Challenging the Status Quo: The Case for Allowing Convicted Felons to Exercise 2nd Amendment Rights

223 Ammunition Banned
iStock

A federal judge recently denied a convicted felon’s request to have their gun possession charge thrown out on constitutional grounds. This ruling should be viewed as disappointing.

Judge Holly A. Brady’s ruling that felons do not have gun rights is a setback for those who believe in the importance of the right to keep and bear arms, even for individuals who have made mistakes in the past.

It is true that there are historical laws that exclude felons from possessing firearms, but that does not necessarily mean that such laws are consistent with the Second Amendment.

The number of crimes now considered to be “felonies” has slowly increased over the decades. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of “the people” to keep and bear arms, and it is not clear that this right is extinguished simply because someone has been convicted of a felony. The language of the Second Amendment does not exclude felons from its protection, and it is concerning that judges are interpreting it that way.

Throughout the USA, there are a variety of non-violent felonies that individuals can be charged with. Once convicted, these individuals are forever barred from possessing the most efficient tool for self-defense. Many of these felony crimes do not involve any acts of violence or threats of future violence and can include:

  • White-collar crimes: This category includes financial fraud or deceit, such as embezzlement, money laundering, insider trading, or tax evasion.
  • Drug offenses: Certain drug-related crimes, such as drug possession with intent to distribute or drug trafficking, can also be classified as non-violent felonies.
  • Environmental crimes: These are offenses that involve violating environmental laws, such as dumping hazardous waste, polluting the air or water, or trafficking in illegal wildlife products.
  • Forgery and counterfeiting: These crimes involve creating or altering documents or currency to defraud others, such as forging checks or counterfeiting money.
  • Cybercrimes: With the increasing use of technology, certain computer-related offenses, such as hacking, identity theft, or cyberstalking, can be considered as non-violent felonies.

These individuals who made mistakes in the past and successfully completed their punishment, aka ‘did their time,’ seem unlikely to pose a threat to others if they are allowed to own guns.

Does the Punishment Fit the Crime?

Handcuffs Arrest Resistance
Istock

Logical arguments can be made that Lifetime bans on felons owning guns are an example of a punishment that does not fit the crime. While it is true that some individuals who have been convicted of felonies have committed violent acts and may pose a risk to society, there are also many non-violent felons who have had their gun rights taken away.

The ruling in United States v. Cummings adds to the long list of over ninety rulings that demonstrate the limited success of convicted felons in claiming Second Amendment protections. Despite last year’s landmark New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, which cast doubt on many modern gun restrictions, felons have had little success convincing courts that the Second Amendment protects their ability to own guns.

As reported by ‘The Reload’;

“Professor Jake Charles of Pepperdine University recently released a report that found there hasn’t been a single successful Second Amendment claim brought against the federal law barring possession of firearms by convicted felons.”

This lack of success is disappointing, especially given that there have been dissenting opinions that questioned the federal lifetime prohibition on at least some, namely non-violent, felons owning guns. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, for example, dissented in favor of restoring the gun rights of a non-violent felon in 2019’s Kanter v. Barr.

Judges should begin to take into consideration the impact of lifetime bans on gun ownership for non-violent felons, as well as the historical and constitutional arguments for and against such bans.

Ultimately, it is essential to remember that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right protected by the Second Amendment, even for those with past crimes. While there may be legitimate reasons to restrict gun ownership for individuals who have committed violent crimes or who pose a continued risk to society, it is not clear that a blanket lifetime ban on felons owning guns is a proportional punishment.

As supporters of the Second Amendment and gun rights, we must continue to advocate for a fair and just system that upholds the rights of all individuals, including those who have made mistakes in the past.

What do you believe? Should select Felons have the RKBA?


By Fred Riehl and AI tools. Note: This article was generated using AI editing and may contain some automated content aggregation and analysis.

37 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Arizona

Do we deny felons the right to speak? To worship? No, then they shall also have the right to defend their lives and property, wives and liberty. If they cannot be trusted to have a gun, don’t let them out of prison.

Stag

It’s amazing how every comment on this article advocating FOR liberty had three downvotes. Some people here sure love their infringement.

Logician

Yes, it was only yesterday I said to a friend that it seems some people just can’t get enough of being a SLAVE!!!

Jay Dee

I would agree. The lifetime bans on legal ownership of firearms ignores the fact the people can and do rehabilitate themselves. Most repeat offences come within months of release from prison. The law should be revised so that say, 5 years after completing a prison sentence or parole, all rights are restored. This provides an incentive for rehabilitation.

By the same token, current mental illness laws fail to recognize that people are able to recover. These laws should be revisited as well.

Raconteur

David Codrea said it best (paraphrasing): A person who can’t be trusted with a gun, can’t be trusted without a custodian.

So, if a felon can’t be trusted with a gun, what the hell is he doing out of prison?

Roland T. Gunner

Yes, David’s writing is superb.

