Illinois Firearm Identification card ruled unConstitutional in state court....yes, this is correct.

[M14 Shooter]

Around here, ALL gun crimes are committed by using LEGALLY obtained firearms.

You are fully aware of the fact you cannot prove this to be true.
Why do you need to manufacture falsehood to make a point?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Around here, ALL gun crimes are committed by using LEGALLY obtained firearms.

You are fully aware of the fact you cannot prove this to be true.
Why do you need to manufacture falsehood to make a point?

I don't have to prove a thing. You have to prove me wrong. If you can't, my statement stands.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Around here, ALL gun crimes are committed by using LEGALLY obtained firearms.

You are fully aware of the fact you cannot prove this to be true.
Why do you need to manufacture falsehood to make a point?

I don't have to prove a thing. You have to prove me wrong. If you can't, my statement stands.

I am impressed at your ability to be intellectually dishonest with a straight face.

Absent proof, your claim means less than nothing.

 

[2aguy]

Total gun murder number for children...? Again, ban cars, not guns...

we need cars. We don't need guns.

Tell that to the people who use their legal guns to stop rapes, robberies and murders...

 

[2aguy]

And you have never once linked to how you come up with 270 billion so it's most likely bullshit like most of your posts

Here's How Much Gun Violence Is Costing You a Year | HuffPost

In collaboration with online publication Mother Jones, Miller conducted extensive research on the cost of gun violence in America. His conclusion? Gun violence costs the U.S. $229 billion a year, or about $700 per American.

The cost of gun violence in the U.S. can be broken down into two different categories: direct costs and indirect costs — or “out-of-pocket costs and costs attributed to lost wages, pain, suffering and quality of life,” said Miller.

This is how many lives an how much money is saved by Americans with their legal guns saving lives...stopping rapes, robberies and murders...

Case Closed: Kleck Is Still Correct


If this 1/3 vs. 2/3 ratio of deaths to injuries in actual shootings pertains in these DGUs, that makes for at least 176,000 lives saved—less some attackers who lost their lives to defenders. This enormous benefit dwarfs, both in human and economic terms, the losses trumpeted by hoplophobes who only choose to see the risk side of the equation.


==============
Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

Our man Bruce Krafft — whose posts we dearly miss — did the math back in 2012. Here it is:
Our fearless leader suggested that I take a look at the flip side of the anti’s latest attack on our freedoms (a recycled strategy from the Clinton-era Public Health model of gun control): the monetary cost of gun violence.
For example, the Center for American Progress touted the “fact” that the Virginia Tech massacre cost taxpayers $48.2 million (including autopsy costs and a fine against Virginia Tech for failing to get their skates on when the killer started shooting).
It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what are the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .
In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
The Kleck-Gertz DGU study estimated that there are between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs a year in the U.S. The Ludwig-Cook study came up with 1.46 million. So let’s split the difference and call it 1.88 million DGUs per year.
In the K-G article Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 15.7 percent of people who had a DGU reckoned they almost certainly saved a life. Ignoring the ‘probably’ and ‘might have’ saved a life categories for simplicity, 15.7 percent of 1.88 million gives us 295,160 lives saved annually.
[NB: A number of people have questioned the 15.7 percent stat. Remember: many states regard the mere act of pulling a gun on someone a form of deadly force. In addition, virtually every jurisdiction in the nation requires that an armed self-defender must be in “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” before using (or in some places even threatening to use) deadly force.]
How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.
According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.


So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.

Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.

I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership

.
When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”


Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”
So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.

 

[2aguy]

Will you grow up.

Childish penis references do nothing but illustrate your own immaturity.

I bet you still giggle when someone says boobie

Naw, I giggle when someone says, "Defensive Gun Use", you know that guy's compensating.

Legal gun ownership does not add to the crime or murder rate and the safety record of legal gun owners is stellar compared to any other product or activity

We have 33,000 gun deaths... 78,000 gun injuries, 400,000 gun crimes and 270 BILLION in economic losses every year because of guns. not to mention the "Security State" apparatus of "Active Shooter Drills" that we all have to live with because you never tell which "Legal" gun owner might decide to off the boss.

