A gun might be used in the commission of a crime," the gun grabbers then say, again falsely linking potential with actual. "Others have not used these rights wisely," they will finally say, making the argument that because some misuse their rights, those rights should be denied to all.
If prisoners were allowed to carry guns, the number of assaults, rapes, and murders in prison would drop greatly. Prisoners would treat each other better and those who were interested in bettering themselves would have the safety to do so.
quote:Originally posted by mlincoln
You people just cannot come to grips with the main idea here.
I would say, sir, that it is you that just cannot come to grips with the main idea.
The main idea is that the second ammendment reads "shall not be infringed." While pretending to advocate a position that fully embraces that, you are instead demanding the same carve outs that you criticize your opponets for seeking. You favor full gun rights except in this case, and except in that case, and so forth.
Allowing those within the crimminal justice system to carry weapons makes sense for a variety of reasons.
1. "Shall not be infringed." It's a universal statement, with no qualifications.
2. While the police, courts, and juries work hard, innocent men and women do go to jail. To place an innocent person amongst true crimminals and then to deny him access to his weapons is obscene.
3. Prisoners have rights. They are allowed access to attorneys, to telephones, to books, etc. The Constitution does not end at the jailer's gate, and the second amendment is part of the Constitution.
4. The same arguments used to deny prisoners second amendment rights are those used to deny citizens second amendment rights. "Something bad will happen," the gun grabbers say, as if a potential for harm is equivalent to actual harm being done. "A gun might be used in the commission of a crime," the gun grabbers then say, again falsely linking potential with actual. "Others have not used these rights wisely," they will finally say, making the argument that because some misuse their rights, those rights should be denied to all.
If prisoners were allowed to carry guns, the number of assaults, rapes, and murders in prison would drop greatly. Prisoners would treat each other better and those who were interested in bettering themselves would have the safety to do so.
LMAO at you.
There is NO "justice" system under what you profess.
If you are in prison for a crime that doesn't truely call for hanging, you should ONLY have limited rights, otherwise there is NO punishment and "paying" the debt to society.
You should have the following rights:
- the right to a steel cage 14 hours a day.
-the right to "hard" labor, so the prison system can be self-sufficient.
- the right to councel.
-the right to NECESSARY health/dental/mental care.
- the right to ONE nutrious meal a day.
- the right to have the snot knocked out of you if you get out of line.
PRISON isn't summer camp. Prison is a place for criminals to be reformed and PAY THEIR DEBT TO SOCIETY.
Notice I didn't mention cable, books, phones, gym time, and otherwise "privilages"?
You don't get crap like like with REAL justice. Prisoners have LITTLE in the way of rights, as they gave that up upon commiting crimes.
NOW after being released and off probation, they THEN have full rights.
quote:interesting? try 1500-2000 in the state things happened in. washington doesnt mean anything, whats your point? why should I pay a bribe money for my rights? rights I had till that pos clinton and his lib friends butted in.
$1 is too much, period.
Duckster would have us believe he is Jesus Christ, has never ever committed a crime, so if he is capable of being perfect, then everyone in society is capable. He's is going to need a prison the size of Nebraska to put all the rest of us in, because he is going to be the ONLY free man in America.
mlincoln is trying to play devil's advocate, to "expose" the generally accepted position (on this thread) as incorrect. It is very simple lincoln, you as a citizen have all constitutional rights guaranteed to you up to a point where your actions infringe on another citizen's Constitutionally guaranteed rights. At that point, you have consciously made a decision to give up certain rights, due to the fact that you tried to take someone else's. It has ALWAYS been part of the law that your rights exist UNTIL you restrict another's with your actions, then yours become restricted by the criminal justice system, for an appropriate time.
And yes, tech141 was trying to point out that some things currently felonies are not worthy of that classification. He is right.(Like hate crimes PC bullsnot, growing pot, etc) But it is part of the process of making anyone who will not conform to govt. control, a felon.
mlincoln,,, IF your serious then your an idiot and have NO concept of law or rights. As a prisoner, you have NO RIGHTS except to be protected from cruel and un-usual punishment and a right to councel. Your ignorant statement that they have a right to a phone is pure fertilizer. What prisoners have are privlages. Nothing more. And they can be taken away at the whim of the staff. No books, no phone, no nothing. Even their "recreation" time can be taken. They spend their entire time in the SHOE. Isolation.
