In one of the cases before the court, a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to driving under the influence 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, a man who pleaded guilty to counterfeiting and smuggling cassettes in the 1980s challenged the firearms ban.
[Justice Amy Coney] Barrett, the newest member of the court, had given Second Amendment groups reason for optimism on the issue. In 2019, as a judge on the federal appeals court in Chicago, Barrett dissented from an opinion upholding the law that bans convicted felons from owning a gun.
The Wisconsin man who challenged the law in that case, Rickey Kanter, had pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud. Barrett wrote in her dissent that the ban went too far when applied to someone who had not been convicted of a violent crime.
— John Fritze in Supreme Court passes on Second Amendment cases challenging lifetime gun ownership ban
Now do voting.
Trump lost, Cletus. Deal with it.
Did he really???
So the overwhelming evidence thus far says. Those claiming fraud have had ample opportunities to present their evidence in court, and repeatedly failed. They also seem to believe Democrats capable of a level of competency that they’ve never come remotely close to capable of before or since this supposed massive fraud operation.
@Serpent_Vision- “Those claiming fraud have had ample opportunities to present their evidence in court”
Not true – the mainstream media has misled you as the majority of cases were actually dismissed on procedural grounds, NOT on merit. There’s plenty of evidence of swing state voter fraud that hasn’t been adjudicated.
Work for 2-3 h0urs in y0ur spare time and get paid 1200 0n your bank acc0unt every week…
Get m0re information 0n f0ll0wing site…WorkJoin1
I’ll give $20 for two hours of your time, pay’s not much but the work can be a whole lot more “gratifying”…
“gratifying” to who?
““gratifying” to who?”
Usually the ‘catcher’…
😊… Nuff said? Actually it can be mutual, hard not get into it after a couple of hours and I aim to please…
Wait. This article is from April. Why is it being posted as if this just happened??
Slow news day?
It’s not all bad news.
There were two 2A cases that are apparently being held until it rules on NYSRPA v. Bruen (oral arguments being heard this month).
Those two are, Young v. Hawaii (Hawaii open carry restrictions), and Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs Inc. v. Grewal, that deals with magazine possession…
I’m more concerned with those that aren’t felons of any sort, yet are still denied their right to self defense.
Let’s deal with that issue first. (And why the rehash of this? No idea, but whatever.)
Who, more than felons(who have done their time), need protection from the more organized felons out on the street? Many felons are forced to do things outside to “repay” protections they got inside.
They know where you are, your parole limits you(in many cases) to a certain area of the state, many go back to their old neighborhoods(where they have family), but the old gangs are still there and they report to the shot callers in the prison gangs. The police won’t help.
The Dems are just trying to fragment the people into different classes. A felon has a red stamp on his/her forehead and is just like a runaway, worn out, slave, no good for their purposes, not even good enough to feed, so just dump him/her out to find their fate and take any self defense tools from them.
A felony is a crime that demands at least 1 complete year behind bars. If the crime is that bad, no one should be able to plea to the crime and NOT do the full year. This is a favorite ploy by the courts to turn you into a second class citizen with the stroke of a pen. Many young adults will do anything just to get out of jail, even screwing up their whole lives by taking a plea rather than fighting the charge.
We simply need to get some issues on the ballot and be able to get issues on our ballots far easier than we do now. This is of course AFTER we stop at least 7/8 of our voting fraud schemes.
No. And not because of the potential for fraud in the voting.
I’ve seen firsthand what rampant ballot initiatives can do, from having lived in California for a while. That’s basically letting people give themselves the keys to the treasury.
YES … we need to get more issues on the ballot and far easier than in the past and present. I am going to expend my efforts towards that goal once it appears we got the voter fraud resolved. We can’t rely on 3 branches of almost totally dysfunctional govt. to protect our rights, to include the unofficial 4th. branch of govt. being the funk and fake news media.
There is no way in hell we can judge the rest of the nation based on wacky screwball CA or the rest of the leftist coast.
rampant ballot initiatives can do, from having lived in California for a while. That’s basically letting people give themselves the keys to the treasury.
Unless some far left judge (not hard to find in Kommiefornia) decides the people were too stupid to understand what they were voting for…
I think that you refer to Proposition 8? That’s pretty much what happened in that case. The people voted, the activists didn’t like the results, activists were especially pissed at Latino voters (who are actually pretty conservative people), so they ran crying to an activist judge. Activist judge decided that the will of the people counts for nothing – and that the constitution is unconstitutional.