Again....here is what guns in the hands of law abiding Americans save in terms of lives and money......people who are not raped, robbed or murdered because they can use guns to save themselves and others...

Case Closed: Kleck Is Still Correct

If this 1/3 vs. 2/3 ratio of deaths to injuries in actual shootings pertains in these DGUs, that makes for at least 176,000 lives saved—less some attackers who lost their lives to defenders. This enormous benefit dwarfs, both in human and economic terms, the losses trumpeted by hoplophobes who only choose to see the risk side of the equation.


==============
Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

Our man Bruce Krafft — whose posts we dearly miss — did the math back in 2012. Here it is:
Our fearless leader suggested that I take a look at the flip side of the anti’s latest attack on our freedoms (a recycled strategy from the Clinton-era Public Health model of gun control): the monetary cost of gun violence.
For example, the Center for American Progress touted the “fact” that the Virginia Tech massacre cost taxpayers $48.2 million (including autopsy costs and a fine against Virginia Tech for failing to get their skates on when the killer started shooting).
It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what are the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .
In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
The Kleck-Gertz DGU study estimated that there are between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs a year in the U.S. The Ludwig-Cook study came up with 1.46 million. So let’s split the difference and call it 1.88 million DGUs per year.
In the K-G article Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 15.7 percent of people who had a DGU reckoned they almost certainly saved a life. Ignoring the ‘probably’ and ‘might have’ saved a life categories for simplicity, 15.7 percent of 1.88 million gives us 295,160 lives saved annually.
[NB: A number of people have questioned the 15.7 percent stat. Remember: many states regard the mere act of pulling a gun on someone a form of deadly force. In addition, virtually every jurisdiction in the nation requires that an armed self-defender must be in “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” before using (or in some places even threatening to use) deadly force.]
How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.
According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.
So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.


Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.


I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.


When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”


Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”
So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.

 

[JoeB131]

Most? I'd like to see substantiation for that. And I'm talking about everywhere, not just some roads. Why should you be allowed a fast car just to compensation for your shortcomings?

Actually, I should have a fast car so I can get to work in a timely manner.

You know, practical stuff.

No practical reason to have a gun... since you'll never get the drop on a bad guy who means business and the government has fucking tanks.

 

[JoeB131]

Again....here is what guns in the hands of law abiding Americans save in terms of lives and money......people who are not raped, robbed or murdered because they can use guns to save themselves and others...

AGAIN- ONLY 200 DGU SHOOTINGS BY CIVILIANS.

Sorry, man, A gun made you feel good about your tiny manhood is not a DGU.

Having to put the guy down is a DGU.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Any tax or fee on the exercise of a Right is unConstitutional.....see Murdock v Pennsylvania, and now a judge in Illinois, even with morons in charge of the state, finds the FOID card, unConstitutional.....the card is required in Illinois to own a gun...

Illinois Circuit Judge Rules FOID Card Unconstitutional; Attorney General Reportedly Appealing to IL Supreme Court - The Truth About Guns

The case began with the March 2017 arrest of a now-divorced, 4′ 11″ fifty-something woman for the high crime of possessing a single-shot .22 rifle for self-defense. Obviously, she’s not exactly Bonnie Parker of Bonnie and Clyde fame. She failed to have a FOID card for her rifle, despite eligibility to receive one. In February 2018, a White County judge ruled the FOID Act unconstitutional.

10. In this case the facts show the defendant possessed a gun, in her house, for the purpose of self-defense without a FOID card. To require the defendant to fill out a form, provide a picture ID and pay a $10 fee to obtain a FOID card before she can exercise her constitutional right to self-defense with a firearm is a violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the States and a violation of Article I, Section 22, of the Constitution of the State of Illinois, as applied to this case only.

11. Based upon the forgoing, the Court finds 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) unconstitutional as applied to this case.

Motions and counter-motions poured in, and in October 2018, the judge reaffirmed his ruling and expanded upon it.

