Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Felon's black-powder gun ownership loop hole??

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    453
    Feedback Score
    0

    Felon's black-powder gun ownership loop hole??

    Recently heard the most outlandish claim (on the internet - if you can believe it):

    supposedly, convicted felons are still able to possess black powder guns even though they are prohibited from owning modern ammunition or guns.

    Just curious if this could possibly be true. I realize bp weapons are not considered the same by BATFE & can be mail ordered, etc. But what about felons?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    7488 ft.
    Posts
    2,462
    Feedback Score
    18 (100%)
    Black powder guns are not firearms according to federal law.

    Many state legislatures closed that loophole.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    423
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Is this something you're actually worried about, or are you just asking out of curiosity? I don't understand what seems so outlandish about it.

    If a felon wants to get a gun to hurt someone, they're just going to acquire one illegally. I seriously doubt if any of them would even know to go seeking a black powder weapon, much less take the initiative to do it.

    Since when does gun control stop criminals from getting guns?

    Maybe I'm in the minority on this one, but I feel like if someone cannot be trusted to own a firearm, they shouldn't be free from prison at all. There are a million deadly weapons in everyday life. If someone is so dangerous that they cannot be trusted around one of those million items, then keep them locked away. If they aren't dangerous enough to be locked away, then forget about trying to keep dangerous objects out of their hands: it ain't gonna happen and it ain't gonna help.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    453
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Byron View Post
    Is this something you're actually worried about, or are you just asking out of curiosity? I don't understand what seems so outlandish about it.
    Not afraid of it, just surprised.

    As for the millions (billion?) guns owned in the USA, I think the miracle that the MSM & anti-2nd Amendment people fail to see is: gun crime in the US is rare given the number of guns owned.

    I also understand your arguments about how society treats those who were previously imprisoned, and have been released without restoring all the freedoms they previously had. Not saying I necessarily agree - just that I hear & understand you.
    Last edited by TY44934; 11-05-10 at 12:05.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Squirrel!
    Posts
    1,660
    Feedback Score
    0
    This whole ordeal is stupid. Utterly stupid.

    A black powder rifle is NOT a firearm, end of story. Neither does it represent any threat to the community at large in a day of semi-auto (and full auto) weapons. Quit worrying about whether a black powder rifle constitutes a "firearm" and let's focus on the real issues.

    I'm not for criminals having guns. However, I'm against blanket statements and judgments, such as anyone who's a felon can't possess a firearm. So if the person dodged taxes and got caught, they can't own a firearm? Yet the NYC gang-banger who's only been convicted of violent misdemeanors can own as many guns as he wants? Yeah, that makes perfect sense.

    In my opinion, the only people who should be barred from weapons are violent offenders, child molesters, and those that have used firearms in the perpetration of crimes. If your crime wasn't of a violent nature and didn't involve a weapon, then why should you be barred from owning a firearm? That makes about as much sense as banning someone from ever driving again because they got caught littering while walking down the sidewalk.

    Just because a felon possesses a black powder rifle, or any other weapon, does not make them a threat. So quit acting like it's an issue. Unless you think Martha Stewart is a deadly threat to society. She's a felon too and can no longer own firearms thanks to the backwards laws on who can't own firearms.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    188
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I think it's pretty simple. If you have committed a crime on the level that you were prosecuted for a felony, you have shown that you cannot be trusted by the general public.

    Yes it's a very large blanket statement, but there's different levels of crimes for a reason. You've forfeited your rights as an honest citizen by committing the crime, so you do the time.
    A work in progress, check epitaph for results.

    Si Succiderit, De Genu Pugnat

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    7488 ft.
    Posts
    2,462
    Feedback Score
    18 (100%)
    I met a fellow who was a felon (not sure for what) and he later got busted for having a Thompson Contender with 10 inch barrel (single shot of course). He did 3 years for that, with no underlying offense. While in prison, he lost all parental rights with regard to his 4 y.o. daughter, because foster care is supposed to last no longer than a year. So the state went to court and terminated his parental rights and adopted her out to some other family. I felt sorry for the guy.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    907
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Byron View Post
    Maybe I'm in the minority on this one, but I feel like if someone cannot be trusted to own a firearm, they shouldn't be free from prison at all.
    Nope you're not, if you've served out your punishment and the justice system feels you're fit to reenter society, than your rights should be restored.

    I recall reading something like 70% are non violent offenses to begin with and don't carry prison time but instead probation.
    _________________________________________

    I understand too is an adverb and to is a preposition, I still prefer using to in place of too.

    The way I see it I'll save maybe 5-10 minutes over my lifetime not typing that extra o at the end of to. Even typing up this explanation saves me more time than typing that extra o


    Cheers,
    Mr. Smiles

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    907
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ejh28 View Post
    I think it's pretty simple. If you have committed a crime on the level that you were prosecuted for a felony, you have shown that you cannot be trusted by the general public.
    I'd be willing to bet you've committed a felony or a gross misdemeanor somewhere in your life with out knowing it.

