1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mass shooting on campus in Oregon

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Gator, Oct 1, 2015.

  1. JC

    JC Well-Known Member

    It's great that you think this is a good one.
     
  2. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    I think they're relying on their strong emoji game.
     
    Stoney likes this.
  3. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I don't have an opinion about the former. The Supreme Court seems to have been OK with it.

    I don't give a shit about the latter.
     
    Riptide likes this.
  4. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    I think it's stupid that former felons are denied anything legal to everyone else.

    Once you are released back into society, all walls, barriers and gates should be dropped, too.
     
  5. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't agree with the "once you are released" bit, if only because you haven't completed your punishment when you've been released on parole. But once you've completed your sentence -- i.e., you're no longer on parole -- I don't see any particular reason why you shouldn't regain all your rights.

    HOWEVER, as I understand it it has long been the law that being convicted of a felony comes with the penalty of losing at least some civil rights.

    Then, there's the matter of those convicted of sex crimes against children. When should they get their full rights back?
     
  6. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    Before a convicted murderer.

    Agree about the "on parole" caveat.
     
  7. Riptide

    Riptide Well-Known Member

    Just for argument's sake: A convicted murderer might have learned his lesson about killing others, but pedophilia isn't known for its rehabilitated souls, is it?
     
  8. Smallpotatoes

    Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

    But not stable enough to own a gun.
     
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    And my argument is always: Now hunters and military veterans won't seek help for mental illness, knowing it will disqualify them for gun ownership.

    Very, very bad unintended consequence on many levels.
     
  10. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I think the weight of the evidence is way tilted in favor of the convicted murderer. I read something recently that talked about impulsivity and how, for a very large majority of prisoners, you edit a very few minutes of their lives and you have a wildly different outcome:

    I don't think you could say the same thing about those convicted of sex crimes against children.

    What Was Gary Becker’s Biggest Mistake?
     
  11. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Just do it in kind of a reverse Catch-22: That you're crazy enough to want a gun means you're obviously too crazy to have one.

    Her Hillaryness says "Heyyyyyyyy ..."
     
  12. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    How's it worse than the current situation?

    A) You don't know that they would be unwilling to give up their guns to receive treatment

    2) You can't predict their behavior if they fail to receive treatment.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page