Archived Posts » 59,699,509
Fourth Circuit Reviewing Constitutionality of § 922(g)(9)
12/30/2010 11:49:18 PM
It's going to be very interesting to see how this plays out. Should a DV misdemeanor conviction justify losing your RKBA? The comments at the link below are also well worth reading.
http://volokh.com/2010/12/30/big-second-amendment-opinion-from-the-fourth-circuit-related-to-the-ban-on-gun-possession-by-domestic-violence-misdemeanants
http://volokh.com/2010/12/30/big-second-amendment-opinion-from-the-fourth-circuit-related-to-the-ban-on-gun-possession-by-domestic-violence-misdemeanants
12/31/2010 12:06:57 AM
12/31/2010 2:22:55 AM
DV should not be used as a means for stripping the RIGHT TKBA.
I understand the "good intentions" behind that law but in reality it is just another "loophole" to restrict gun ownership PERIOD.
Every situation is different: "wife beater" gets drunk and takes it out on "his family who has done nothing wrong" is an asshole and should spend time in jail.
However, there are some "women/men regardless of sexual preference" (not being stereotypical just example) who ask for it just in the same as a child who is bad "just for the attention"
Then you have the "domestic" just because you are related, "if I want to kick my cousins ass because he is being a twatwaffel that should be treated as assault PERIOD, not DV "because we are related"
And there is DV because your wife/husband has fucked up royally and beating his/her ass is deserved or heat of the moment. but still should only be considered as battery and not DV. as in " you came home from working a shitload of hours and catch/findout your husband/wife is/has been fucking your friend/brother/sister/whatever yeah you should be able to go off and still keep your rights.
I feel the line between DV and assault and battery has been construed only for the sake of "another reason to scare people into allowing the .gov to restrict the rights of the people to keep and bear arms.
How about we restrict rights for traffic violations just so almost everyone cannot own a firearm.
there has to be a line drawn, Yes there are VERY bad people in the world whom commit extremely horrendous violations against humanity but laws should be written to combat those offenders and keep them from causing harm to society and NOT used for political agenda to decree a common goal and that goal being eliminating everyone from owning a gun one "feel good" law at a time.
I understand the "good intentions" behind that law but in reality it is just another "loophole" to restrict gun ownership PERIOD.
Every situation is different: "wife beater" gets drunk and takes it out on "his family who has done nothing wrong" is an asshole and should spend time in jail.
However, there are some "women/men regardless of sexual preference" (not being stereotypical just example) who ask for it just in the same as a child who is bad "just for the attention"
Then you have the "domestic" just because you are related, "if I want to kick my cousins ass because he is being a twatwaffel that should be treated as assault PERIOD, not DV "because we are related"
And there is DV because your wife/husband has fucked up royally and beating his/her ass is deserved or heat of the moment. but still should only be considered as battery and not DV. as in " you came home from working a shitload of hours and catch/findout your husband/wife is/has been fucking your friend/brother/sister/whatever yeah you should be able to go off and still keep your rights.
I feel the line between DV and assault and battery has been construed only for the sake of "another reason to scare people into allowing the .gov to restrict the rights of the people to keep and bear arms.
How about we restrict rights for traffic violations just so almost everyone cannot own a firearm.
there has to be a line drawn, Yes there are VERY bad people in the world whom commit extremely horrendous violations against humanity but laws should be written to combat those offenders and keep them from causing harm to society and NOT used for political agenda to decree a common goal and that goal being eliminating everyone from owning a gun one "feel good" law at a time.
12/31/2010 11:19:28 AM
Originally Posted By jixxerbeast:
DV should not be used as a means for stripping the RIGHT TKBA.
I understand the "good intentions" behind that law but in reality it is just another "loophole" to restrict gun ownership PERIOD.
Every situation is different: "wife beater" gets drunk and takes it out on "his family who has done nothing wrong" is an asshole and should spend time in jail.
