9th Circuit Court of Appeals 2nd Amendment Ruling

[smoothshooter]

The Court recently ruled that felons not convicted of a violent crime may possess firearms.
I applaud the ruling.
So, what is the ripple effect of this?

Cajun Lawyer?

 

[johngalt]

The Court recently ruled that felons not convicted of a violent crime may possess firearms.
I applaud the ruling.
So, what is the ripple effect of this?

Cajun Lawyer?

Good news! I'm shocked the 9th has had some sensible rulings lately.

 

[Patrick L]

The ripple effect here in NYS will be that our wonderful governess will institute something new "just to show that NY stands up to the gun lobby." Last time we got ammo background checks, even though the ruling had nothing to do with ammo.

 

[GypsmJim]

Guns and the second amendment protect people that are law abiding citizens. If you are a felon, no matter whether it is violent or not, you lose that right.

The ripple effect is that some states / cities / localities will now make laws in opposition to that moron law, that will in effect harm the rest of us, i.e. the law abiders.

 

[smoothshooter]

Guns and the second amendment protect people that are law abiding citizens. If you are a felon, no matter whether it is violent or not, you lose that right.

The ripple effect is that some states / cities / localities will now make laws in opposition to that moron law, that will in effect harm the rest of us, i.e. the law abiders.

Felons (and illegal immigrants) are going to be allowed to vote before long, so why shouldn’t the non-violent American felons be allowed to have guns?

 

[ISCS Yoda]

There is an interesting debate with respect to non-violent felons. What crime did they commit? Sentencing a street corner marijuana dealer to prison is different than sentencing a world-class heroin importer to prison and VERY DIFFERENT when it comes to paper crimes such as lying on Federal forms, cheating the IRS, etc.

I'm somewhat sympathetic to the paper criminals (not the huge FSX types!) and maybe even street peddlers of marijuana but not to peddlers of heroin and fentanyl and cocaine, etc.

The ripple effect will be that the states and Congress will be altering their laws and rules accordingly. The effect on most of us should be minimal BICBW.

 

[walnutred]

Several years ago I was taking an OSHA training class at the University of Cincinnati. It was was a very cold January and I had a down parka. At lunch time I put on my parka, stuck my hand in my pocket and realized I had not left my P3AT in my hotel room. By Ohio law at the time I had committed a felony. Should that disqualify me from ever owning a firearm again?

 

[SMSgt]

Several years ago I was taking an OSHA training class at the University of Cincinnati. It was was a very cold January and I had a down parka. At lunch time I put on my parka, stuck my hand in my pocket and realized I had not left my P3AT in my hotel room. By Ohio law at the time I had committed a felony. Should that disqualify me from ever owning a firearm again?

You weren't "convicted" of a felony.

 

[Eric300]

If you're CONVICTED of a felony, you're a FELON. Doesn't make much difference to me what the crime was.

 

[Buford57]

Felony used to mean a capital crime. Possible death penalty. Later defined as a crime punishable by one year or more imprisonment. When I was on the job any bad check or combination of bad checks totalling $2500 was a felony. Stupid? Yeah. Irresponsible? Sure. Fine, restitution, maybe a little jail? Reasonable. Lifetime loss of a constitutional right? Didn't think it warranted it then, still don't.

 

[S-W4EVER]

Felony used to mean a capital crime. Possible death penalty. Later defined as a crime punishable by one year or more imprisonment. When I was on the job any bad check or combination of bad checks totalling $2500 was a felony. Stupid? Yeah. Irresponsible? Sure. Fine, restitution, maybe a little jail? Reasonable. Lifetime loss of a constitutional right? Didn't think it warranted it then, still don't.

I agree. This was the reasoning in Tennessee v. Garner (making it illegal to shoot at fleeing felons without extenuating circumstances).

I have never understood why a person convicted of a non-violent felony loses their 2A Rights. I suspect this leads to over-charging so a defendant is pressured to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, whether they’re guilty or not.

As far a felony crimes of violence, disarm them all.

 

[Rustyt1953]

About 25 years ago a member of my extended family circle spent two years in the big house for embezzlement. After that he worked hard and made a good living. He has raised a family and all are doing well.

He paid his debt to the state. He should be allowed to protect his home and family with a firearm.

 

[ASA335]

The loss of any right should have a high bar to reach.

If "any felony" is the bar, then legislatures and chief executives only need to pass laws that make any undesirable act or omission (according to them) a felony.

I can see it now, NY makes jaywalking a felony and now half of NY citizenry are barred from ever possessing a firearm.

I'm fine for now with conviction of unlawful violence or unlawful threat of violence being the bar to loss of firearms rights.

 

[WCCPHD]

I think that that gun rights should be tied directly to voting rights.

IF you can vote, you can possess a gun. A right should be a right.

Personally I tire of the Second Amendment being a Second Class Right.

 

[stansdds]

Show me where our constitution states that rights are to be lost if convicted of a crime.

I used to be one who thought that loss of rights was just a part of punishment for criminal activity, but constitutionally, but loss of rights is not constitutional. What has changed is our system of justice. When the constitution was penned, a violent criminal, once convicted, would find themselves dangling at the end of a rope. As a society, we largely decided to stop executions, but that did not change the constitution.

I know I am about to take a lot of heat for this post, but the constitution states what it states. I'm putting on my Nomex fire suit now.

 

[walnutred]

You weren't "convicted" of a felony.

Yes, committing, charged and convicted are all different things. However had one of the doorways had a metal detector the outcome could have been very different. I committed what according to the law at the time was a felony. Given some of our poorly written laws it's easy to do.

When Ohio's CCW law was first passed pocket carrying in a motor vehicle was illegal. I'm sure I did that at least once also. Working around the barn pocket carrying, need something from the farm supply store, jump in the truck and head to town. Unless you transferred the handgun to a case you were committing a crime. I started keeping a 1 gallon zip lock bag in the console because it met the definition of a "case".

Just look at the latest Ex Order discussed in another thread and you will see how easy it has become to commit a felony.

 

[GypsmJim]

Felons (and illegal immigrants) are going to be allowed to vote before long, so why shouldn’t the non-violent ones be allowed to have guns?

They shouldn't be allowed to vote either.

 

[deadin]

The "poster child" in this case was listed as having 5 "non-violent" felonies on his record. To me that shows quite a disregard for the law in the first place. Does the court think being armed will solve all of these problems?
The specs will go up (If for no other reason than the sample being bigger) and give the liberals more reason to rewrite the law with even more stringent rules...

What was the old saying? "Give them enough rope and let them hang themselves"

 

[SMSgt]

Whatever happened to Do your time, complete your parole, make any required restitution, go straight, and apply for rights restoration?

 

[johngalt]

There should be only 2 classes: Those who are in jail, those who aren't. Those who aren't have ALL their rights.

Creating a multi-tier society of different classes damages us all. Put an end to all this 'universal background check' nonsense.