Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DeWine wants more jail time for felons with guns, Montgomery Co. Sheriff welcomes idea

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DeWine wants more jail time for felons with guns, Montgomery Co. Sheriff welcomes idea

    LOCAL NEWS
    by: Ethan Fitzgerald

    Posted: Jul 29, 2019 / 04:58 PM EDT / Updated: Jul 29, 2019 / 05:16 PM EDT

    MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Ohio (WDTN) – Governor Mike DeWine is asking the state legislature to consider stiffening penalties for felons caught with guns.

    DeWine wants Ohio law to mirror federal penalties.

    When a felon is caught with a gun the charge is typically filed under weapons under disability. And according to Montgomery County Sheriff Rob Streck, it’s a common charge locally.

    In Ohio, if a felon gets charged with weapons under disability, the offender is looking at five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Whereas at the federal level, the offender would likely get 10 years with 3 years supervised release and $250,000 in fines.

    Sheriff Streck is coming out in support of Governor DeWine who toured the Ohio State Fair last week and mentioned his intentions to try and stiffen gun penalties for felons.

    “To us, that’s when we sit back and say thank goodness. Somebody is paying attention to what’s going on and trying to help the community out,” said Sheriff Streck.

    The Sheriff says more time behind bars and safer streets makes this idea a no-brainer.

    “Because they are in prison or in the jail a little bit longer… hopefully that helps them change their outlook on how their using their life,” said Streck.

    Keeping guns out of the hands of convicted felons is a top priority for the sheriff’s office.

    Sheriff Streck said, “My detectives in special investigations stop at nothing. They work hour after hour trying to get those people in custody.”

    Because of the dangers behind weapons under disability, the goal is to get to the felons before they commit another crime.

    “We hit places where citizens complain. Where there’s overdose deaths and things like that. Because drugs and guns go hand in hand. Drugs, guns and Money,” said Streck.

    2 NEWS asked DeWine’s communications team what was next for the proposal. The immediate answer was not clear. A spokesman said it’s on Governor DeWine’s radar.
    Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. James Madison, Federalist Paper No 10

  • #2
    If these people couldn't care less of dying from a drug overdose or being shot and serving 5-10 years of existing laws, what makes anyone think the care if they served 15-20 when in reality they will serve 2-5 anyway because of over crowded jails and prisons? There is a reason they have a gun with these drugs, they are willing to kill, die and protect their habit and use.

    This is just political jargon to make DeWine look tough on crime. When in reality it does nothing but fill up the fail houses even more.

    You want to keep Ohioans safe, let them protect themselves, Pass Constitutional Carry, support Stand Your Ground Laws and stop telling people the state will save you because they can't, won't and it was never their obligation to begin with. We are called a regulation nation for a reason..

    I have one question for you folks who think the' war on drugs' is actually working.

    We have been fighting this war since Richard Nixon declared a 'war on drugs' in June 1971. and really way before that. Nixon went on to create the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in 1973. This agency is responsible for tackling drug use and smuggling in the United States. At the start, the DEA was given 1,470 special agents and a budget of less than $75 million. Today, the agency has nearly 5,000 agents and a budget of $2.03 billion. We have
    from 1993 to 2011, there were three million admissions into federal and state prisons for drug offenses. Over the same period, there were 30 million arrests for drug crime, 24 million of which were for possession. Some of these were repeat offenders, of course.

    We have lost individual rights, liberty, freedoms and INNOCENT LIVES because of it. And still going on today. From Unconstitutional Civil Forfeiture laws, that is in reality, Government theft that Nixon introduced, to innocent Americans being murdered by police for the no knock policies to catch drug dealers and or users. See Houston Texas, and this one In Atlanta, Kathryn Johnson, a 92-year old woman took a seat in her La-Z-Boy to watch the evening news. She never realized she would never get out of the chair alive. She was shot and killed in her home in November 2006. Thinking her home was being invaded, Mrs. Johnson fired one shot. The cops responded by shooting her to death. Law enforcement fired 39 rounds at Mrs. Johnson as she remained in her brown faux-leather chair that was quickly turning red from the six shots that hit her. Those are just two examples.

