High Court Punts on 2nd Amendment Cases Challenging Lifetime Ban on Owning Guns

[excalibur]

Conservative Court my ass.

The clock is ticking on Liberty.

​

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.​

​

The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised and dismayed some gun advocates who'd hoped the court would whittle away at the lifetime limitation.​

​

As reported by USA Today, the court's sidestepping the issue let stand a series of lower court rulings that prohibited people convicted of an array of nonviolent offenses -- driving under the influence, making false statements on tax returns, selling counterfeit cassette tapes -- from owning a firearm.​

​

The decisions Monday were handed down without explanation.​

​

The news outlet said the last time the nation's highest court issued major gun rights rulings dates back to 2008 and 2010. The court struck down handgun restrictions in the District of Columbia and Chicago.​

​

USA Today says four justices are needed to take up a case, but five are needed for any majority opinion. There have been, of late, only minority dissenting opinions indicating eagerness to address Second Amendment issues.​

​

The court was considering the latest gun cases amid a spate of recent mass shootings n places including Georgia, Colorado and Indiana.​

​

The three gun ownership cases involved varied circumstances: In one, a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to a DUI in 2005 challenged the ban on purchasing or owning a gun. In another, a Pennsylvania woman who pleaded guilty to making a false statement on her tax returns sued over the ban. In a third, involving a man who pleaded guilty in a cassette counterfeiting matter back in the 1980s, there was yet another challenge to the firearms ban. ​

High Court Punts on 2nd Amendment Cases Challenging Lifetime Ban on Owning Guns

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised...

www.newsmax.com

 

[skews13]

Conservative Court my ass.

The clock is ticking on Liberty.

​

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.​

​

The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised and dismayed some gun advocates who'd hoped the court would whittle away at the lifetime limitation.​

​

As reported by USA Today, the court's sidestepping the issue let stand a series of lower court rulings that prohibited people convicted of an array of nonviolent offenses -- driving under the influence, making false statements on tax returns, selling counterfeit cassette tapes -- from owning a firearm.​

​

The decisions Monday were handed down without explanation.​

​

The news outlet said the last time the nation's highest court issued major gun rights rulings dates back to 2008 and 2010. The court struck down handgun restrictions in the District of Columbia and Chicago.​

​

USA Today says four justices are needed to take up a case, but five are needed for any majority opinion. There have been, of late, only minority dissenting opinions indicating eagerness to address Second Amendment issues.​

​

The court was considering the latest gun cases amid a spate of recent mass shootings n places including Georgia, Colorado and Indiana.​

​

The three gun ownership cases involved varied circumstances: In one, a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to a DUI in 2005 challenged the ban on purchasing or owning a gun. In another, a Pennsylvania woman who pleaded guilty to making a false statement on her tax returns sued over the ban. In a third, involving a man who pleaded guilty in a cassette counterfeiting matter back in the 1980s, there was yet another challenge to the firearms ban. ​

High Court Punts on 2nd Amendment Cases Challenging Lifetime Ban on Owning Guns

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised...

www.newsmax.com

Thoughts and prayers

 

[justinacolmena]

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised and dismayed some gun advocates who'd hoped the court would whittle away at the lifetime limitation.

Brush with the law. Guns are banned for life. Period. Really?

That is not a court with any lawful jurisdiction over the United States in pursance of the Constitution.

 

[excalibur]

Thoughts and prayers

I thought that you were a gun owner. Hmmm? Or did you lie on another board about that?

 

[Coyote]

I have to admit, if you're going to have a life time ban on guns, it should be for crimes that are relevant...not selling counterfeit cassettes or lying on your taxes...

 

[task0778]

I think the SCOTUS largely wants to leave gun laws up to the states to decide what their rules and laws are going to be, not just the rights end of it but also the enforcement mechanisms. In the above cases, who gets to decide what is a non-violent crime and what isn't? PA can define certain crimes as sufficient to deny gun ownership while another state doesn't for the same thing. I don't think the high court wants to open that can of worms and referee individual cases. It's not like each state can't determine that for themselves and if the voters want changes they can vote the people out of office if they won't do what the people want.

 

[Gdjjr]

Lying on your taxes is an ultimate sin- well, unless you're a crony-

 

[Gdjjr]

I think the SCOTUS largely wants to leave gun laws up to the states to decide what their rules and laws are going to be, not just the rights end of it but also the enforcement mechanisms.

The 14th amendment ended states decisions on the US constitution law- shall not be infringed is the US constitution and applies to the states constitution(s)- well, when the agenda fits-

 

[danielpalos]

Conservative Court my ass.

The clock is ticking on Liberty.