So. If that is the extent of your knowledge of the penal system, then maybe you should go read a book or maybe get a job in the field and learn something before you open mouth and insert your Nike.
quote:Originally posted by 45long
mlincoln,,, IF your serious then your an idiot and have NO concept of law or rights. As a prisoner, you have NO RIGHTS except to be protected from cruel and un-usual punishment and a right to councel. Your ignorant statement that they have a right to a phone is pure fertilizer. What prisoners have are privlages. Nothing more. And they can be taken away at the whim of the staff. No books, no phone, no nothing. Even their "recreation" time can be taken. They spend their entire time in the SHOE. Isolation.
So. If that is the extent of your knowledge of the penal system, then maybe you should go read a book or maybe get a job in the field and learn something before you open mouth and insert your Nike.
Well, the article below contradicts a lot of what you say. Perhaps you'd like to read it and we can discuss.
I'm not referring to the basterdazation of the Constitution that the slip and fall lawyers have made of it I am talking about what is fact. Just because some scum bag and his equally scumbag lawyer gets some corrupt judge to say that not geting his chunky peanut butter is cruel and un-usual doesn't make it so. Nothng in your article corrected my previous post. I have several friends in the corrections service. I am in a related field. A phone and magazines is nor a right. Niether is possion of a weapon as you eluded to. Those right are lost while incarcerated and possibly beyond depending on the offense. The corrupt judges and slip and fall lawyers that have meanieized the Constitution is the main reason we have the problems we have today. And your acertions that a prisoner has the right to a firearm while in prison shows how rediculous you are. The 2nd NEVER intended that. It didn't hold true then,(1776), and it doesn't hold true now.
Comments
I believe that the vicious animals that infest prisons ought to be put to death.
I further believe that a prisoner that is raped, murdered, or otherwise savaged while paying his debt to society out to be protected much as any other citizen...swift, sure execution for the guilty.
Washing your hands of prisoners ..allowing rape, murder, gangs, ect. to operate in prisons is a sure indictment of an extremely sick culture, and a very warped, perverted mindset.
You people just cannot come to grips with the main idea here.
Make damn sure that animals are executed;
Make damn sure that lesser criminals pay their debt to Society.
As for the Gun Controllers among us that insist somehow that prisoners are allowed weapons under the second Amendment....
BWAAHAAHAHAHHHHH..heheheh.
You think we Second Amendment supporters are as...slow....as YOU ???
I would say, sir, that it is you that just cannot come to grips with the main idea.
The main idea is that the second ammendment reads "shall not be infringed." While pretending to advocate a position that fully embraces that, you are instead demanding the same carve outs that you criticize your opponets for seeking. You favor full gun rights except in this case, and except in that case, and so forth.
Allowing those within the crimminal justice system to carry weapons makes sense for a variety of reasons.
1. "Shall not be infringed." It's a universal statement, with no qualifications.
2. While the police, courts, and juries work hard, innocent men and women do go to jail. To place an innocent person amongst true crimminals and then to deny him access to his weapons is obscene.
3. Prisoners have rights. They are allowed access to attorneys, to telephones, to books, etc. The Constitution does not end at the jailer's gate, and the second amendment is part of the Constitution.
4. The same arguments used to deny prisoners second amendment rights are those used to deny citizens second amendment rights. "Something bad will happen," the gun grabbers say, as if a potential for harm is equivalent to actual harm being done. "A gun might be used in the commission of a crime," the gun grabbers then say, again falsely linking potential with actual. "Others have not used these rights wisely," they will finally say, making the argument that because some misuse their rights, those rights should be denied to all.
If prisoners were allowed to carry guns, the number of assaults, rapes, and murders in prison would drop greatly. Prisoners would treat each other better and those who were interested in bettering themselves would have the safety to do so.
You people just cannot come to grips with the main idea here.
I would say, sir, that it is you that just cannot come to grips with the main idea.
The main idea is that the second ammendment reads "shall not be infringed." While pretending to advocate a position that fully embraces that, you are instead demanding the same carve outs that you criticize your opponets for seeking. You favor full gun rights except in this case, and except in that case, and so forth.
Allowing those within the crimminal justice system to carry weapons makes sense for a variety of reasons.
1. "Shall not be infringed." It's a universal statement, with no qualifications.
2. While the police, courts, and juries work hard, innocent men and women do go to jail. To place an innocent person amongst true crimminals and then to deny him access to his weapons is obscene.
3. Prisoners have rights. They are allowed access to attorneys, to telephones, to books, etc. The Constitution does not end at the jailer's gate, and the second amendment is part of the Constitution.
4. The same arguments used to deny prisoners second amendment rights are those used to deny citizens second amendment rights. "Something bad will happen," the gun grabbers say, as if a potential for harm is equivalent to actual harm being done. "A gun might be used in the commission of a crime," the gun grabbers then say, again falsely linking potential with actual. "Others have not used these rights wisely," they will finally say, making the argument that because some misuse their rights, those rights should be denied to all.
If prisoners were allowed to carry guns, the number of assaults, rapes, and murders in prison would drop greatly. Prisoners would treat each other better and those who were interested in bettering themselves would have the safety to do so.
LMAO at you.
There is NO "justice" system under what you profess.
If you are in prison for a crime that doesn't truely call for hanging, you should ONLY have limited rights, otherwise there is NO punishment and "paying" the debt to society.
You should have the following rights:
- the right to a steel cage 14 hours a day.
-the right to "hard" labor, so the prison system can be self-sufficient.
- the right to councel.
-the right to NECESSARY health/dental/mental care.
- the right to ONE nutrious meal a day.
- the right to have the snot knocked out of you if you get out of line.
PRISON isn't summer camp. Prison is a place for criminals to be reformed and PAY THEIR DEBT TO SOCIETY.
Notice I didn't mention cable, books, phones, gym time, and otherwise "privilages"?
You don't get crap like like with REAL justice. Prisoners have LITTLE in the way of rights, as they gave that up upon commiting crimes.
NOW after being released and off probation, they THEN have full rights.
$1 is too much, period.
Duckster would have us believe he is Jesus Christ, has never ever committed a crime, so if he is capable of being perfect, then everyone in society is capable. He's is going to need a prison the size of Nebraska to put all the rest of us in, because he is going to be the ONLY free man in America.
mlincoln is trying to play devil's advocate, to "expose" the generally accepted position (on this thread) as incorrect. It is very simple lincoln, you as a citizen have all constitutional rights guaranteed to you up to a point where your actions infringe on another citizen's Constitutionally guaranteed rights. At that point, you have consciously made a decision to give up certain rights, due to the fact that you tried to take someone else's. It has ALWAYS been part of the law that your rights exist UNTIL you restrict another's with your actions, then yours become restricted by the criminal justice system, for an appropriate time.
And yes, tech141 was trying to point out that some things currently felonies are not worthy of that classification. He is right.(Like hate crimes PC bullsnot, growing pot, etc) But it is part of the process of making anyone who will not conform to govt. control, a felon.
So. If that is the extent of your knowledge of the penal system, then maybe you should go read a book or maybe get a job in the field and learn something before you open mouth and insert your Nike.
mlincoln,,, IF your serious then your an idiot and have NO concept of law or rights. As a prisoner, you have NO RIGHTS except to be protected from cruel and un-usual punishment and a right to councel. Your ignorant statement that they have a right to a phone is pure fertilizer. What prisoners have are privlages. Nothing more. And they can be taken away at the whim of the staff. No books, no phone, no nothing. Even their "recreation" time can be taken. They spend their entire time in the SHOE. Isolation.
So. If that is the extent of your knowledge of the penal system, then maybe you should go read a book or maybe get a job in the field and learn something before you open mouth and insert your Nike.
Well, the article below contradicts a lot of what you say. Perhaps you'd like to read it and we can discuss.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/17.html