5th circuit strikes down DOJ over reach on prohibited persons

[2aguy]

Good....we may qctually have good judges on that court....

They struck this down because the clown at the DOJ didnt do it right....

The actual opinion, however, makes it clear that the the appellate court’s issue wasn’t just with this specific statute, but the underlying argument that the Department of Justice made in trying to defend the law.

Fifth Circuit rejects DOJ stance on prohibited persons: "lacks any true limiting principle"

Most of the headlines and coverage of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision that the fe

bearingarms.com

 

[Donald H]

I won't be vindictive by saying, 'good for America'.

Are you trying to say that this should be celebrated? Is that an indication of how far off course your gun dogma has taken you?

If this happened in Canada I would be outspoken on condemning it on the basis of the fact that it's obviously necessary.

But you applaud it and laugh about it! Why is that?

 

[2aguy]

I won't be vindictive by saying, 'good for America'.

Are you trying to say that this should be celebrated? Is that an indication of how far off course your gun dogma has taken you?

If this happened in Canada I would be outspoken on condemning it on the basis of the fact that it's obviously necessary.

But you applaud it and laugh about it! Why is that?

The DOJ did it wrong you doofus......

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

The DOJ did it wrong you doofus......

This..pleases you?
That people almost certainty will die...as a result..innocent victims of Domestic Abuse--doesn't bother you at all?

Tell me..how much blood DOES your Tree of Liberty need~

 

[Donald H]

The DOJ did it wrong you doofus......

I'm fully aware and that's the reason why I commented on the issue. To draw out the question is promoting the evil that can become the consequences, and you can stand as partially responsible.
Right?

The court could have handled the error in a rational way, but that's not America.

So I won't say that you had it coming, if there are resultant shootings and deaths.

 

[Donald H]

This..pleases you?
That people almost certainty will die...as a result..innocent victims of Domestic Abuse--doesn't bother you at all?

Tell me..how much blood DOES your Tree of Liberty need~

That's exactly the point I made on his position!

His mindset resulted in his gums flapping before his brain kicked in.

Who's going to buy in with him now? Will 14Shooter take this one on too?

 

[Concerned American]

If this happened in Canada I would be outspoken

LIAR! I have asked you numerous times to comment on mass stabbings in Alberta, gun violence in Toronto and Ottawa, homelessness in BC, Turdeau's corruption and all I hear are those ever so famous Canadian crickets--nothing from the duck.

 

[Concerned American]

The court could have handled the error in a rational way

They did, duck. Not sorry that it doesn't meet with your commie approval--actually I'm ecstatic, they must have gotten it right.

 

[whitehall]

Did I read it wrong? Why is it good news that society can't prevent a man with a record of wife beating from purchasing a firearm?

 

[SavannahMann]

When the nation was founded. And the Second was Ratified. When people got out of Prison they could get guns again.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Are you trying to say that this should be celebrated?

Correct.
The constitution requires due process before someone can have their rights removed.
The law in question dies not provide for this.
Thus, the court struck it.

 

[Donald H]

Correct.
The constitution requires due process before someone can have their rights removed.
The law in question dies not provide for this.
Thus, the court struck it.

You're exaggerating a simple issue that could have been decided easily and would have been in any other modern country.

 

[Concerned American]

You're exaggerating a simple issue that could have been decided easily and would have been in any other modern country.

Please link to your degree in American Juris Prudence duck. If you don't have one, STFU. You have no expertise in the matter not to mention that as a commie Canadian, you have no standing in the conversation.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You're exaggerating a simple issue that could have been decided easily...

As it is a simple issue, it was easily decided...
The Constitution requires due process.
The law in question does not provide it.
Thus, unconstitutional.

 

[Donald H]

As it is a simple issue, it was easily decided...
The Constitution requires due process.
The law in question does not provide it.
Thus, unconstitutional.

It was struck down because the DOJ didn't do it right. The OP will tell you why.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It was struck down because the DOJ didn't do it right.

No. It was struck down because the legislature didn't do it right.

"The question is whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), a specific statute that does so, is constitutional under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.:

Do try to keep up.

 

[Concerned American]

No. It was struck down because the legislature didn't do it right.

"The question is whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), a specific statute that does so, is constitutional under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.:

Do try to keep up.

He can't -- he's a commie plant in Canada and he is always trying to reinterpret the US constitution to Canadian.

 

[Billy_Bob]

As it is a simple issue, it was easily decided...
The Constitution requires due process.
The law in question does not provide it.
Thus, unconstitutional.

Due Process in order to remove a protected right requires competent adjudication, not a rule, regulation, or law. Absent a competent judicial process, red flag laws are unconstitutional. Full Stop.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Due Process in order to remove a protected right requires competent adjudication, not a rule, regulation, or law. Absent a competent judicial process, red flag laws are unconstitutional. Full Stop.

Red flag laws are an anti-gun loon's wet dream.

 

[SavannahMann]

Red flag laws are an anti-gun loon's wet dream.

When we are discussing a school shooting, or a mass shooting. Republicans rush out to blame mental health and how we need to address that. When we say OK. At least take the guns from someone who is a danger. Oh. 2nd Amendment.

It is a bullshit argument.