However, there are some "women/men regardless of sexual preference" (not being stereotypical just example) who ask for it just in the same as a child who is bad "just for the attention"
Then you have the "domestic" just because you are related, "if I want to kick my cousins ass because he is being a twatwaffel that should be treated as assault PERIOD, not DV "because we are related"
And there is DV because your wife/husband has fucked up royally and beating his/her ass is deserved or heat of the moment. but still should only be considered as battery and not DV. as in " you came home from working a shitload of hours and catch/findout your husband/wife is/has been fucking your friend/brother/sister/whatever yeah you should be able to go off and still keep your rights.I feel the line between DV and assault and battery has been construed only for the sake of "another reason to scare people into allowing the .gov to restrict the rights of the people to keep and bear arms.
How about we restrict rights for traffic violations just so almost everyone cannot own a firearm.
there has to be a line drawn, Yes there are VERY bad people in the world whom commit extremely horrendous violations against humanity but laws should be written to combat those offenders and keep them from causing harm to society and NOT used for political agenda to decree a common goal and that goal being eliminating everyone from owning a gun one "feel good" law at a time.
DV should not be used as a means for stripping the RIGHT TKBA.
I understand the "good intentions" behind that law but in reality it is just another "loophole" to restrict gun ownership PERIOD.
Every situation is different: "wife beater" gets drunk and takes it out on "his family who has done nothing wrong" is an asshole and should spend time in jail.
However, there are some "women/men regardless of sexual preference" (not being stereotypical just example) who ask for it just in the same as a child who is bad "just for the attention"
Then you have the "domestic" just because you are related, "if I want to kick my cousins ass because he is being a twatwaffel that should be treated as assault PERIOD, not DV "because we are related"
And there is DV because your wife/husband has fucked up royally and beating his/her ass is deserved or heat of the moment. but still should only be considered as battery and not DV. as in " you came home from working a shitload of hours and catch/findout your husband/wife is/has been fucking your friend/brother/sister/whatever yeah you should be able to go off and still keep your rights.I feel the line between DV and assault and battery has been construed only for the sake of "another reason to scare people into allowing the .gov to restrict the rights of the people to keep and bear arms.
How about we restrict rights for traffic violations just so almost everyone cannot own a firearm.
there has to be a line drawn, Yes there are VERY bad people in the world whom commit extremely horrendous violations against humanity but laws should be written to combat those offenders and keep them from causing harm to society and NOT used for political agenda to decree a common goal and that goal being eliminating everyone from owning a gun one "feel good" law at a time.
In Connecticut, Assault 3d (misdomeanor assault) is a state disqualifier [for permits and hanguns, and I believe TASERS too], regardless of who whether you assault your child/cohabitant or a guy you don't know. And, it is probably a good thing. A person who doesn't have the restraint to keep from slugging somebody is somebody who is likely to be dangerous posessing a firearm, especially in opublic. Many mutual gfights (e.g. bar fights) are charged as Breach of Peace 2d and will usually result in permit denial or revocation, on suitability, even though they are not statutory denials (even if the charge is dismissed....suitability is based on conduct, not convictions) - which make sense because the individual shows an inclination towards violent behavior, much can be made even more dangerous to the public by allowing them to posss a firearm. Studies have shown DV situations to magnify the epidemic. Blaming their situation for their manifestations is the reverse of promoting personal responsibility for ones actions. If a job (or other life circumstancea) are making somebody angry and stressed, the sound decision is to remove yourslef from the situation- temorarily or permenantly, and/or change thje underlying stressors and/or seek counseling. That way you don't make choices that you regret later. And, if you do make bad choices(and your circumstances have changed and years have passed), that's why (in Connecticut at least) there is an ecquitable pardon process.
And, the Supreme Court just upheld the prohibition what, 2 yerars ago? Even if the 4th Circuit looks at the appellant favorably, which I doubt they will, the standing national policy isn't going to change.
12/31/2010 2:45:46 PM
It is a retroactive law and one that is further screwed up by the courts. You are charged with a DV with you and your ex-girlfriend from high school. You plead the case to a disturbing the peace. Even though the final disposition is non-DV related, the ATF views it as a DV conviction. That presents major problems with the agreements made for the plea deals.
12/31/2010 9:18:37 PM
To add to the discussion, I also ask why the hell should conviction for committing one of the ever-increasing number of innocuous acts that is now labeled a "felony" disqualify one from keeping arms? Really, there are so many "felonies" on the books now that I'm sure everyone unknowingly commits one daily...