    Now, We have politicians going after big pharmacy and trying to hit the lottery by having them either pay huge fines, imprisoning them or putting them completely out of business. And they are not even considering the ramification of their actions. They are not even thinking about the Americans they will be hurting through lack of availability, highers costs and quality of life who depend on medicines to even survive chronic pain or even acute pain.

    We all have choices and responsibility for those choices. Government should not be involved in what we put in our bodies. I know what I say here means nothing but I think it needs to be said. I use to think we need to put all these drug abusers and users in prison for the rest of their lives. Then, I got older and noticed more what was actually going on. The states and Feds accumulated more power, they have government has been more violent, innocent Americans have been murdered by the police and most of their punishment were they got to resign with full benefits. Not to be really held accountable for their unconstitutional action.

    There is a reason prohibition never worked. The people wanted the alcohol and they were willing to sacrifice everything to get it. At least the politicians were wise enough to realize that freedom means freedom to choose what you want to put your body and the state has no right to stop you in a truly free society. The repealed prohibition on alcohol.

    My question is when is it enough? When are we gonna say we can't do this anymore, this isn't right? When are we gonna fight for individual freedom, liberty and rights again? When are we gonna say the person who is accountable for their own actions and will pay the price for their own vices? We have grown a government that really isn't worried about the actual drug use, but salivate over the possibility of money that might be found for their coffers. That's a very dangerous Government.

    Think about it folks. We need to rethink this 'war on drugs' that isn't working and never have. We have more drug use today than ever. Enough is enough. Choose freedom.








    I carry a firearm because a cop is too heavy and takes too many breaks.

    Montani Semper Liberi - (Mountaineers Are Always Free)

    Comment


    • #3
      Dewine attempted to put in place similar penalties for third time offenders while he was AG and Kasich shot it down (pun intended). Now, as Governor...he is attempting it again and ELIMINATING the third strike for FELONS who are caught with a GUN. While I agree with your sentiment, and believe constitutional carry (more good guys carrying firearms), eliminating duty to retreat, and additionally...ending gun free zones (one point you missed in the above dissertation), why is it you must detract from what is most certainly a step in the right direction? Your observations and comments, while all valid, seem to indicate some sort of disdain for any attempts by our politicritters (maybe Dewine specifically) to do something that will help keep our streets safe.

      This is just political jargon to make DeWine look tough on crime. When in reality it does nothing but fill up the fail houses even more.
      Are you indicating you'd rather convicted felons who are caught with a firearm under disability continue to use the revolving door of our criminal justice system and remain a danger to society VS. keeping them in "the fail house" where they are not a danger to the public?

      If this is indeed "political jargon" attempted at influencing public opinion...he is at the very least being persistent in his attempt. Could it be possible he actually wants to keep violent criminals behind bars? Wouldn't less gun crime benefit the entire 2A community?
      Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. James Madison, Federalist Paper No 10

      Comment


      • #4
        So stabbing someone with a knife or budging someone to death with a sledge hammer is somehow not as bad as shooting someone with a gun? Would increasing the state penalty of having a gun, but not a knife or a club or a hammer, from 5 to 10 years cause an evil criminal to decide not to hurt someone? Would increasing the state penalty of having a gun prevent someone from acquiring a gun? No, but it will keep the focus on the gun so that when increased penalties fail, the next argument is, and has always been, to remove all guns from society. DeWine is not aiming at violent criminals; he is aiming at our guns, surreptitiously, just like he has always done.

        Also, DeWine is a lawyer and former attorney general--so he knows that many of those convicted of state weapons disability offenses are also prosecuted at the federal level and also do federal time. I know first hand that at least one U.S. attorney in Ohio trolls state dockets for state weapons under disability convictions for easy federal prosecutions. And before anyone says "double jeopardy" see Gamble v. United States (2019), No. 17-646, 587 U.S. ___.

        And then there is this:
        Because of the dangers behind weapons under disability, the goal is to get to the felons before they commit another crime.
        Really? I thought people in America were innocent until proven guilty.
        "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by liberty View Post
          So stabbing someone with a knife or budging someone to death with a sledge hammer is somehow not as bad as shooting someone with a gun?
          Nope. Murder is murder. Tool does not matter.