I think that you refer to Proposition 8
That’s the one… As I recall the “alternative lifestyle” crowd was trying to link themselves to the historical treatment of Black folks and the Black folks were pretty unhappy about it… Anyway it only took ONE activist judge to overrule the will of the people, pretty sure that’s NOT what the Founders envisioned for our Constitutional Republic…
You going to buy a gunm?
” Nah, I cant own one, I got caught selling bootleg cassette tapes.”
What’s a cassette tape?
Good one possum.
I lived/worked near NYC for most of the ’80s.
Never heard of a single felony conviction for street level bootleg music sales. SOP was taking bootleg materials, a warning, then letting the person walk.
I would expect a felony conviction for those operating large scale bootleg operations.
Large scale copyright violation? Yeah, why don’t I care if these people walk around unarmed. They CLEARLY violated the trust of “We the People”.
Wanna sell someone elses copyrighted music on a street corner? Talk to your elected reps and have copyright laws changed.
Bootlegging music is NO different then walking into a farmers fields and stealing crops. Can get you shot.
Maybe the solution is as simple as arming up the artists who own the music copyrights, and letting them loose on the bootleggers. 🤔
Uhhhhmmmm, sharing files is not theft. That entire concept of “intellectual property” needs to be reexamined, and heavily modified. Bear in mind that people like Walt Disney bought congress critters for the purpose of extending copyright into eternity. The author’s life, plus 70 years, I think it is now. FFS, that’s idiotic.
But, when you duplicate something, leaving the original behind, you’ve “stolen” nothing. Stop confusing ones and zeros on the internet with food crops, or whatever.
The conversation started on the bootleg tapes topic. Long before music downloads.
Besides, like I stated prior, contact your elected reps if you want copyright laws changed.
If someone makes a choice to violate fed law and catchs a conviction, don’t expect any sympathy.
You rolled the dice, pay the price.
Besides what many think, we are STILL a country of laws.
I noticed an attorney who was assigned as Guardian ad Litem for my sons (in my divorce) had an illegal music sharing Icon on his computer home screen. This guy was also in a band that was negotiating to sell their music copyrights to Sony.
But I would expect that level of hypocrisy from a lawyer.
Meanwhile Jim Crow Gun Control joe’s son hunter who does drugs, undermines America and along with his deceased brother’s so called wife Hallie leaves hunter’s Gun in a Dumpster that was soon found by a dumpster diver. Hunter also answered No on the 4473 if he used drugs to purchase the gun destined for a dumpster.
Today hunter biden could probably walk into a Gun Store and walk out with a firearm while others who are obviously more trustworthy and deserving are on their knees asking the USSC for help and forgiveness and getting nowhere. It is what it is and it reeks.
Answering “No” on the 4473 form is answering in the present, the question does not ask if you have ever used drugs. You could be out of rehab, had a life changing conversion(that you have every reason to stick to) and answer “no”.
If you had only quit for a day, or had a relapse before it was time to pick up the firearm, you would be a liar and, I feel, subject to arrest for perjury.
The question on the form reads:
“Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.”
It makes no reference to being a present or former user.
Hahahahaha.
Just wait until the alphabet boiz start running state “med marijuana” card databases against the 4473 data. Expect to see the purchaser data from states with legalized pot dispensaries run against 4473 data too. 🤔 Ever wonder why your ID was scanned at time of purchase? Or why Credit/Debit cards are usually the ONLY acceptable method of payment?🤔
If you’re too stupid to NOT have seen this coming, you’re too stupid to properly retain your 2nd A rights.
Don’t hate the messanger, hate the message. TTTH!✋
Hope you enjoyed that high, most people had NO idea of the ACTUAL cost during the time of purchase.
Can anyone figure out why many large employers have stopped doing drug tests? 🤔
Could that be a leftarded move to get more names on a prohibited possor list?
Giving the leftards/anti-gunners a rope to hang you with is NOT a smart move.
rt66Paul comment reads like, yeah, I broke a federal law yesterday, but I haven’t YET today. 🤣
Seeing the light in regard to fed law is NOT like walking into a church and telling the congregation you JUST found Jesus.
🤔I didn’t know he was missing.
most people had NO idea of the ACTUAL cost during the time of purchase.