​

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.​

​

The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised and dismayed some gun advocates who'd hoped the court would whittle away at the lifetime limitation.​

​

As reported by USA Today, the court's sidestepping the issue let stand a series of lower court rulings that prohibited people convicted of an array of nonviolent offenses -- driving under the influence, making false statements on tax returns, selling counterfeit cassette tapes -- from owning a firearm.​

​

The decisions Monday were handed down without explanation.​

​

The news outlet said the last time the nation's highest court issued major gun rights rulings dates back to 2008 and 2010. The court struck down handgun restrictions in the District of Columbia and Chicago.​

​

USA Today says four justices are needed to take up a case, but five are needed for any majority opinion. There have been, of late, only minority dissenting opinions indicating eagerness to address Second Amendment issues.​

​

The court was considering the latest gun cases amid a spate of recent mass shootings n places including Georgia, Colorado and Indiana.​

​

The three gun ownership cases involved varied circumstances: In one, a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to a DUI in 2005 challenged the ban on purchasing or owning a gun. In another, a Pennsylvania woman who pleaded guilty to making a false statement on her tax returns sued over the ban. In a third, involving a man who pleaded guilty in a cassette counterfeiting matter back in the 1980s, there was yet another challenge to the firearms ban. ​

High Court Punts on 2nd Amendment Cases Challenging Lifetime Ban on Owning Guns

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised...

www.newsmax.com

They should petition to get their cases expunged to recover their right to arms.

 

[Claudette]

I have to admit, if you're going to have a life time ban on guns, it should be for crimes that are relevant...not selling counterfeit cassettes or lying on your taxes...

I agree. Kinda wonder why we have a SC if they don't want to do their duty.

 

[Crick]

I bet a lifetime ban on gun ownership for any crime from a parking ticket to mass murder would drop the US gun death rate. Maybe someday we could even extend it to include Original Sin. ; - )

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The clock is ticking on Liberty.

lol

Hyperbolic nonsense.

Laws are presumed to be Constitutional until the Supreme Court rules otherwise.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I have to admit, if you're going to have a life time ban on guns, it should be for crimes that are relevant...not selling counterfeit cassettes or lying on your taxes...

I agree. Kinda wonder why we have a SC if they don't want to do their duty.

The remedy is to petition Congress to amend the law, not whine about the Supreme Court.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I have to admit, if you're going to have a life time ban on guns, it should be for crimes that are relevant...not selling counterfeit cassettes or lying on your taxes...

That's the problem with "common sense" gun laws. There isn't a lot of common sense involved

 

[justinacolmena]

Conservative Court my ass.

The clock is ticking on Liberty.

Thoughts and prayers

I thought that you were a gun owner. Hmmm? Or did you lie on another board about that?

Got a prayer or two, or are you just stroking your beard to pick up whores? There's no "conservative" court here. It's a Roe-v-Wade cop-calling whore's court where we're required to "register" all our weapons like registered sex offenders even if we haven't done anything wrong. We're just marking off the calendar days in our prison cells.

 

[toobfreak]

Conservative Court my ass.

The clock is ticking on Liberty.

​

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.​

​

The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised and dismayed some gun advocates who'd hoped the court would whittle away at the lifetime limitation.​

​

As reported by USA Today, the court's sidestepping the issue let stand a series of lower court rulings that prohibited people convicted of an array of nonviolent offenses -- driving under the influence, making false statements on tax returns, selling counterfeit cassette tapes -- from owning a firearm.​

​

The decisions Monday were handed down without explanation.​

​

The news outlet said the last time the nation's highest court issued major gun rights rulings dates back to 2008 and 2010. The court struck down handgun restrictions in the District of Columbia and Chicago.​

​

USA Today says four justices are needed to take up a case, but five are needed for any majority opinion. There have been, of late, only minority dissenting opinions indicating eagerness to address Second Amendment issues.​

​

The court was considering the latest gun cases amid a spate of recent mass shootings n places including Georgia, Colorado and Indiana.​

​

The three gun ownership cases involved varied circumstances: In one, a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to a DUI in 2005 challenged the ban on purchasing or owning a gun. In another, a Pennsylvania woman who pleaded guilty to making a false statement on her tax returns sued over the ban. In a third, involving a man who pleaded guilty in a cassette counterfeiting matter back in the 1980s, there was yet another challenge to the firearms ban. ​

High Court Punts on 2nd Amendment Cases Challenging Lifetime Ban on Owning Guns

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised...

www.newsmax.com

I'd be curious to know what driving under the influence, making false statements on a tax return, or selling counterfeit cassette tapes has to do with one's right to own a gun? It's a wonder anyone has a gun right left in the country!

 

[justinacolmena]

I'd be curious to know what driving under the influence, making false statements on a tax return, or selling counterfeit cassette tapes has to do with one's right to own a gun? It's a wonder anyone has a gun right left in the country!

If you never really did anything wrong with a gun, why shouldn't you own one?
And if you did do something wrong with a gun, why would you ever be let out of prison?

 

[StormAl]

Conservative Court my ass.