          Originally posted by liberty View Post
          Really? I thought people in America were innocent until proven guilty.
          They are. We are talking about people who have been convicted. Multiple times. When less than 2% of the population commits over 50% of all violent crime, then maybe we should take a look at the 2% and quit turning them back on the street? Just sayin. Not rocket surgery.

          Comment


          • #6
            The problem we have is that the same people who support turning violent people back on the street support laws that make it illegal for those same people to have firearms, while allowing them to have bows and arrows, knives, hammers, axes, automobiles, etc... That is absolutely illogical, but people buy it because the democrats who are impersonating journalists keep repeating those illogical arguments. It should be obvious to everyone that these are excuses to target firearms because an adequately armed population cannot be enslaved. Laws prohibiting certain people from having firearms does not do anything but perpetuate the fallacy that civilian ownership of firearms is bad.

            I think we need to try to change the narrative to keeping people in prison longer who have committed violent acts without consideration of what kind of weapon was used. If someone cannot be trusted with a weapon, that person should not be free, because he/she will get a weapon regardless of what is legal or illegal.
            "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Aaron View Post
              Dewine attempted to put in place similar penalties for third time offenders while he was AG and Kasich shot it down (pun intended). Now, as Governor...he is attempting it again and ELIMINATING the third strike for FELONS who are caught with a GUN. While I agree with your sentiment, and believe constitutional carry (more good guys carrying firearms), eliminating duty to retreat, and additionally...ending gun free zones (one point you missed in the above dissertation), why is it you must detract from what is most certainly a step in the right direction? Your observations and comments, while all valid, seem to indicate some sort of disdain for any attempts by our politicritters (maybe Dewine specifically) to do something that will help keep our streets safe.



              Are you indicating you'd rather convicted felons who are caught with a firearm under disability continue to use the revolving door of our criminal justice system and remain a danger to society VS. keeping them in "the fail house" where they are not a danger to the public?

              If this is indeed "political jargon" attempted at influencing public opinion...he is at the very least being persistent in his attempt. Could it be possible he actually wants to keep violent criminals behind bars? Wouldn't less gun crime benefit the entire 2A community?

              Absolutely not, I want violent thugs to stay in prison especially rapists, murderers and Pedophiles forever. My point is this is political jargon because he wants theses tougher on crime bills added on Gun control laws. If he was really serious, he would do this with a clean more prison time bills. From what I have seen, he’s wanting to lump them altogether. And you know exactly why he’s doing it.
              I carry a firearm because a cop is too heavy and takes too many breaks.

              Montani Semper Liberi - (Mountaineers Are Always Free)

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm sorry... don't tell me "I know exactly what he is doing" as if you have insight into my thinking and reasoning. The first time I ACCIDENTALLY shook that man's hand at a Sportsman's Alliance Reception, it took me MONTHS to shake the slime off. It has taken him several yrs, and multiple actions to bring me around to my current tolerance. Though I do not believe he is a "champion" of the RTKABA, I feel he has moved our direction significantly. He has a long way to go, but we are working with him, and his office. It does us NO GOOD to simply scream at the top of our lungs we don't agree with something. Reasoning and civil discourse are our only options right now. If they do not result in the proper constitutionally constrained legal guidelines necessary for our Republic to survive, then alternative resolutions may be the result. Let us function within the Democratic Republic that our forefathers created until that time is upon us...
                Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. James Madison, Federalist Paper No 10

                Comment


                • #9
                  BS, that’s weak myopic pandering to the King. You don’t give up our rights, freedoms and liberties thinking you will be getting something in return when in reality you will lose those rights and they will be back for more. These Fascist Authoritarian Totalitarian Politicians from both sides have been doing this for decades. I’ve watched them do it. So yea, I have a real good idea what they want, they want more power over you while you accept the fact that you will have less freedom, liberties and individual rights. If you can’t see that, then why in hell are you fighting at all? Breadcrumbs and hope pray the Kings will see it your way some day?

                  How naive.
                  I carry a firearm because a cop is too heavy and takes too many breaks.

                  Montani Semper Liberi - (Mountaineers Are Always Free)

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X