3. The Court supplements its ruling of February 2, 2018, as follows:

a. To comply with 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) a person must have a FOID card on their person when in either actual or constructive possession of a firearm or ammunition. Owning a FOID card is insufficient to comply with the statute. See People v. Eldens, 63 Ill.App.3d 554 (Fifth Dist. 1978) and People v. Cahill, 37 Ill.App.3d 361 (Second Dist. Second Div. 1976). A person is in constructive possession of a firearm or ammunition when: (1) The person has knowledge of the presence of a weapon or ammunition, and (2) That person is in immediate and exclusive control over the area where the firearm or ammunition is located.

Due to the language of 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) and the Court’s interpretation of the statute, it is clear that compliance is impossible when one is in ·their own home. No person could have their FOID card on their person 24 hours each and every day when firearms or ammunition are in the house.

In addition, every person in the home (family member, friend, spouse, etc.) who has knowledge of the firearms or ammunition and has immediate and exclusive control of the area where the firearms or ammunition is located, who does not have a FOID card, would be in violation of the statute.

Thus, 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) is unconstitutional, as applied to this defendant, because it is impossible to comply in the person’s .own home. As an alternative, if 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) is constitutional then it becomes obvious the legislature did not intend the ~tatute to apply in one’s own home due to impossibility of compliance.

Conservatives cheer a tyrant in black robes legislating from the bench in defiance of the will of the majority of the people.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Conservatives cheer a tyrant in black robes legislating from the bench in defiance of the will of the majority of the people.

Look at you, willfully ignorant of the fact the will of the people does not supersede the constitution.

 

[Blues Man]

Suicide is not a crime.

And you have never once linked to how you come up with 270 billion so it's most likely bullshit like most of your posts

Most crimes are committed with illegally obtained firearms
Most murders are criminal killing other criminals

Legally owned guns do not add to the crime or murder rates

Around here, ALL gun crimes are committed by using LEGALLY obtained firearms. Facts sure do get in your way, don't it.

Suicide does not count...
It takes care of itself

Actually, suicide does count. Attempted Suicide is against the law. Even successful suicide is against the law but it's a little hard to prosecute dead people.

Suicide is not against the law

Is Suicide Illegal? Suicide Laws By Country

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

Your own cite says otherwise. You really need to read your own cites.

What about the line

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

did you not understand?

 

[Blues Man]

Suicide is not a crime.

And you have never once linked to how you come up with 270 billion so it's most likely bullshit like most of your posts

Most crimes are committed with illegally obtained firearms
Most murders are criminal killing other criminals

Legally owned guns do not add to the crime or murder rates

Around here, ALL gun crimes are committed by using LEGALLY obtained firearms. Facts sure do get in your way, don't it.

BULLSHIT.

Do illegal gun owners commit most gun crime?

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF

How dangerous people get their guns in America

We don't have a problem with illegal guns here. We have a problem with illegal use of guns here.

'Prove it.

You do know there is a whole country out there outside of the patch of dirt you live on don't you?

I don't have to prove it. I think Rustic will agree with me. Guns are do not commit crimes. People with guns commit crimes. MOST guns are not illegal. Most are legally purchased but can be used by PEOPLE for illegal uses. Even the guns in the Urban areas.

Well , Corky, I never said guns commit crimes
The guns used in the majority of crimes are illegally obtained

 

[Blues Man]

Around here, ALL gun crimes are committed by using LEGALLY obtained firearms.

You are fully aware of the fact you cannot prove this to be true.
Why do you need to manufacture falsehood to make a point?

I don't have to prove a thing. You have to prove me wrong. If you can't, my statement stands.

If you make the assertion the burden of proof is on you

 

[2aguy]

Any tax or fee on the exercise of a Right is unConstitutional.....see Murdock v Pennsylvania, and now a judge in Illinois, even with morons in charge of the state, finds the FOID card, unConstitutional.....the card is required in Illinois to own a gun...

Illinois Circuit Judge Rules FOID Card Unconstitutional; Attorney General Reportedly Appealing to IL Supreme Court - The Truth About Guns

The case began with the March 2017 arrest of a now-divorced, 4′ 11″ fifty-something woman for the high crime of possessing a single-shot .22 rifle for self-defense. Obviously, she’s not exactly Bonnie Parker of Bonnie and Clyde fame. She failed to have a FOID card for her rifle, despite eligibility to receive one. In February 2018, a White County judge ruled the FOID Act unconstitutional.

