A Pennsylvania man who pled guilty to food stamp fraud back in 1995 got a great Christmas present two days early.
Bryan Range had been denied his right to keep and bear arms for nearly 30 years. But on December 23, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirmed its earlier ruling that a person who commits a “nonviolent, nondangerous misdemeanor” and hasn’t been incarcerated cannot be deprived of his or her Second Amendment rights.
Range’s conviction was classified as “a Pennsylvania misdemeanor punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment.” Since federal law generally makes it illegal for anyone convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for over one year, Range wasn’t able to possess or purchase a firearm.
In June 2023, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals restored Range’s right to keep and bear arms. But because of a circuit court split, the case was sent to the U.S. Supreme Court, which remanded the case back down to the 3rd Circuit. The latest decision sends the matter back to the Supreme Court for consideration.
The pre-Christmas court ruling stated: “Range remains one of ‘the people’ protected by the Second Amendment, and his eligibility to lawfully purchase a rifle and a shotgun is protected by his right to keep and bear arms.”
According to court documents, In 1998, Range tried to buy a firearm but was rejected by Pennsylvania’s instant background check system. Range’s wife, who thought the rejection was a mistake, gave him a rifle.
Years later, Range tried to buy a firearm and was again rejected. After doing some research, Range learned he was banned from buying a firearm because of his 1995 conviction. Upon learning that, Range sold his rifle to a gun dealer.
Part of the discussion in the case was whether Range was one of the “people” referred to in the part of the Second Amendment stating “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
“In sum, we reject the Government’s contention that ‘felons are not among ‘the people’ protected by the Second Amendment.’ Heller and its progeny lead us to conclude that Bryan Range remains among ‘the people’ despite his 1995 false statement conviction.
The court then turned to the second aspect of the Bruen standard—whether the government could prove a similar precedent at the time of the founding.
“Because the Government has not shown that our Republic has a longstanding history and tradition of depriving people like Range of their firearms, § 922(g)(1) cannot constitutionally strip him of his Second Amendment rights,” the ruling stated. “More than two decades after he was convicted of food stamp fraud and completed his sentence, he sought protection from prosecution under § 922(g)(1) for any future possession of a firearm. The record contains no evidence that Range poses a physical danger to others.”
All of these prohibitions are unconstitutional. The real question to ask is not who should or should not have a gun. The real question is if, through full due process, one is deemed untrustworthy to have a gun, why are they amongst us in the first place?
Good. Now restore the gun civil rights to president trump. And all non felon criminals also. But that will not happen. Allowing criminals to vote but denying them 2A rights, only creates a new slave class in this country.
Pretty sure DJT can pardon himself(& afford lethal protection). I have a son who has a “non violent” felony. The complication being it happened in Indiana & he lives in Ill annoy.
No, he can only pardon federal offenses. The “crimes” he was convicted for are all state level.
No rights for you you nonviolent misdemeanor person you.
Maybe if you actually murdered somebody Biden would pardon you and then you can have your rights back.
“Bryan Range had been denied his right to keep and bear arms for nearly 30 years. But on December 23, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirmed its earlier ruling that a person who commits a “nonviolent, nondangerous misdemeanor” and hasn’t been incarcerated cannot be deprived of his or her Second Amendment rights.”
Now the anti-gun are going to be pushing for incarceration for all “nonviolent, nondangerous” misdemeanors. I’ll bet in anti-gun states you will see an increase in tyrannical ‘red flag’ terror raids and incarceration for “nonviolent, nondangerous” misdemeanors.
makes perfect sense as violent and dangerous misdemeanors and felonies go unpunished.
It’s only twenty-seven words long for a reason. Maybe it’s time we had a national discussion about that.
Non violent felons and non disabled / mental ill aliens should never banned.
For violent felons the states should choose but after an limit from 5 years ore so they should forced to regain latest if they are not mental disabled !!
The test for Constitutionality in the arena of the second amendment is so simple…is this person a danger to society? not the society where everyone is offended by pronouns or specific speach patterns, but an actual threat to average citizens? No! Someone looking to take advantage of the silly system surrounding the food stamp program, back in the ninties, is not, in my book, DANGEROUS…too dangerous to purchase a firearm. Why does COMMON SENSE not prevail?