Thin blue line shields us from an armed and dangerous felon

I've always been dubious about the idea that convicted felons should be stripped of important civil rights even after they've serve their time. That's especially true of non-violent offenders. And it's even more concerning when we're talking about somebody deprived of their rights decades after a crime. (We'll put aside, for the moment, concerns about the crimes that never should have been crimes.)

We have both in a story from Connecticut, ably covered by David Codrea of The Examiner:

And the purpose of the raid? The compelling reason 15 heavily-armed police state ninjas used a battering ram on an unlocked door, assaulted and threw citizens to the ground, put guns to their heads, terrorized a man with a heart condition, destroyed and seized property, and generally trashed the place?

Because a son who "was arrested 34 years ago at the age of 17 with a friend who had forged a check [and] hasn't been arrested since" was living with his gun owner father.

That's right. The ATF pulled a D-Day on a peaceful family because one person dwelling in the home, alongside a gun owner, was arrested 34 years ago.

The kicker? After all that fuss, the ATF confiscated all guns but one. They left behind a loaded Beretta pistol.

If any of this makes sense to you, you have a better insight into cop-think than I ever will.