10. In this case the facts show the defendant possessed a gun, in her house, for the purpose of self-defense without a FOID card. To require the defendant to fill out a form, provide a picture ID and pay a $10 fee to obtain a FOID card before she can exercise her constitutional right to self-defense with a firearm is a violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the States and a violation of Article I, Section 22, of the Constitution of the State of Illinois, as applied to this case only.

11. Based upon the forgoing, the Court finds 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) unconstitutional as applied to this case.

Motions and counter-motions poured in, and in October 2018, the judge reaffirmed his ruling and expanded upon it.

3. The Court supplements its ruling of February 2, 2018, as follows:

a. To comply with 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) a person must have a FOID card on their person when in either actual or constructive possession of a firearm or ammunition. Owning a FOID card is insufficient to comply with the statute. See People v. Eldens, 63 Ill.App.3d 554 (Fifth Dist. 1978) and People v. Cahill, 37 Ill.App.3d 361 (Second Dist. Second Div. 1976). A person is in constructive possession of a firearm or ammunition when: (1) The person has knowledge of the presence of a weapon or ammunition, and (2) That person is in immediate and exclusive control over the area where the firearm or ammunition is located.

Due to the language of 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) and the Court’s interpretation of the statute, it is clear that compliance is impossible when one is in ·their own home. No person could have their FOID card on their person 24 hours each and every day when firearms or ammunition are in the house.

In addition, every person in the home (family member, friend, spouse, etc.) who has knowledge of the firearms or ammunition and has immediate and exclusive control of the area where the firearms or ammunition is located, who does not have a FOID card, would be in violation of the statute.

Thus, 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) is unconstitutional, as applied to this defendant, because it is impossible to comply in the person’s .own home. As an alternative, if 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) is constitutional then it becomes obvious the legislature did not intend the ~tatute to apply in one’s own home due to impossibility of compliance.

Conservatives cheer a tyrant in black robes legislating from the bench in defiance of the will of the majority of the people.

Nope.....we have left wing judges ruling against our Rights over and over again.....we have to take whatever victories we can get...when they stop using the judiciary as an unelected legislature, then we don't have to hope real Judges rule against them over and over again...

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Around here, ALL gun crimes are committed by using LEGALLY obtained firearms. Facts sure do get in your way, don't it.

Suicide does not count...
It takes care of itself

Actually, suicide does count. Attempted Suicide is against the law. Even successful suicide is against the law but it's a little hard to prosecute dead people.

Suicide is not against the law

Is Suicide Illegal? Suicide Laws By Country

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

Your own cite says otherwise. You really need to read your own cites.

What about the line

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

did you not understand?

You forget that in the Common Wealth states like Maryland and Virginia, just to name two, they have laws on the book that date back to the old English Common laws. These are rarely used but can and are used when dealing with attempted suicide. Therefor, there are still about 20 States where they can press Criminal Charges for a failed suicide attempt. It's rarely done but I use Maryland (2016) and Virginia (2013) as an example. The charges were later dropped when they got the person into a slow to induct mental health hospital. But it was used to get him off the streets to prevent him from harming himself and others in the meantime.

And there is no law against convicting a successful suicide either unless it's an assisted suicide. I could easily make light of this but won't. Once again, you are just gumming your jaws trying to make yourself look smarter than you really are. And that is stupid. We all know you won't change because we just can't fix stupid.

 

[Blues Man]

Suicide does not count...
It takes care of itself

Actually, suicide does count. Attempted Suicide is against the law. Even successful suicide is against the law but it's a little hard to prosecute dead people.

Suicide is not against the law

Is Suicide Illegal? Suicide Laws By Country

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

Your own cite says otherwise. You really need to read your own cites.

What about the line

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

did you not understand?

You forget that in the Common Wealth states like Maryland and Virginia, just to name two, they have laws on the book that date back to the old English Common laws. These are rarely used but can and are used when dealing with attempted suicide. Therefor, there are still about 20 States where they can press Criminal Charges for a failed suicide attempt. It's rarely done but I use Maryland (2016) and Virginia (2013) as an example. The charges were later dropped when they got the person into a slow to induct mental health hospital. But it was used to get him off the streets to prevent him from harming himself and others in the meantime.