Stag

All arms laws violate the 2A and are, therefore, unconstitutional. The GCA of 1968, which created the list of prohibited persons and was later amended by the Brady Bill, is almost an exact copy of the Nazi gun control laws. The “undesirables” in this case are felons instead of jews. What’s so dangerous about that is almost anyone can be deemed a felon. There are literally THOUSANDS of crimes in the US code and all are felonies. It has been estimated that the average person may commit up to three felonies a day and never even know it. Government has… Read more »

Finnky

No one can be “deemed a felon” as you have to be convicted. Of course ERPOs take away that pesky trial requirement and the recent convictions of Justin Ervin and Matt Hoover demonstrate how little protection juries provide.

Logician

What I want, is for somebody to show me in writing, where it says that I am guaranteed that I will ever get a fair trial in any matter!! If we do not have that guarantee, then that must mean a trial is one of two things, it’s either a gamble, or a scam that is being run on us! Prove me to be wrong, if you can!! And since no man or woman can be forced into either gambling being the victim of a scam, isn’t that our exit point from the legal system/Matrix??

Stag

James Madison in The Federalist 62 outlines some of the “mischievous effects of a mutable government” which constantly changes the law to suit its own needs or the needs of its supporters: “The internal effects of a mutable policy are still more calamitous. It poisons the blessings of liberty itself. It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood: if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or… Read more »

USMC0351Grunt

Once again the recent Supreme Court decision in mock should be over turning all of this.

Xaun Loc

Actually, no you don’t need to be convicted of a felony, to get slapped with a lifetime ban. Most obviously there is the lifetime ban that was added for anyone convicted of a “domestic violence” misdemeanor. These are all state level violations and there is no formal list of which specific state charges are included. At the moment, whether or not someone is banned under NICS depends on how the state chooses to report the conviction, but people can be charged for possession of a firearm under the federal law even if they are not barred in NICS. It is… Read more »

USMC0351Grunt

I’m willing to bet that on appeal of these two cases especially after the recent Supreme Court case of Mock, (I will dig for the reference end update this when I get a chance), these two are going to get there cases overturned.

Last edited 10 months ago by USMC0351Grunt
jack mac

Allowing the governing to prohibit individual citizens from exercising any right has established an official underclass. Nations with an official underclass cannot be a free society. Preventing the governing from depriving rights is the founding principle of our nation. There are ever increasing number of pretense other than felon to cast private citizens into the prohibited person underclass. “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime” is now the prevailing philosphy of our legal system.

Nurph

Can a person convicted of a non-violent felony vote? Can they petition the government? Can they pursue whatever religion they want? If the answer to any/all of those questions is yes, then the #2A is no different.

Larry

Democrats want felons to be able to vote even from prison. This is not a joke.

https://ballotpedia.org/Voting_rights_for_people_convicted_of_a_felony

RepealNFA

Felons still have their 1st amendment rights and the highest court has FINALLY ruled that the 2nd amendment is NOT a second class right, so the prohibition against freed felons is undeniably unconstitutional.

jdege

I haven’t a problem with forbidding guns to a convicted felon while he’s in prison. Or, for that matter, after he’s been released and on parole.

It’s when his time has been completely served that the question arises.

Should be immediately regain his rights? Perhaps.

Or only after ten years of blameless behavior? Perhaps.

Or how about we allow him to petition to have his rights restored, after ten years? That seems a bit harsh, but that’s the current law.

But right now, Congress has ordered BATFE to refuse to accept such petitions. And that’s simply wrong.

45crittergitter

Yes.

Graywolf

i don’t think anyone should be banned for life … if a person is that dangerous why did they let them back out in the first place, when they get out they have done their time, if they do the same thing again keep them in longer and band them when they get out then.

DDS

If they’re dangerous, they should remain locked up.

If they’re not dangerous, what’s the point of denying them arms?

The icky part is the Left’s propensity to let them out while they’re still dangerous.

Rob

Some of this is either taken out of context or interpreted by the writer to follow his argument. For instance: “The language of the Second Amendment does not exclude felons from its protection, and it is concerning that judges are interpreting it that way.” The language of the 2A has nothing to do with judge’s interpretations; it’s a matter of law written after the 2A. The problem is with the law.

Rob J

The language of the 2A has everything to do with it. If a law is repugnant to the Constitution then it is invalid.

We can all agree that removing the rights of a convicted, and incarcerated, felon is warranted given their proven actions. The question then becomes what happens after said person is released.

Should every felony hold a life sentence? Life long punishment, carried beyond a prison sentence or probation, for a malum prohibitum law violation is an unjust punishment for a crime that holds no life sentence… imo.

Logician

You have to understand something here, Rob, and that is that the legal system is a SCAM that is being run on us all. If you read my two page long treatise called The Scam Of The Legal System, or The Legal System Is Even WORSE Than Gambling!, or Pulling The Teeth Out Of The Mouth Of The Legal System, or Any Person Subject To…, or The Holes In The Legal System, or Is Someone Shopping Around For A Friendly Judge?, none of this would be a mystery to you.

