onikaizoku11

onikaizoku11 t1_j9y9lcw wrote

>I believe fines are only punishment for poor people, so that's why I say jail time minimum. That way, even millionaires who illegally acquire a firearm without the proper training would have a consequence.

Is what I was really pointing at in that comment.

Why are fines mostly only bad for the poorer of us? Because they don't have the same resources. A say $500 fine, just throwing out a realistic figure, is less than a pittance for a wealthy individual, that is food money for half the month for financially struggling people.

Now throw mandatory jail time into the mix, same variables. Rich person can get representation and fight legally much easier than a poor person. Hell, in the case of the affluent, them not even being officially charged for lengthy periods of time after offenses is a real consideration.

For reference, I have lived in a part of Georgia where there is still a law on the books that says every home is required to have a firearm. Throw in the newish law pretty much getting rid of the need for permits of any kind to carry or own here.... Who is hurt more before that commentor's idea? After? The poor guy only now he has jailtime on his record.

2

onikaizoku11 t1_j9xwrvj wrote

Your heart is in the right place, but you are only adding another layer to a problem. Not solving it. You only get the jail time after a conviction, which comes after a trial, a trial that the wealthy can circumvent for years if not indefinitely in a state like Texas.

I don't profer a solution here, to be clear and honest, but your proposed solution makes stuff worse.

1