NRA: Guns for Stalkers/Abusers OK, 1st Amendment Not OK

[Indy]

Point being, once he violates, it's because he's not going to stop. And you have to decide how many years of that woman's life are going to be taken from her--if he doesn't kill her.

[Philly]

[Indy]

Like I said, you need to have some experience with what happens when women get stalked. You won't be so liberal about sentencing, and you certainly won't think I'm a fascist.

Stalking destroys the lives of women, even after the fact (if they're still alive). It should be treated as seriously as something like rape.

[Philly]

[Indy]

It's not an appeal to emotion it's an appeal to REALITY.

You seem to think that stalking is merely some kind of nuisance that women have to tolerate from annoying/creepy guys.

You have no idea.

[Philly]

[Indy]

Yeah, rape is just that much farther up the ladder than this?



Like I said, you need to look into some stalking cases to better understand how heinous this crime really is and what it does to women--if they survive.

Back to the original point: when you stalk, your Second Amendment rights (as they're being interpreted now) should be revoked.

[exploited]

[Indy]

Right. No argument there.

[exploited]

So the issue is how you embody that in law. Maybe have a felony stalking charge and a misdemeanor charge, and make the determination of that part of the court proceedings?