Sarge Posted January 15, 2006 Author Share Posted January 15, 2006 Sarge should be the one to know that along with the specifics of the rights restored ALL of them before he complians. If he does not know the specifics of VA then he should not complian Don't quite know what angle you're looking at this, but I was well aware that this pertained only to voting rights. I'd really be howling if he restored the right to buy firearms. I think the word everyone (or most people rather) missed here is FELON. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. I'm sure everyone of these lowlifes, before they wrote those hot checks, thought long and hard, "Gee, if I do this, I'm gonna lose the right to vote":rolleyes: ANd do we really want people of such character, or lack thereof, voting anyway? That might be good for libs and Dems and their chances in office, but for the rest of us, we'd prefer different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 I think the word everyone (or most people rather) missed here is FELON. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. I'm sure everyone of these lowlifes, before they wrote those hot checks, thought long and hard, "Gee, if I do this, I'm gonna lose the right to vote":rolleyes: They did the time, they stayed out of trouble, and you still cry about it. Get over it. It's a positive program producing positive results in a state you don't live in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 15, 2006 Author Share Posted January 15, 2006 They did the time, they stayed out of trouble, and you still cry about it. Get over it. It's a positive program producing positive results in a state you don't live in. If what you say is so true, why not restore all of their rights, including the right to buy a gun? And I still pay Va taxes thank you, since it's my home state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 If what you say is so true, why not restore all of their rights, including the right to buy a gun?And I still pay Va taxes thank you, since it's my home state Why not? Simple, because voters are comfortable with it. Handing a felon a gun doesn't fly with repubs that would rather they all be tortured to satisfy their punishment fetish, or with dems who would rather take guns then give anyone one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 15, 2006 Author Share Posted January 15, 2006 Why not? Simple, because voters are comfortable with it. Handing a felon a gun doesn't fly with repubs that would rather they all be tortured to satisfy their punishment fetish, or with dems who would rather take guns then give anyone one. But it be OK with you libs, right? Funny you'd consider giving a convicted felon a gun, but you want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens to own weapons. And you wonder why your party is in the minority Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Considering you can be convicted of a Felony for as something as little as Drug Possession in some states, I think restoring voting rights is a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 But it be OK with you libs, right? Funny you'd consider giving a convicted felon a gun, but you want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens to own weapons.And you wonder why your party is in the minority Who wants to restrict law abiding citizens from owning guns? I noticed you used the word "weapons" I mean what are you referring to, Machine Guns? AK-47s?Grenades? In that case yeah I think it should be illegal to own assault rifles. However hand guns, hunting rifles, no one cares and no one is trying to restrict those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCRunner Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Does someone here actually believe only Democrats get arrested and convicted of felonies? You think all these people with restored voting rights are Democrats? Restoring voting rights is gaining widespread support across the country even though it only affects a minority of states. It's needlessly punative and counterproductive. They should all get their rights back. There are enough lingering serious "disadvantages" to having a felony record which make life very difficult for felons, so for those of you who want punishment to go on and on and on, I would think that there's enough already to satisfy your inexplicable hunger for a permanent mark of Cain. About the right of felons to own guns. I have no problem with that unless they have a history of violence. And then I might restrict their gun ownership even if all they have is a misdemeanor record if that misdemeanor is domestic violence or some other act of violence - even destruction of property. It's really hard to generalize because each person and circumstance is different. Sometimes a one time act is just that - a one time act. I could care less if someone who commits fraud and ends up with a felony record owns a gun. But I do care if some guy who regularly blows his top and attacks people and gets pled down to a misdemeanor has a gun. There seems to be more risk with that scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 But it be OK with you libs, right? Funny you'd consider giving a convicted felon a gun, but you want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens to own weapons.And you wonder why your party is in the minority "you libs?" Sorry to interrupt another straw man bash but I'm pro-gun rights. Also I don't wonder why the democrats are out of power, but I have no doubt you'd hate my reasoning. It isn't as romantic (or false) as your own belief in a righteous GOP.Here's the bottom line in this thread, Warner is engaged in positve motivation with the aim of turning criminals back to the right path. Democrats agree with it, and Warner happens to be a democrat. If that doesn't satisfy your punishment fetish, too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 He could care less about these felons. All Warner wanted to do here is restore the voting rights to these ex-cons so that they will vote Democrat during the Senate relection this year. Typical Lib move. Which obviously explains why he restored the rights of 3K felons out of 240K applications. Obviously, he knows thet 3K felon votes will be enough to swing the vote for the entire state of Virginia, two years from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 But it be OK with you libs, right? Funny you'd consider giving a convicted felon a gun, but you want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens to own weapons.And you wonder why your party is in the minority You seem to have missed half his post. (The half that doesn't fit your "anybody who doesn't agree 100% with my political spew is a no-good commie liberal.") What he said was that they won't get the right to carry a weapon back because the Republicans and the Democrats were opposed to it. He's in favor of everyone (aparantly, from his post, even "reformed" felons) carrying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redphoenix Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 He could care less about these felons. All Warner wanted to do here is restore the voting rights to these ex-cons so that they will vote Democrat during the Senate relection this year. Typical Lib move. :applause: :applause: :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Which obviously explains why he restored the rights of 3K felons out of 240K applications. Obviously, he knows thet 3K felon votes will be enough to swing the vote for the entire state of Virginia, two years from now. Sad that something this obvious needed to be pointed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCRunner Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Sad that something this obvious needed to be pointed out. Do you really think that all these 3,000 people will actually vote. I'd be surprised if 25% of them voted. Or even 10%. And don't you think Warner knows that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 Do you really think that all these 3,000 people will actually vote. I'd be surprised if 25% of them voted. Or even 10%. And don't you think Warner knows that? Probably none of them will vote. Lowlifes seldom do. He just did it to feel good, because the liberal mantra is "If it feels good, do it" WHy, those poor whiddle felons. They've suffered enough already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCRunner Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Probably none of them will vote. Lowlifes seldom do.He just did it to feel good, because the liberal mantra is "If it feels good, do it" WHy, those poor whiddle felons. They've suffered enough already He did it because he believed it was the right thing to do. Which, of course, it was. Sometimes it's as simple as that. Warner gains no political points from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan133 Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I cannot even imagine why anyone would oppose the right to vote. some people should not be alowed to vote, non- US citizens, mentally incapable people, conservative democrats and liberal republicans (JOKE:D ), and in states that take away the right to vote as a punishment. rights can be suspened and revoked as punishment and voting just happens to be one of them and that is the price you pay to society your entire life, not until the govenor decides its ok again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winslowalrob Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 He just did it to feel good, because the liberal mantra is "If it feels good, do it" YEAHHHHH BOIIIIII!!! ORGY AT MY PLACE!!! DONT GOT A PARTNER? THEN TAKE MY WIFE!!! No seriously, wasn't that like chief Wiggums' mantra? And then one of the cops drops his pants? Can anyone verify this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 Since Warner is a Democrat I'm surprised that he would want to give so many Republicans the right to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 36 Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 Which obviously explains why he restored the rights of 3K felons out of 240K applications. Obviously, he knows thet 3K felon votes will be enough to swing the vote for the entire state of Virginia, two years from now. Some people need to take a refresher course on how to read. It never said that 240K applications were submitted; it stated that several political groups were urging him to restore those rights to 240,000 felons, but not that they had applied. However, it did state that he only DENIED 195 petitions. Huge swing there form your "3K out of 240K" argument, huh??? Learn how to read!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 The right to vote is just the right given to us sheep so we can decide who shears us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.