U.S. District Court finds provision of 1968 Gun Control Act Unconstitutional

Geaux4it

Intensity Factor 4-Fold
May 31, 2009
22,873
4,294
290
Tennessee
More victories for law abiding true Americans. The 2A foundation is tearing down the impacts to our civil rights. Matter of time before National Concealed Carry passes

When will the American communist realize we will not be assimilated?

-Geaux
---------------------------

U.S. District Court finds provision of 1968 Gun Control Act unconstitutional Firearms Policy Coalition

In another victory for Second Amendment civil rights by attorney Alan Gura, a United States District Court found a provision of the Gun Control Act of 1968 unconstitutional as applied to some people who, like the plaintiff in the case, are currently law-abiding and not felons, adjudicated as mentally defective, or have a violent criminal history.

In the decision released today, Middle District of Pennsylvania Judge William W. Caldwell ultimately held that “Plaintiff [Julio Suarez] has established that his background and circumstances place him outside of the intended scope § 922(g)(1), and therefore the application of [18 U.S.C.] § 922(g)(1) violates Plaintiff’s Second Amendment protections.”

According to the decision, “On June 26, 1990, Julio Suarez was convicted in Montgomery County, Maryland of carrying a handgun without a license….The offense was a misdemeanor and subject to a term of imprisonment for not less than thirty days nor more than three years.”

Following the conviction, the record showed, Suarez was sentenced to 180 days imprisonment and a $500 fine–both suspended–and he was sentenced to one year probation. Suarez’s conviction, according to Defendants [United States Attorney General Eric Holder and others], places him within the scope of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which bars individuals convicted of certain offenses from possessing a firearm.

However, the Court held that “Plaintiff’s background and circumstances in the years following his conviction establish that he is no more dangerous than a typical law-abiding citizen and poses no continuing threat to society….Therefore, we find that Plaintiff falls outside the intended scope of § 922(g)(1) and is distinguishable from those historically barred from Second Amendment protections.”
 
"U.S. District Court finds provision of 1968 Gun Control Act Unconstitutional"

Wrong.

The provision of the Act is Constitutional, it was the application of [18 U.S.C.] § 922(g)(1) that violated the Second Amendment concerning this specific case.

You're either a liar or ignorant of the law. Given your posting history it's clearly both.
 
"U.S. District Court finds provision of 1968 Gun Control Act Unconstitutional"

Wrong.

The provision of the Act is Constitutional, it was the application of [18 U.S.C.] § 922(g)(1) that violated the Second Amendment concerning this specific case.

You're either a liar or ignorant of the law. Given your posting history it's clearly both.

LMAO- The title is from the article itself genius. You must of went to the same law school Obama did, and apparently, got the same failing score.

U.S. District Court finds provision of 1968 Gun Control Act Unconstitutional"
 
Lets share some more 2A victories as Americans fight to regain their civil rights.

-Geaux
--------------------------
Court overturns restrictions on concealed guns in much of California
Appeals panel finds state rules allowing counties to restrict the right to carry concealed weapons in public violate the 2nd Amendment.

SAN FRANCISCO — In a significant victory for gun owners, a divided federal appeals court Thursday struck down California rules that permit counties to restrict as they see fit the right to carry a concealed weapon in public.

The 2-1 ruling by a U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel would overturn restrictions on carrying concealed handguns, primarily affecting California's most populated regions, including Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego and San Francisco.

The majority said the restrictions violate the 2nd Amendment's guarantee of the right to bear arms because they deny law-abiding citizens the ability to carry weapons in public unless they show they need the protection for specific reasons.

"We are not holding that the Second Amendment requires the states to permit concealed carry," Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain, a Reagan appointee, wrote for the panel. "But the Second Amendment does require that the states permit some form of carry for self-defense outside the home."

Court overturns restrictions on concealed guns in much of California - Los Angeles Times

================================
California Gun Waiting Period Laws Ruled Unconstitutional
Federal court decides 10-day waiting period laws violate Second Amendment rights

ROSEVILLE, CA, and BELLEVUE, WA / August 25, 2014 – California’s 10-day waiting period for gun purchases was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge this morning in a significant victory for Second Amendment civil rights. The laws were challenged by California gun owners Jeffrey Silvester and Brandon Combs, as well as two gun rights groups, The Calguns Foundation and Second Amendment Foundation.

In the decision released this morning, Federal Eastern District of California Senior Judge Anthony W. Ishii, appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton, found that “the 10-day waiting periods of Penal Code [sections 26815(a) and 27540(a)] violate the Second Amendment” as applied to members of certain classifications, like Silvester and Combs, and “burdens the Second Amendment rights of the Plaintiffs.”


California Gun Waiting Period Laws Ruled Unconstitutional Calguns Foundation

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
U.S. court rules residency requirements for pistol buys is unconstitutional

A federal district court in Texas ruled residency requirements for pistol purchases is unconstitutional, directly challenging Attorney General Eric Holder who has argued the federal ban on handguns outside of a person’s state of residence doesn’t violate the second amendment.

In the case, federally licensed firearms dealer Frederic Russell Mance Jr. of Texas and gun buyers Tracey and Andrew Hanson sued Mr. Holder and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Director B. Todd Jones claiming the federal ban on the sale of handguns outside of one’s state stops the formation of a national handgun market.

U.S. court rules residency requirements for pistol buys is unconstitutional CalGunLaws On Target Legal Resources Online

=========================

Court rules San Diego County's gun policy is unconstitutional

SAN DIEGO - It is a major victory for gun owners in California. On Wednesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that San Diego County's strict policy on issuing gun permits is violating Second Amendment rights.

"I've been waiting five years for this," said Ed Peruta.

He sued the San Diego County Sheriff's Department and Sheriff Bill Gore after being denied a gun permit several years ago.

Court rules San Diego County s gun policy is unconstitutional - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego
 

Forum List

Back
Top