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

[exploited]

[Philly]

You already got me being inconsistent. I said you could jail someone for fraud. And yeah, violating probation can mean jail time at a judges discretion, though I think the judges should exercise a lot of discretion. That's fine with me, but all the big sentences we require off the bat for non violent crimes is not ok.

[exploited]

[Philly]

Because your extreme case example included other crimes besides stalking. Violent ones. Give me a real life example of JUST stalking with no violent crimes or terroristic threats where years are warranted and I'll reconsider.

[eynon81]

[exploited]

[Philly]

[Indy]

I disagree with the idea that stalking is a non-violent crime. In the hardcore cases we've been citing, that's violence all right. Even if the stalker never physically touched them, the threat of violence is what makes it so terrifying.

Point being, you want it handled BEFORE violence can occur.

I'm not saying every instance of stalking should mean--gasp!--something draconian like mandatory minimums or that we should fill our prisons with, say, people who are stalking because they're mentally ill.

But guns? F*** no.

[Philly]

[exploited]