The clock is ticking on Liberty.

​

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.​

​

The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised and dismayed some gun advocates who'd hoped the court would whittle away at the lifetime limitation.​

​

As reported by USA Today, the court's sidestepping the issue let stand a series of lower court rulings that prohibited people convicted of an array of nonviolent offenses -- driving under the influence, making false statements on tax returns, selling counterfeit cassette tapes -- from owning a firearm.​

​

The decisions Monday were handed down without explanation.​

​

The news outlet said the last time the nation's highest court issued major gun rights rulings dates back to 2008 and 2010. The court struck down handgun restrictions in the District of Columbia and Chicago.​

​

USA Today says four justices are needed to take up a case, but five are needed for any majority opinion. There have been, of late, only minority dissenting opinions indicating eagerness to address Second Amendment issues.​

​

The court was considering the latest gun cases amid a spate of recent mass shootings n places including Georgia, Colorado and Indiana.​

​

The three gun ownership cases involved varied circumstances: In one, a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to a DUI in 2005 challenged the ban on purchasing or owning a gun. In another, a Pennsylvania woman who pleaded guilty to making a false statement on her tax returns sued over the ban. In a third, involving a man who pleaded guilty in a cassette counterfeiting matter back in the 1980s, there was yet another challenge to the firearms ban. ​

High Court Punts on 2nd Amendment Cases Challenging Lifetime Ban on Owning Guns

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised...

www.newsmax.com

SCOTUS can certainly and legitimately do what it did. People, indeed, can be regulated regarding firearms based on their behavior. Having said that, I personally don't think all crimes, and particularly those that are non-violent, should carry lifetime firearms bans.

 

[Rigby5]

I think the SCOTUS largely wants to leave gun laws up to the states to decide what their rules and laws are going to be, not just the rights end of it but also the enforcement mechanisms.

The 14th amendment ended states decisions on the US constitution law- shall not be infringed is the US constitution and applies to the states constitution(s)- well, when the agenda fits-

I am pro gun, but you are wrong on this.
What the 14th amendment did was to prevent states from infringing on individual rights.
But the 2nd amendment is not just an individual right.
It was basically a strict prohibition against any federal jurisdiction on firearms restrictions.
The fact firearms are an individual right comes more from the 4th and 5th amendment, not the 2nd.
The 2nd amendment is just deciding that states and local should be legislating what restrictions there should be on gun rights.
All rights have to have some restrictions, in order to compromise between your rights and the rights of others.
So the 2nd amendment can't be saying there are to be no restriction on gun rights.
Instead, all the 2nd amendment is really saying is that those restrictions can't be federal.
So then the 14th amendment has no effect on gun rights other than to prevent discrimination between different groups of people.
The 14th amendment just says all people have to be treated the same under any state or local laws.
The 14th amendment did not at all force the 2nd amendment prohibition against any federal gun legislation to apply also to prohibiting state and local legislation, as long as it was nor racially biased.

 

[Rigby5]

Conservative Court my ass.

The clock is ticking on Liberty.

​

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.​

​

The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised and dismayed some gun advocates who'd hoped the court would whittle away at the lifetime limitation.​

​

As reported by USA Today, the court's sidestepping the issue let stand a series of lower court rulings that prohibited people convicted of an array of nonviolent offenses -- driving under the influence, making false statements on tax returns, selling counterfeit cassette tapes -- from owning a firearm.​

​

The decisions Monday were handed down without explanation.​

​

The news outlet said the last time the nation's highest court issued major gun rights rulings dates back to 2008 and 2010. The court struck down handgun restrictions in the District of Columbia and Chicago.​

​

USA Today says four justices are needed to take up a case, but five are needed for any majority opinion. There have been, of late, only minority dissenting opinions indicating eagerness to address Second Amendment issues.​

​

The court was considering the latest gun cases amid a spate of recent mass shootings n places including Georgia, Colorado and Indiana.​

​

The three gun ownership cases involved varied circumstances: In one, a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to a DUI in 2005 challenged the ban on purchasing or owning a gun. In another, a Pennsylvania woman who pleaded guilty to making a false statement on her tax returns sued over the ban. In a third, involving a man who pleaded guilty in a cassette counterfeiting matter back in the 1980s, there was yet another challenge to the firearms ban. ​

High Court Punts on 2nd Amendment Cases Challenging Lifetime Ban on Owning Guns

The Supreme Court on Monday opted not to take up three challenges to a federal ban on gun ownership for people who've been convicted of nonviolent crimes.The decision reinforced the apparent inclination by the court to skirt Second Amendment questions. But it also surprised...

www.newsmax.com

They should petition to get their cases expunged to recover their right to arms.

From what I have heard, that is expensive.
You have to donate a lot to certain political campaigns and it is similar to the process of getting a pardon.
Although some states make it easy, the feds are much more expensive.