# YAGunThread - Let's keep it simple **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 18, 2013, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yagunthread-lets-keep-it-simple/650725 "2013-02-18T19:45:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2013, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yagunthread-lets-keep-it-simple/650725/41 "2013-02-22T05:37:28Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Because you are punishing him for a crime he didn’t commit. He had the gun, but did not use it and it was not part of the crime. You can’t punish him worse for doing something legal that is unconnected to the crime. > > Your assumption is that the criminal would have used the gun he was carrying if that became necessary to commit the crime. Don’t you need to show evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, that this is true? You can’t just assume that he is guilty of intent to use a gun. You have to show that he did intend to do so, and that is an uphill battle, especially since he didn’t use the gun. > > You can’t punish people for crimes they might have committed, but didn’t. That’s (IMO) the Constitutional issue. > > Suppose the criminal is wearing a belt. He could have used it to strangle someone. Even though he didn’t, don’t we need to double his sentence? > > Regards, > Shodan > [@SirGalahad](#): > > Let’s agree to disagree … but my gist doesn’t involve deterrence, it involves actual crimes committed. A felon or someone in illegal possession of a gun is already committing a gun crime by owning and carrying the weapon; no new laws needed. > If the perp is legally carrying, charging him additionally flies in the face of an already tarnished justice system. Charge criminals for crimes to control crime, not for non-crimes to control possession of Constitutionally protected arms, in an effort to work around the 2nd Amendment. If enacted, a law like that could lead to speeders or reckless drivers being charged with a gun crime for having a legal gun in the car. The only constitutional issue is the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. We criminalize mere possession of a firearm in all sorts of situations. Drinking in a bar while carrying is a crime. Being a felon while carrying is a crime. Being in a federal building while carrying is a crime. And committing a crime while carrying can also be a crime. And I think I stated waaaay at the beginning that the crimes that this could apply to would have to be limited to avoid silly scenarios like speeding. ---
**Author:** ![kopek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kopek/32/337_2.png) [@kopek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kopek)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2013, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yagunthread-lets-keep-it-simple/650725/42 "2013-02-25T16:46:25Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > This problem has a solution: Electable judges. Got them – doesn’t help. Actually makes the abuse worse and the temptation for mandatory sentences even greater - especially during election season. ---
**Author:** ![Abatis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d78d45/32.png) [@Abatis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abatis)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yagunthread-lets-keep-it-simple/650725/43 "2013-03-03T07:09:01Z")
I think we have to swing way back from where we are now to get to the place where we actually punish gun toting criminals. Here’s what’s happening right now in St Louis. Give me your honest assessment of this “criminal justice” policy as explained by St. Louis Police Chief Dan Isom: * * * [INDENT]"One thing we have to be aware of to give context to this whole problem is that we are looking at an urban problem. It’s much less a suburban or rural problem. It really affects young minorities— Hispanic and black males. I think that the suspects devalue life, the victims devalue life, and the system also devalues life. When you look at the shooting victims and suspects in these neighborhoods, you see 20 or 30 felony arrests, with eight convictions. Often the convictions don’t result in any jail time at all; they’re getting probation on top of probation. This has caused a lot of us in cities to move toward federal prosecution, because we know on the state level it’s a hit-and-miss prospect: they’re arrested, they’re convicted, and they come out multiple times. In Missouri, there’s a type of probation people can receive, and it has made it very difficult for us to establish a person as a convicted felon. I’ve heard other chiefs talking about the fact that a weapons charge in their state is only a misdemeanor offense. But in St. Louis, a weapons violation can turn out to be no offense at all. An individual will get arrested for a weapons charge, which is a felony, and often they plead to that case and get an SIS—a suspended imposition of sentence. It means that if you serve out your probation, which everybody does, that conviction is erased. So if you’re arrested again with another weapon, you don’t have a conviction on your record, so you’re not a felon in possession of a weapon. If you continue to get multiple SISs, you never become a convicted felon. These offenders will often show up for other crimes, and if they never have a conviction, then you’re never able to put stiffer charges on them."[/INDENT] * * * Really, I don’t think that’s a problem at all; actually punishing criminals who use guns is way overrated . . . I really think we should just concentrate on gun control for White, non-urban people. It is so much easier and stupid people will actually believe politicians are “doing something”. And we won’t be losing loyal democrat voters to felon disablement! Win all the way around, disarm White tea party birther clingers and keep the Homeboys happy! . [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yagunthread-lets-keep-it-simple/650725.md?page=2)