|
|
Post by MacBeth on Jan 31, 2009 16:55:22 GMT -5
Jan 30th, 2009 | CHEBOYGAN, Mich. -- Being rescued was a mixed blessing for a man who got lost while hunting in Cheboygan County. Howard Keshick became disoriented in Inverness Township in December and called for help on his cell phone. Police and a Coast Guard helicopter braved high winds and blowing snow to locate him. But the Cheboygan Daily Tribune reported authorities discovered Keshick was a convicted felon and charged him with illegal possession of a firearm. Police said he claimed he didn't know the law applied to his black powder muzzleloader. Keshick was bound over for arraignment in circuit court on Wednesday. Meanwhile, he is scheduled for sentencing Feb. 3 on charges including home invasion, property destruction and being a habitual offender. ------ Information from: Cheboygan Daily Tribune, www.cheboygannews.comwww.salon.com/wires/ap/2009/01/30/D961MOIG0_odd_lost_hunter/ |
|
|
|
Post by wayneinfl on Jan 31, 2009 18:45:48 GMT -5
"But the Cheboygan Daily Tribune reported authorities discovered Keshick was a convicted felon and charged him with illegal possession of a firearm. Police said he claimed he didn't know the law applied to his black powder muzzleloader."
Wow. In many states it doesn't.
In Florida it's a gray area now. The law was pretty clear that the prohibitions didn't apply to muzzleloaders as the federal definition does not consider a muzzleloader to be a firearm, and Florida definition is even looser than the federal. Unfortunately, a state appeals court a few years ago upheld a ruling against a convicted felon even though he had actually called the ATF to make sure he could legally own a muzzleloader before he bought it. I think the court flubbed this one the same way they flubbed the definition of a ballistic knife.
|
|
|
|
Post by MacBeth on Feb 1, 2009 8:48:18 GMT -5
Yes, please. Let's make sure we ensure the rights of felons to have weapons.
|
|
Calluna
Super Duper Member
I think there's someone on the other side...
Posts: 1,005 
|
Post by Calluna on Feb 1, 2009 11:06:52 GMT -5
Well, if he's already a convicted felon, carrying ANY weapon, not just something that fits some technicality of not being a firearm, might be the issue here. Afterall, I would hope that someone out on parole (I assume that's the case, since they didn't say he was an escaped convict) would not even be allowed to carry a knife on them. Whether or not anyone else could legally purchase that weapon under existing firearms laws is irrelevant if it violates the terms of his parole.
|
|
|
|
Post by wayneinfl on Feb 1, 2009 11:23:18 GMT -5
If he's that dangerous, he shouldn't be out and about in the first place. Why was Keshick free to begin with? On the other hand, if he's not a threat, why shouldn't he have the same rights as anyone else? I kind of agree with you about Keshick, but for other convicted felons- say, some old man who got arrested in the 70's for having too much dope- I can't see restricting his rights today.
Besides, a felon doesn't have the same rights as anyone else (in other states). Federal law doesn't consider a muzzleloader to be a regulated firearm- the only thing he could have would be a muzzleloader. When was the last you heard of a convicted felon holding up a liquor store with a muzzleloader?
|
|
|
|
Post by MacBeth on Feb 1, 2009 13:31:51 GMT -5
Actually, I would not care. I do not think that arming felons with anything is a smart move.
This is exactly the sort of argument that pushed me from reasonable gun control to no guns.Not the criminals so much as the bullheaded need to parse anything that has to do with guns instead of acknowledging that arming felons is just plan stupid
|
|
Calluna
Super Duper Member
I think there's someone on the other side...
Posts: 1,005
|
Post by Calluna on Feb 1, 2009 19:17:06 GMT -5
If he's on parole, that means his sentence isn't over yet. So, no, he doesn't get the same rights as anyone else.
And, quite frankly, what does it matter what type of weapon it is? Just because it isn't commonly used doesn't mean it CAN'T be used. I'm astounded that you'd defend a FELON. What happened to the argument that gun laws keep guns out of the hands of people who aren't law-abiding? It seems there are loopholes. I don't care if it was a Swiss army knife...if he's a felon, with a history of being a repeat offender no less, he shouldn't have ANY of it. That's the price you pay for breaking laws.
|
|
|
|
Post by wayneinfl on Feb 1, 2009 23:55:11 GMT -5
Calluna:
According to the article I read, he's not even on parole, yet. He's convicted and waiting for sentencing. If the guy's dangerous, why is he out there to begin with? Do you see what I'm saying here?
If he's not safe, he's not safe whether he's got a muzzleloader or not. If he's safe, he's safe with a muzzleloader.
Beth:
No doubt arming felons "is just plain stupid." Prisons don't arm felons. Felons are dangerous even without weapons. And if they can get crack, marijuana or heroin, they can get weapons. That's why we should keep them in prisons until they're reformed.
|
|
|
|
Post by MacBeth on Feb 2, 2009 6:11:43 GMT -5
All true, but irrelevant to what I was talking about.
How many weapons should a felon be allowed, wayne? What types are OK? Apparently these muzzleloaders are OK. What else? And where do you draw that line (on the weapons, not another diatribe on the broken court system)
|
|
|
|
Post by wayneinfl on Feb 2, 2009 12:48:48 GMT -5
If he's safe enough to walk the streets, he ought to be able to own any firearm I can.
|
|
|
|
Post by MacBeth on Feb 2, 2009 12:56:57 GMT -5
Egads....
|
|
|
|
Post by wayneinfl on Feb 2, 2009 13:22:01 GMT -5
Why not? If he wants guns, he's going to have them anyway. If some crack dealer can come out of prison and get cocaine from South America, why not guns? And it's not as if some white collar criminal even needs guns to continue his crimes. Or some rapist who likes to victimize smaller and weaker people.
On the other hand, if he's safe and reformed, what harm would it do for him to be armed?
|
|
