It falls apart when one says legitimate anything before a trial occurred. There’s no logic that works around that except take rights away. It’s stupid also because felons can’t own guns. It’s a total straw man argument. A joke.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 03, 2024 10:40 amAre you saying you're good with taking away the hypothetical violent offender's guns pre-conviction? The heck with "legal" or "illegal" weapon, you're saying the when police and prosecutor's feel the offender is the exact right cat they've arrested who did the violence ("Legitimate arrests, where legitimate probable cause and evidence exists.") Criminal using a gun to commit the crime...who has guns, right? Just not yet convicted...judges should be able to quickly say, yup, remove the guns pending trial?WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Sat Feb 03, 2024 9:19 am This is a very strange place sometimes. Made an observation about a specific incident where it was discouraging to me that an arrested party was granted bail due to the circumstances surrounding his arrest. And here we are.
I have no interest in bail being used as a punitive pre-conviction sledge hammer. I hate that our justice system nuts to bolts is a dysfunctional dumpster fire where rights and fairness are regularly lost in the maelstrom. Unacceptable. Frustrating. A serious overhaul, and the establishment of a system of oversight, are long overdue.
If Mr. Nance's 2A rights were to be taken away, it would have only been after a felony conviction by a jury of his peers. What are the posters here suggesting we do regarding bail for those arrested for violent crimes committed with illegal weapons? Let's stay on point: Legitimate arrests, where legitimate probable cause and evidence exists. Nance doesn't fit the bill? Then who does? Enlighten me. Help me understand.
Incarceration is a heck of a lot more of restriction of one's rights than removal of guns...so, that must be your position, right?
BTW, I agree that it's "discouraging" that bail is granted to the known violent offenders. A lot of things are frustrating....another is that stiff penalties aren't often enough assessed to those who attack police without a self-defense situation. That seems more fixable than the prior.
It's also more fixable to have tougher gun registration, safety and red flag laws, stronger penalties for illegal weapons, and restrictions on high capacity weapons.
None of it is sufficient by itself, but the culture of violence and the glorification of guns is a big part of the problem.
You can’t say anything is legitimate before the trial. So dumb. The whole approach here is eerily close in syntax and cadence to PB.