And there is no law against convicting a successful suicide either unless it's an assisted suicide. I could easily make light of this but won't. Once again, you are just gumming your jaws trying to make yourself look smarter than you really are. And that is stupid. We all know you won't change because we just can't fix stupid.

You have to go back to old outdated never used laws

And FYI It's commonwealth not common wealth

If you're going to impugn someone else's intelligence maybe you should have a grasp on the words you use to do so.

The fact is it is not illegal to commit suicide, if it was then the police could seize the property of the person who committed suicide

And tell me when was the last time a person was tried in court for attempting suicide?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Actually, suicide does count. Attempted Suicide is against the law. Even successful suicide is against the law but it's a little hard to prosecute dead people.

Suicide is not against the law

Is Suicide Illegal? Suicide Laws By Country

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

Your own cite says otherwise. You really need to read your own cites.

What about the line

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

did you not understand?

You forget that in the Common Wealth states like Maryland and Virginia, just to name two, they have laws on the book that date back to the old English Common laws. These are rarely used but can and are used when dealing with attempted suicide. Therefor, there are still about 20 States where they can press Criminal Charges for a failed suicide attempt. It's rarely done but I use Maryland (2016) and Virginia (2013) as an example. The charges were later dropped when they got the person into a slow to induct mental health hospital. But it was used to get him off the streets to prevent him from harming himself and others in the meantime.

And there is no law against convicting a successful suicide either unless it's an assisted suicide. I could easily make light of this but won't. Once again, you are just gumming your jaws trying to make yourself look smarter than you really are. And that is stupid. We all know you won't change because we just can't fix stupid.

You have to go back to old outdated never used laws

And FYI It's commonwealth not common wealth

If you're going to impugn someone else's intelligence maybe you should have a grasp on the words you use to do so.

The fact is it is not illegal to commit suicide, if it was then the police could seize the property of the person who committed suicide

And tell me when was the last time a person was tried in court for attempting suicide?

Wow, a spelink nazi response when you have nothing else. And it's English Common Law to be exact, stupid. Just like the whole name is English Common Wealth.

Well, cupcake, how about Maryland in 2018. Attempting suicide is not a crime under Maryland law. But an Eastern Shore man was convicted of it
ets
Let's not forget the state of Virginia. As of 1992, Virginia removed the inability of heirs to inherit the property from a person that commits suicide, it's still listed as a crime and it's listed legally as an Immoral Act and against the law. In Virginia, suicide is a crime

20 states still list it as illegal. And if you are not successful, they can charge you with suicide and try you. But that is just to get you off the street and into mental health more than anything else these days without your consent. In order to get you the mandatory help, you have to be charged with some kind of a crime even if it's a misdemeanor.

You are living proof that we can cure wanting to commit suicide but we can't seem to find a cure for stupid.

 

[Blues Man]

Suicide is not against the law

Is Suicide Illegal? Suicide Laws By Country

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

Your own cite says otherwise. You really need to read your own cites.

What about the line

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

did you not understand?

You forget that in the Common Wealth states like Maryland and Virginia, just to name two, they have laws on the book that date back to the old English Common laws. These are rarely used but can and are used when dealing with attempted suicide. Therefor, there are still about 20 States where they can press Criminal Charges for a failed suicide attempt. It's rarely done but I use Maryland (2016) and Virginia (2013) as an example. The charges were later dropped when they got the person into a slow to induct mental health hospital. But it was used to get him off the streets to prevent him from harming himself and others in the meantime.

And there is no law against convicting a successful suicide either unless it's an assisted suicide. I could easily make light of this but won't. Once again, you are just gumming your jaws trying to make yourself look smarter than you really are. And that is stupid. We all know you won't change because we just can't fix stupid.

You have to go back to old outdated never used laws

And FYI It's commonwealth not common wealth

If you're going to impugn someone else's intelligence maybe you should have a grasp on the words you use to do so.

