11
11
0
Posted 2 y ago
Responses: 8
Failure to pay court ordered child support is civil contempt. Although it is punishable by fine and/or imprisonment, it is not a crime. Generally, We the People may not be denied our rights unless convicted of a felony. So, I'm going to go with "No"
(9)
(0)
SFC Ralph E Kelley
To the SGT (Anonymous) Army | (Other / Not listed) Retired at Retired above.
Yes and speeding in a crime too. So is parking in a handicap spot. Plus failure to come to a full stop at a stop sign. Hogging the passing lane on an interstate. Failing to be invited into a house (trespass - even at your sainted grandmother's) Allowing an official document to remain with your name misspelt (My last name is KELLEY, noy Kelly, Kellee, Kele, Keley, Killy, Kally, Colley, Calley, etc, etc)
If all 'crimes' were applied then not a single person in the United States would be crime-free. Remember it doesn't just stop at the 2nd Amendment it includes all the Constitutional Rights and Amendments. A slippery slope for a law-based society.
My guess is you have a personal bias herein about child support.
Fair enough because I have a personal bias in support of the Constitution.
CPT Jack Durish CPT (Join to see) SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTMLTC Stephen F. CPL Douglas Chrysler Maj Robert Thornton LTC Trent Klug SPC Matthew Aamot
Yes and speeding in a crime too. So is parking in a handicap spot. Plus failure to come to a full stop at a stop sign. Hogging the passing lane on an interstate. Failing to be invited into a house (trespass - even at your sainted grandmother's) Allowing an official document to remain with your name misspelt (My last name is KELLEY, noy Kelly, Kellee, Kele, Keley, Killy, Kally, Colley, Calley, etc, etc)
If all 'crimes' were applied then not a single person in the United States would be crime-free. Remember it doesn't just stop at the 2nd Amendment it includes all the Constitutional Rights and Amendments. A slippery slope for a law-based society.
My guess is you have a personal bias herein about child support.
Fair enough because I have a personal bias in support of the Constitution.
CPT Jack Durish CPT (Join to see) SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTMLTC Stephen F. CPL Douglas Chrysler Maj Robert Thornton LTC Trent Klug SPC Matthew Aamot
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
To Ralph. “My guess is you have a personal bias herein about child support.”
I have a personal bias against blatantly false information. The OP wrote that, “Although it is punishable by fine and/or imprisonment, it is not a crime”.
That is demonstrably false.
I have a personal bias against blatantly false information. The OP wrote that, “Although it is punishable by fine and/or imprisonment, it is not a crime”.
That is demonstrably false.
(0)
(0)
SFC Ralph E Kelley
To the SGT (Anonymous) Army | (Other / Not listed) Retired at Retired above.
I actually agreed with you.
I said: "Yes and speeding in a crime too." and further elaborated further down with, "If all 'crimes' were applied then not a single person in the United States would be crime-free. Remember it doesn't just stop at the 2nd Amendment it includes all the Constitutional Rights and Amendments. A slippery slope for a law-based society."
I don't know you but have you never, ever committed any of those other crimes I outlined? If so under a society that 'enforced' the removal of a person rights after commission of one of those minor crime, you (nor I or many others) would have none.
If they are charge with and convicted of a felony then it follows that they DO lose their rights. A misdemeanor - I say NO.
I actually agreed with you.
I said: "Yes and speeding in a crime too." and further elaborated further down with, "If all 'crimes' were applied then not a single person in the United States would be crime-free. Remember it doesn't just stop at the 2nd Amendment it includes all the Constitutional Rights and Amendments. A slippery slope for a law-based society."
I don't know you but have you never, ever committed any of those other crimes I outlined? If so under a society that 'enforced' the removal of a person rights after commission of one of those minor crime, you (nor I or many others) would have none.
If they are charge with and convicted of a felony then it follows that they DO lose their rights. A misdemeanor - I say NO.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
To Ralph. I read what you wrote. Please note that I haven’t directly given or inferred an opinion on whether someone convicted of a (any) crime should lose any rights.
The OP stated that failure to pay child support isn’t a crime. I simply explained that it is a crime. In every state and also federally.
The OP stated that failure to pay child support isn’t a crime. I simply explained that it is a crime. In every state and also federally.
(0)
(0)
Typical lib move. Next they will want the indebted individual to rat out any friends and family who possess firearms.
(8)
(0)
The rights set forth in the "Bill of Rights" are not granted by the government but guaranteed to be observed by part of the US Constitution. Prior to the imposition of the "banned for life" due to the commission of a domestic abuse misdemeanor, it required a felony conviction to lose the right of self-defense. I have never been entirely comfortable with the loss of Constitutional rights for a misdemeanor. When I was a police officer about 80% of the domestic rape and abuse allegations were false, or enhanced by the complainant. At the same time, I suspect most cases of domestic abuse go unreported. Considering all of the above I am still somewhat torn when it comes to this issue.
When the government expresses the desire to suspend civil rights for what is essentially 'contempt of court', the federal government has gone a bridge too far. I am forced to wonder, is the object of this proposed law to encourage irresponsible parents to pay, or is it to deprive people of the right to own firearms.
Food for thought.
When the government expresses the desire to suspend civil rights for what is essentially 'contempt of court', the federal government has gone a bridge too far. I am forced to wonder, is the object of this proposed law to encourage irresponsible parents to pay, or is it to deprive people of the right to own firearms.
Food for thought.
(7)
(0)
Read This Next