Re: Group seeks judges' aid to alter gun law

"Herb Martin" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:45e3a9f6$0$16935$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:


"Jim Yanik" <jyanik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns98E3D4E0C1EF3jyanikkuanet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Lock up felons who deserve it -- restrict deferred sentences for
correcting injustices.

It seems reasonable to me that people *who plead guilty or no contest
to felony crimes or domestic violence misdemeanors* be prohibited
from getting/possessing a CWP or RKBA. After all,they committed the
crime,and admitted to it.

The problem is that "withholding adjudication" prevents the guilty/NC
plea from being recorded,and thus discovered during the background
check.

If the crime is sufficient to revoke such rights,then perhaps they
should not have their judgment withheld.The judge can still lessen or
eliminate any jail time,if they deem it justified.

Exactly -- people opposed to CHL laws are focusing on the wrong
thing here.

The problem is those who are being given deferred adjudication or
"cleaned records" who do not deserve it.

IF they have legally clean records then they deserve their CHL -- if
they don't deserve the CHL then they don't deserve to have their
convictions set aside and expunged.

After a successful 10 year probation,they can have their RKBA rights
restored,and their "slate" cleared.

Should depend on the crime. A vioolent assault might be grounds for
permanent loss.




I'm thinking of one-time criminals not having a permanent stigma to live
with.Not extreme criminals.
I figure that if such a person goes for 10 years(or some lengthy period)
and not have any violent episodes,behaved themselves,then they have shown
they can regain their rights.


IMO,that's one problem our judges don't seem to consider;a person's long
criminal history.They seem to deal only with the crime on the docket.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
.