The fact is it is not illegal to commit suicide, if it was then the police could seize the property of the person who committed suicide

And tell me when was the last time a person was tried in court for attempting suicide?

Wow, a spelink nazi response when you have nothing else. And it's English Common Law to be exact, stupid. Just like the whole name is English Common Wealth.

Well, cupcake, how about Maryland in 2018. Redacted Mueller Report
ets
Let's not forget the state of Virginia. As of 1992, Virginia removed the inability of heirs to inherit the property from a person that commits suicide, it's still listed as a crime and it's listed legally as an Immoral Act and against the law. In Virginia, suicide is a crime

20 states still list it as illegal. And if you are not successful, they can charge you with suicide and try you. But that is just to get you off the street and into mental health more than anything else these days without your consent. In order to get you the mandatory help, you have to be charged with some kind of a crime even if it's a misdemeanor.

You are living proof that we can cure wanting to commit suicide but we can't seem to find a cure for stupid.

You didn't misspell anything you just didn't know there is a difference between commonwealth and common wealth

IOW you don't understand the word you hear in your head, Corky.

And when has anyone been tried posthumously for committing suicide? When has any legal action been taken against people or the families of people who have committed suicide?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Your own cite says otherwise. You really need to read your own cites.

What about the line

Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.

did you not understand?

You forget that in the Common Wealth states like Maryland and Virginia, just to name two, they have laws on the book that date back to the old English Common laws. These are rarely used but can and are used when dealing with attempted suicide. Therefor, there are still about 20 States where they can press Criminal Charges for a failed suicide attempt. It's rarely done but I use Maryland (2016) and Virginia (2013) as an example. The charges were later dropped when they got the person into a slow to induct mental health hospital. But it was used to get him off the streets to prevent him from harming himself and others in the meantime.

And there is no law against convicting a successful suicide either unless it's an assisted suicide. I could easily make light of this but won't. Once again, you are just gumming your jaws trying to make yourself look smarter than you really are. And that is stupid. We all know you won't change because we just can't fix stupid.

You have to go back to old outdated never used laws

And FYI It's commonwealth not common wealth

If you're going to impugn someone else's intelligence maybe you should have a grasp on the words you use to do so.

The fact is it is not illegal to commit suicide, if it was then the police could seize the property of the person who committed suicide

And tell me when was the last time a person was tried in court for attempting suicide?

Wow, a spelink nazi response when you have nothing else. And it's English Common Law to be exact, stupid. Just like the whole name is English Common Wealth.

Well, cupcake, how about Maryland in 2018. Redacted Mueller Report
ets
Let's not forget the state of Virginia. As of 1992, Virginia removed the inability of heirs to inherit the property from a person that commits suicide, it's still listed as a crime and it's listed legally as an Immoral Act and against the law. In Virginia, suicide is a crime

20 states still list it as illegal. And if you are not successful, they can charge you with suicide and try you. But that is just to get you off the street and into mental health more than anything else these days without your consent. In order to get you the mandatory help, you have to be charged with some kind of a crime even if it's a misdemeanor.

You are living proof that we can cure wanting to commit suicide but we can't seem to find a cure for stupid.

You didn't misspell anything you just didn't know there is a difference between commonwealth and common wealth

IOW you don't understand the word you hear in your head, Corky.

And when has anyone been tried posthumously for committing suicide? When has any legal action been taken against people or the families of people who have committed suicide?

Until 1992, the state of Virginia wouldn't allow the heirs to inherit the property of a successful suicide victim.

Now, you are just being even more stupid than usual. You tell me exactly how they can cross examine a dead person in a courtroom?

JUDGE: Answer the question
SILENCE.....
JUDGE: Answer the question or I will find you in contempt of court
SILENCE.......
JUDGE: I find you in contempt and sentence you to 30 days in jail. And what's that smell........

Once again, you prove that we can't cure stupid.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Around here, ALL gun crimes are committed by using LEGALLY obtained firearms.

You are fully aware of the fact you cannot prove this to be true.
Why do you need to manufacture falsehood to make a point?

I don't have to prove a thing. You have to prove me wrong. If you can't, my statement stands.

If you make the assertion the burden of proof is on you

Once again, he proves that we can't cure stupid.