Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/16/2001 6:47:17 PM EDT
Spin Doctors on MAX! [url]http://www.vpc.org/press/0110emer.htm[/url] Violence Policy Center Applauds Emerson Decision, Court Upholds Protective Order Gun Ban NRA-Endorsed Suit Would Have Allowed Domestic Abusers To Keep Their Guns WASHINGTON, DC—The Violence Policy Center (VPC) today applauded the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in United States v. Emerson. In reversing a lower district court ruling, the judges rejected the argument that the Second Amendment guarantees domestic abusers an individual right to keep and bear arms and that the plaintiff, Timothy Joe Emerson, was denied due process when arrested for possessing firearms under 1994's federal Protective Order Gun Ban. The VPC is a national non-profit organization working to stop gun death and injury in America. Mathew Nosanchuk, VPC litigation director and legislative counsel states, "Today the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the sweeping arguments of the gun lobby that the Second Amendment guarantees domestic abusers an individual right to possess a gun. Final score: public safety, one; gun lobby and domestic abusers, zero." Timothy Joe Emerson, a Texas resident, had been charged with violating 18 U.S.C.§ 922(g)(8), which prohibits possession of a firearm by persons under a domestic violence restraining order. Emerson's wife obtained such an order from a judge in 1998, after Emerson had acknowledged his mental instability. Two months later Emerson's wife and daughter went to his office, where Emerson pulled his Beretta pistol from his desk drawer during an argument. Emerson was subsequently indicted for illegally possessing two 9mm pistols, a semi-auto SKS assault rifle with bayonet, a semi-auto M-14 assault rifle, and an M1 carbine and tried in District Court. Emerson contended that his case should be dismissed on the grounds that the federal ban on gun possession by those under a protective order for domestic violence violated the Second Amendment. The district judge sided with Emerson and dismissed the charges. Justice Department prosecutors then appealed the trial court's decision, stating that it directly conflicted with long-established legal precedent regarding the Second Amendment laid down by the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Miller [307 U.S. 174 (1939)] as well as the language of the Second Amendment itself, which speaks in terms of a limited right to keep and bear arms in connection with service in a state militia.
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 6:54:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/16/2001 6:49:21 PM EDT by raf]
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 6:59:02 PM EDT
VPC is just polishing the brass on the Titanic. The AW ban WILL go away in 04',and things will just get beter from there. Something like the second amenment restoration act will get passed, and all will be well and their 'cause' will be a moot point. They smell defeat and are looking for whatever victories they can. IMHO
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 7:03:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/16/2001 6:58:56 PM EDT by doc_Zox]
like the ruling? wear the T-shirt! [url]www.cafepress.com/2ndamendment[/url] [img]http://images.cafepress.com/zoom/698434_zoom.jpg[/img] :) dZ
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 7:05:30 PM EDT
They always claim victory. They are as stupid as SoDamn Insane, don't know when their asses have been kicked.
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 7:28:06 PM EDT
Teh ruling is great, but unless I misunderstand something, Emerson must have been a dumb sh*t to pull a gun in the middle of an argument with his spouse, restraining order or not.
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 7:31:24 PM EDT
a semi-auto SKS assault rifle with bayonet Oh no, a assault rifle with a fixed magazine and a pointy thing where the bullets come out! So scary!
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 7:37:40 PM EDT
How did you guys even FIND this VPC statement? Everyone is so busy with Anthrax, worries about future terrorist strikes, and the War in Afganistan that no one is broadcasting either the decision or the VPC's response to it.
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 8:04:34 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LARRYG: They always claim victory. They are as stupid as SoDamn Insane, don't know when their asses have been kicked.
View Quote
Liberals are good at spin control. Gotta give 'em that. They're just trying to find a way to bolster the troops and get fellow libs to cough up some cash by claiming that victory is in sight. Timing's damn bad for them.
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 9:35:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Armed Scientist: VPC is just polishing the brass on the Titanic. The AW ban WILL go away in 04',and things will just get beter from there. Something like the second amenment restoration act will get passed, and all will be well and their 'cause' will be a moot point. They smell defeat and are looking for whatever victories they can. IMHO
View Quote
I wish I shared your optimism!!
Link Posted: 10/16/2001 11:41:27 PM EDT
Woo hoo! I am sending my resume to VPC this week!
Link Posted: 10/17/2001 12:27:33 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/17/2001 7:52:32 AM EDT
Still skeptical over the decision, but hope it somehow helps the oppressed living under Kalifornia Socialist Democrat rule.
Link Posted: 10/17/2001 8:03:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/17/2001 8:06:37 AM EDT by nightstalker]
The Second Amendment & The NRA The events of September 11th appear to have strengthened support for Second Amendment Freedoms. Fifty-six percent of Americans feel the National Rifle Association speaks for them at least some of the time. Fifty-one percent of Americans also said they own a gun or plan to own a gun which parallels the findings in other recent surveys. The Zogby/Associated Television News survey also found that 66% of Americans agreed with the right to carry a firearm on their person or in their car for protection provided they passed a background check and had a safety course. Q. Please tell me if the National Rifle Association speaks for you all of the time, most of the time, some of the time, or never? All of the time 12% Most of the time 14% ------------ > 56% at least some of the time Some of the time 30% http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/011015/02033037_1.html Q. Do you or anyone in your home own a gun or plan to own a gun? Yes - own 46% > 51% own or plan to own a gun Yes - plan to own 5% Q. Do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree that a man or woman who has had a background check by a law enforcement agency or had a safety course, has the right to carry a firearm on their person or in their car for protection? Strongly Agree 46% Somewhat Disagree 11% > 66% agree Somewhat Agree 20% Strongly Disagree 20%
Link Posted: 10/17/2001 8:43:59 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Big_Bear: Regarding the Emerson case, I'm no lawyer but I wonder why they don't have 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)(C)(ii)... (restraining order prohibition) tossed out on the grounds that it's an ex post facto law, which is unconstitutional.
View Quote
Excellent question! I've wondered that myself. I own guns before the restraining order & then after the restraining order is issued I'm guilty for possessing something that was legal before hand. I've been made a criminal for possession after the fact???????? I don't get that!
Top Top