BigRed

It’s a hard pill to swallow for many but the truth is, it easier for a fellon to get a gun coming out of prison than for a law abiding citizen in most states. And it always will be. There are hundreds of millions of ”illegal” guns in the black market. If the felon is someone you cannot trust with a gun, then they should not be freed, perhaps they need to be forever put into the system and moved into easier, nicer conditions rather than be freed for good behavior. If our prison system was a true rehabilitation center… Read more »

Grigori

I totally agree, Big Red. They have done so many Orwellian things with regard to words and meanings and each year, more and more “crimes” get classified as felonies or have a felony aspect added. I can only surmise that the root goal of this is to make more people into “prohibited persons”. It kills me to read that someone caught for drug distribution is convicted with “possessing a firearm during commission of a violent crime” when no violence occurred. No shots fired. No resisting arrest. But somehow, our lawmakers and LE conflate having a gun in possession with drugs… Read more »

J.galt

If felons who have “served their time” can’t be trusted in a free society, perhaps they should be executed for the safety of society

Chuck

You’re correct, and it points out the fallacy of prohibiting what’s never been and never will be successfully prohibited. Just as Prohibition and the War on Drugs have or are still failing.

I don’t recall who said it first or when, but history has proved it’s a Truth.
“There will always be a market, for that which is Prohibited.”

Chuck

Frankly, If someone, who has paid their debt to society, is too dangerous to have their Constitutionally Protected Rights fully restored upon completion of their debt, then they should never have been released from prison in the first place.
Historically, that was how it was during the 18th, 19th and most of the 20th Centuries. It wasn’t until the passage of the Equally Unconstitutional Gun Control Act of 1968, that Felons were denied the restoration of the 2nd Amendment Rights.

Rodoeo

The only felony I’ve ever faced was an incident when I was 17 years old. A buddy of mine was selling drugs 9weed) w/o my knowledge. I was in the vehicle when the local city drug squad busted ‘us’. They charged us both with conspiracy to distribute. My case was thrown out/dismissed due to lack of evidence yet it’s still on my FBI file and also NICS. It causes me delays and occasional denials. I’ve never had any incidents with LE since other than traffic related but still get hassled over it. I’ve held a TSCI (secret) clearance with the… Read more »

Rodoeo

Absolutely.. lawyers aren’t cheap. Also, expunged doesn’t mean the FBI expunges it, just private sector. There is literally no way to get this off your NICS/FBI record. I keep waiting for the ATF to show up at my door so I can explain but they don’t… It just causes me pain and suffering and random denials.

I had to retain a lawyer to even GET the details from NICS. I had no idea why I was getting denied but after spending a lot of money I now know it was that juvenile case.

Last edited 10 months ago by Rodoeo
Roland T. Gunner

Like most political or social questions, it’s really quite simple if you do the right thing

If a man is still a threat to society, keep him locked up. Otherwise, if he has paid his debt to society, he should regain his rights in a reasonable time frame, via a reasonsble process…if not immediately.

Ram

If, as it is claimed, a convicted criminal has served his sentence, and,
as claimed, is no longer a threat to society. There should be a mechanism
to reestablish his wholeness as a citizen. The state can always remember
this second chance status, to enforce enhanced sentencing for future criminal acts. A life outside prison walls as a second class citizen, is only
a continuation of prison life, with a better view. America is a land that should revere second chances.

TStheDeplorable

When Justice Amy Coney-Barrett was on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, she wrote a strong dissent arguing that at least non-violent felons retain the rights of the 2nd Amendment. Now, with Bruen, it seems that the ban on felons possessing firearms would have to be based on similar restrictions at the time the 2nd was ratified, and back then all felons were permitted to be armed once they paid their debt to society. In Bruen there were Justices who noted the racist motivations in some gun regulations. Even the infamous Dred Scot case decision was noted to have worried… Read more »

Logician

The entire legal system, and I mean from the very top of it, the Congress who writes the laws, all the way down to the Clerk of the Court, is one huge scam and crime syndicate! It operates in violation of its own rules and regulations and basic premises for existence with total immunity!! ALL of the “trials” are either rigged up scams, or pure gambles! What else can you call them? Frauds and other crimes run rampant throughout the legal system, and you can easily see it, if you open your eyes up just a little bit! I have… Read more »

Orion

if you feel our justice system is so corrupt, what is your solution?

Laddyboy

ONE: Did the subject of this discussion USE a WEAPON in the commission of a CRIME? THAT person should be BARRED! THAT person fits the ONE REASON our FOUNDING FATHERS stated for A Restriction. That person IS WANTON to harm others! TWO: The OFFENCE must be looked at on a “one to one situation”. Was the AFFRONT vicious or benign? Was the INTENT intended to harm others? THREE: IF the subject would be DANGEROUS to other after RELEASE, then, that person should NOT BE RELEASED! LOOKING at the SORROS PROSECUTORS who put THUGS and KILLERS back into the INNOCENT POPULATION!… Read more »