Question Of The Month. (October 2017)

Discussion in 'Question of the Month' started by ripjack13, Oct 1, 2017.

  1. ripjack13

    ripjack13 Resident Sawdust Maker Staff Member Administrator Forum Moderator Supporter "Philanthropist"

    Messages:
    13,553
    Howdy,
    This is a monthly series of questions topic for everyone to join in on the discussion. Some of the later questions may have a poll, and some will not. Don't be shy now, go ahead and post an answer and vote in the polls...



    What is a good Mandatory Minimum Sentence for Illegal Gun Possession?



    **Rules**
    There is no minimum post requirement.
    :popcorn:
    carbinemike and DarkPassenger308 like this.
  2. DarkPassenger308

    DarkPassenger308 .223 Supporter

    Messages:
    183
    No such thing as a good mandatory minimum.

    Each case should be tried in front of a jury and the presiding judge should have the free agency to sentence as they deem appropriate for that specific criminal case. Taking away a judge's free will to decide the appropriate sentence is an affront to our legal system and our individual liberty. Having the spector of a mandatory minimum hanging over our heads becomes an interrogation tactic and a carrot to dangle for plea deals.

    That's not saying I'm light on gun crimes. Quite the opposite. Throw the damn book at violent offenders and lose the damn key. But don't force a judge's hand. If we can't trust a judge to hand down an appropriate sentence for the crime, we can't trust the judge at all and they should be removed from the bench.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    CaddmannQ, ripjack13 and cmcdonald like this.
  3. CaddmannQ

    CaddmannQ 12g Supporter

    Messages:
    5,169
    Considering that, under the current rules of the State of California, I may, or may not actually possess, or not possess, certain legal or illegal arms, with no certain way under our legal system to discern the actual condition of my legal status, to any certain degree, with respect to any matter concerning the aforementioned arms, even at Great expense and with great effort, because our government has decided that they don't actually have to tell us what the laws are. They can just make it up as they go along.

    Here it's kind of like Obamakare, "There is no time for everybody to read all 17,000 pages, so you all have to vote for it in order to see what's in it".

    BS.

    Since under the laws of California, which are currently all being designed to persecute 2A supporters, by the time I wake up tomorrow I may be in possession of an illegal gun.

    Thus I think I should withhold my suggestions for the question above as being totally biased.

    Anyone who thinks the above represents an incriminating statement in any manner must realize that there are about 100,000 of us in California in the same position right now. Assault weapon limbo.
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2017
    ripjack13 and DarkPassenger308 like this.
  4. Scoop

    Scoop .308

    Messages:
    1,111
    QOM: What is a good Mandatory Minimum Sentence for Illegal GunPossession?

    I do not think there should be any sentencing for mere possession. Punishment should be for ACTING in a felonious manner.
    ripjack13 and DarkPassenger308 like this.
  5. MikeD

    MikeD I'm Your Huckleberry Staff Member Global Moderator Forum Moderator "Philanthropist"

    Messages:
    10,780
    What do you mean by "illegal"?

    Just some random guy who gets caught with a gun because he cannot afford a carry permit, which in MI can run $300+ when you include the mandatory class and CPL application.

    or a convicted felon, career criminal or someone the courts have determined should not be able top possess a firearm?



    I agree!
    ripjack13 likes this.
  6. ripjack13

    ripjack13 Resident Sawdust Maker Staff Member Administrator Forum Moderator Supporter "Philanthropist"

    Messages:
    13,553

    Both... It can go both ways....like a can of worms.....
  7. CaddmannQ

    CaddmannQ 12g Supporter

    Messages:
    5,169
    100% agree, but the media (mind-controlling people) is trying to convince us the people who are mind-controlled cannot be held responsible for their actions.

    Therefore, the only thing left is to punish us for our thoughts.

    This thought spun by my head around so hard that I started another topic about thought control.
    ripjack13 likes this.
  8. MikeD

    MikeD I'm Your Huckleberry Staff Member Global Moderator Forum Moderator "Philanthropist"

    Messages:
    10,780
    We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.-Ronald Reagan

    :rolleye:
    ripjack13 and SHOOTER13 like this.
  9. CaddmannQ

    CaddmannQ 12g Supporter

    Messages:
    5,169
    Well I agree with President Reagan & we also have to reject the idea that everything in this world yields to the Common Sense of The People.

    Many things that we have proved to be true by doing such activities as building atomic bombs, orbiting spaceships, and exploring the bottom of the ocean, are not predicted At All by Common Sense.

    From their experiences with the natural world, people just naturally think that pointed dart shaped things will fly the fastest, life would be easier with less gravity, and that no living animal could exist under 16,000 psi of pressure. It was once common sense that the Earth was the center of the universe because everything in the heavens seem to spin about us.

    All of these things turn out to be absolutely false, kind of like the myth of the Noble Savage. Totally believable until you know the truth.

    Those Noble Savages had lots of wars and slaughtered each other and sometimes engaged in cannibalism too, which is why many of those minor cultures seem to have simply disappeared from the planet.

    They might not have had guns, or even metal, but those Stone Age people of the new world built lots of weapons. I don't believe that a man who builds a club out of a bone in order to kill his enemy is fundamentally any more or less noble than a man who builds a nuclear bomb to kill his enemy.

    And the demented nutcase, absent a machine gun, will do something else: booby trap a bridge, cut the cables on an elevator, drive a truck into a Shopping Mall, destroy a public building, etc.
    ripjack13 and meanstreak like this.
  10. meanstreak

    meanstreak 20g

    Messages:
    665
    Laws could be passed that make me a criminal for firearms I purchased legally, but because I had to register them I am known to have them.

    A difficult question, but as was mentioned before, each case needs to be looked at individually.
    ripjack13 likes this.
  11. CaddmannQ

    CaddmannQ 12g Supporter

    Messages:
    5,169
    The Constitution prohibits the making of ex post facto law.

    You cannot make people criminals after the fact.

    The reality that our government does this to us, and wishes to do it even more, is a very rational reason for Americans to arm themselves against criminal government.
    ripjack13 likes this.
  12. OhioArcher

    OhioArcher Where's da fishes? Forum Moderator Supporter "Philanthropist"

    Messages:
    3,800
    As stated above, there should be no mandatory minimum and every case should be judged on its merits. Carrying a gun does not make one a criminal unless it's used to commit a crime. Unless, of course, you're already a convicted criminal or otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm.
    ripjack13 likes this.

Share This Page