    I'm not talking murderers an rapist (they shouldn't ever be allowed back in to society). Heck in New Mexico if you give your 17year old cousin a sip of your bear you've just committed a felony. And there's a push for other states to do the same.

    So if you think some one should lose their rights for simply doing what people have done for 100's of years because the morale police say so, well than there's no arguing with you about it because you're morally superior.
    _________________________________________

    I understand too is an adverb and to is a preposition, I still prefer using to in place of too.

    The way I see it I'll save maybe 5-10 minutes over my lifetime not typing that extra o at the end of to. Even typing up this explanation saves me more time than typing that extra o


    Cheers,
    Mr. Smiles

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    188
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Pretty sure I've never committed a felony. But thanks for the character assassination
    A work in progress, check epitaph for results.

    Si Succiderit, De Genu Pugnat

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    907
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ejh28 View Post
    Pretty sure I've never committed a felony. But thanks for the character assassination
    No character assassination, just the truth. With the amount of new laws added every year waking up is probably breaking the law some how.

    It's pretty hard to not break the law, thankfully we don't yet have the man power to enforce every law breaker. Call me crazy but with technology I'm willing to bet that we'll have automated ticketing, than they can catch us all. Wake up and piss on the toilet seat... Ticket!
    _________________________________________

    I understand too is an adverb and to is a preposition, I still prefer using to in place of too.

    The way I see it I'll save maybe 5-10 minutes over my lifetime not typing that extra o at the end of to. Even typing up this explanation saves me more time than typing that extra o


    Cheers,
    Mr. Smiles

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,255
    Feedback Score
    28 (97%)
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_smiles View Post
    Nope you're not, if you've served out your punishment and the justice system feels you're fit to reenter society, than your rights should be restored.

    I recall reading something like 70% are non violent offenses to begin with and don't carry prison time but instead probation.
    I agree to an extent except for repeat offenders that go through the revolving door we call the criminal justice system.
    I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. - John Adams

    Keep contacting your reps.
    http://www.ruger.com/index.html

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    2,223
    Feedback Score
    31 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ejh28 View Post
    Pretty sure I've never committed a felony. But thanks for the character assassination
    I wouldn't be too sure about that.


    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...830760842.html

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins Colorado
    Posts
    2,672
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Byron View Post
    Is this something you're actually worried about, or are you just asking out of curiosity? I don't understand what seems so outlandish about it.

    If a felon wants to get a gun to hurt someone, they're just going to acquire one illegally. I seriously doubt if any of them would even know to go seeking a black powder weapon, much less take the initiative to do it.

    Since when does gun control stop criminals from getting guns?

    Maybe I'm in the minority on this one, but I feel like if someone cannot be trusted to own a firearm, they shouldn't be free from prison at all. There are a million deadly weapons in everyday life. If someone is so dangerous that they cannot be trusted around one of those million items, then keep them locked away. If they aren't dangerous enough to be locked away, then forget about trying to keep dangerous objects out of their hands: it ain't gonna happen and it ain't gonna help.
    +10
    gangbangers with muskets

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UT
    Posts
    4,596
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ejh28 View Post
    Pretty sure I've never committed a felony. But thanks for the character assassination
    You're guilty of something at some point and time according to some law you never heard of

    This is why blanket statements are bullshit.

    Furthermore, what if you shot some scumbag raping your mother, and the DA charges you and you serve time. Should you still have your rights taken away?
    Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
    What Happened to the American dream? It came true. You're looking at it.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Squirrel!
    Posts
    1,660
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ejh28 View Post
    I think it's pretty simple. If you have committed a crime on the level that you were prosecuted for a felony, you have shown that you cannot be trusted by the general public.

    Yes it's a very large blanket statement, but there's different levels of crimes for a reason. You've forfeited your rights as an honest citizen by committing the crime, so you do the time.
    There are no words for ignorance this great.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,064
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ejh28 View Post
    Pretty sure I've never committed a felony. But thanks for the character assassination
    Most people commit 2-3 felonies a day and do not even know it.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,542
    Feedback Score
    0
    Yo Homie! Keep your shiv close and your powder dry.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    487
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Most people commit 2-3 felonies a day and do not even know it.
    Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent
    Last edited by stifled; 11-06-10 at 07:28.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    188
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Crimes commonly considered to be felonies include, but are not limited to: aggravated assault and/or battery, arson, burglary, illegal drug use/sales, grand theft, robbery, murder, rape, and vandalism on federal property. Broadly, felonies can be categorized as either violent or non-violent (property and drug) offenses.
    Well I have never done any of these things. But maybe I murdered, raped, and did drugs without knowing it . . . Multiple times a day too!
    A work in progress, check epitaph for results.

    Si Succiderit, De Genu Pugnat

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •