The fact that nonviolent criminals who have paid their debt to society can lose their Second Amendment-protected rights for the rest of their lives has long been a bone of contention for many gun-rights advocates.
A case in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is challenging the federal law prohibiting firearm possession by people convicted of crime punishable by more than one year of imprisonment, regardless of the nature of that crime. And two gun-rights organizations recently filed a brief with that court in the case U.S. v. Duarte, which addresses the issue.
On September 24, the National Rifle Organization (NRA) and Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a joint brief in the case arguing that the lifetime ban is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
Brandon Combs, FPC president, said in a news release that his organization is seeking to overturn the injustice put upon the plaintiff and thousands of other nonviolent offenders.
“It is unconstitutional and immoral for the government to forever disarm people like Mr. Duarte, who committed a non-violent crime, served his time and successfully reentered society,” Combs said. “We will continue to fight to eliminate gun control laws like the one at issue in this case and restore the right to keep and bear arms for all peaceable people. We thank our friends at the NRA and its counsel for their hard work and partnership on this important brief.”
In the brief, NRA and FPC argue that there is no historical evidence—the second requirement of the Bruen standard—for instituting a lifetime ban on nonviolent citizens.
“America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation allows for the disarmament of dangerous persons—disaffected persons posing a threat to the government and persons with a proven proclivity for violence,” the brief argues. “But there is no historical tradition of disarming peaceable citizens. Rather, peaceable citizens—including nonviolent felons and other unvirtuous persons—were expressly permitted and often required to keep and bear arms.”
Further explaining how the law violates the Bruen standard, the brief states: “Historically, no individual was disarmed because the law they violated was classified as a felony. Moreover, upon completing their sentences, offenders not only had full Second Amendment rights, but able-bodied males were required to keep and bear arms under the state and federal militia acts.”
In a news item announcing the brief, NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action wrote that the brief fully explains why that law should be struck down.
“The amicus brief provides an extensive historical analysis of firearm prohibitions from colonial America through the nineteenth century,” the story stated. “It emphasizes that America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation allows for the disarmament of dangerous persons—disaffected persons posing a threat to the government and persons with a proven proclivity for violence. But there is no historical tradition of disarming peaceable citizens.”
A non violent felon, like Donald Trump, should not lose his civil rights. He should still have 2A and voting rights.
And if anyone is wondering. I’ve had this position for years on TTAG. A nonviolent felon should never lose their 2A civil rights.
If they’re too dangerous to have a firearm, why are we letting them out of jail?
Because gas and matches are totally harmless but guns are super dangerous.
or 2 ton objects that can readily crush people.
Speaking of which, Joe and Kamala missed out on the Waukesha visit. I live within 30 mins and go there 2-3X a week. You still see “Waukesha Strong” stuff up in stores.
Echoing SAFEupstateFML’s comment:
If someone who is free among us in society is too dangerous to own firearms, he/she is also too dangerous to own knives, axes, machetes, swords, bricks, rocks, baseball bats, canes, pipes, archery equipment, power tools, chemicals, poisons, accelerants plus ignition devices, vehicles, and glass bottles (among countless other additional items).
We should be giving them a chance to prove they can live in polite society after they’ve served a realistic term. (Note how leftists are letting violent offenders off the hook with a light sentence or no sentence at all.) Surviving in a prison cell proves nothing. Give them a probationary period. The length can be determined based on their particular conviction.
The real problem isn’t that felons shouldn’t lose 2A rights — I think they should. The problem is that we classify too many things as felonies that should not be felonies.
Some non-violent felonies destroy lives — usually committed by higher-ups in finance and business — and no penalty is too harsh for them. Some of those guys deserve the death penalty.
But Duarte’s previous crimes are all penny-ante stuff and shouldn’t rightly be classified as felonies. That’s the real problem. Classifying things as felonies that should not be felonies, or the standard of “more than a year in prison” which can apparently include some misdemeanors.
“Some non-violent felonies destroy lives — usually committed by higher-ups in finance and business — and no penalty is too harsh for them.”
Yep. Some large thefts have resulted in financial ruin which in some cases led the victim to suicide. That seems pretty violent.
A nonviolent felon in america is someone who bounced $300, or more in personal checks.
Or traveling 10 or 20 mph over the speed limit.
A non-violent felon in the United States is also someone who picked up an eagle feather laying on the ground and took it home.
The white liberals and white leftists want a slave class in this country. Disarmed, convicted felon voters are slaves. They are not a complete citizen.
Easily tracked & monitored via cell, newer vehicles, using plastic for purchases, cameras, etc..
I hope this makes it to the Supreme Court while justice Thomas is still alive. I used to find fellons in possession and if their conviction was not for a crime of violence, they didn’t have any warrants, the gun wasn’t hot and they were not up to something with the gun when I came across it then I would simply pocket the gun.
Years back here in MD a man pulled over to the side of a rural part of highway, walked into the woods and relieved himself. The man walks back to his vehicle with a trooper waiting, asked why he walked into the woods, the man was truthful and charged for indecent exposure, registered as a sex offender and all weapons were confiscated for being a menace to society.
Never talk to the cops.
Or call them! I have a son who is a non-violent felon. He has suffered from mental problems. I broached the subject of getting his rights back & he doesn’t seem to care yet wanted me to take him shooting(in ILLANNOY). Lot’s of liability for me. All I can do is pray for him as he’s 47.
A proven to be non violent felon should not be subjected to a law that throws them into the defenseless victim pool. To lay non violent defenseless individuals at the feet of violent criminals is cruel and unusual punishment.