That’s why I grow my own, couple plants a year gives me ALL the pain relief I need, beats hell out of 30 mg Oxycodone every four hours forever… Took me three months to get off that shit, no more prescription drugs…
👍
I don’t agree with how the far left/anti-gunners will use leftarded run state gathered info to classify people as prohibited possessors.
I’m just disgusted that many good people didn’t see the system for the trap it actually is.
These idiots have provided the Fed gov with all the info needed to zip them up.
Makes me wonder how many people stopped by a pot shop the same day they filled out a 4473.🤪
.40 cal, you said, “It makes no reference to being a present or former user.”
The 4473 doesn’t say “Were you”, it says “Are you”, which means present tense. What part of the words “Are you” do you not understand?
No, “Are you” does not mean present tense. Its means “Are you”.
If you did illegal drugs once last month and have not since then you are still a user of illegal drugs because you have been a user of illegal drugs, just not a current user of illegal drugs.
On the other hand if you were asked the question “Are you a gun owner?” the question is qualified as what is current present because ownership is s state of activity that either is or is not.
There are actually a few different things wrong with the question.
the “Are you” would need to be qualified by a “presently” for the “Are you” to mean the present. That’s the way the English language works. This “Are you” has no such qualifying context to indicate a time period or an event frequency, but it does have indicative context of activity (drug use). The “Are you” in this question does not mean “present”, it simply means “Are you …”
its what is called a “loaded question”. It contains or is based on an implicit or explicit assumption that the person being questioned is likely to disagree with. The assumption being based in that they even ask the question to begin with, assuming some people use drugs. Loaded questions answers can be interpreted anyway the “entity” asking the question chooses to interpret the answer.
Lots of people say the question means “present” because of “Are you” by its self sounds like present tense because they want to read it as a “right now” thing. But that’s not the way the English language works and its really not present tense because in the English language tense needs qualification for time and there is no such qualification in the question which indicates present or past.
“present tense” is a tense expressing an action that is currently going on or habitually performed, or a state that currently or generally exists. It depends on something to qualify it as present.
For example, the question “Are you afraid of the dark?” has the qualifier ‘dark’ so we can say that the time is during dark even though its very general, and that time could have been last night, a month ago, or at some point in the future or even right now if its dark, the question is qualified for tense by time even though its general – the question “Are you afraid of being in the dark tonight” has the time qualifier “tonight” so we can say this is present tense if its now “tonight” or future tense if tonight has not arrived yet or we could say its present tense because night is going to arrive but we can’t say its past tense because tonight is not in the past yet. But the question “Are you afraid?” might provoke a response of “afraid of what?” or “Afraid when?” because there is no qualifier for the question. A qualifier can also be a contextual situation or event or time period or action.
a verb tense used to describe a current activity or state of being. However, the present tense does not just describe “present”, in the English language it can also be used to describe past and future activities – thus its necessary for it to be qualified in some way to describe if you are talking about present. Drug use is an activity, so the question “Are you….” is contextually related to an activity – but its not qualified for when that activity takes place so “Are you…” is not qualified for present tense and does not mean present tense.
is English not your first language?
No no, don’t explain it to them 40calB.
Let them come to the epiphany after sounding like a total idiot in front of the lawyer they paid to represent them in a feeble attempt to have their 2nd A rights restored.
Expensive lessons are usually the ones “most” learned and remembered.
I’ve had this discussion with several people, both of my sons included. Those discussions with deniers usually end with my letting them know I’ll try to be kind when I say “I told you so”.😄
Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to driving under the influence in 2005 challenged the ban on purchasing or owning a gun.
When did DUI become a felony? In PA you have to have caused an accident in which injury or injury causing permanent impairment or death to be charged with with felony DUI… So the guy either messed someone up pretty bad or caused one or more deaths…
Its been a felony for a long time and its also been a misdemeanor for a long time, ever since the legal concept of DUI as a prosecutable offense has been around. It depends on the seriousness and is if it a repeat offense.
Under most circumstances, a first time conviction for driving under the influence is a misdemeanor, but there are circumstances under which a DUI can be a charged as a felony crime. These circumstances vary by state and jurisdiction.
but there are circumstances under which a DUI can be a charged as a felony crime.
You mean like the ones I ACTUALLY listed as being FELONIES in PA?
I think we should focus restoring gun rights for people convicted of MISDEMEANOR domestic violence first. Losing your gun rights over that is a real miscarriage of justice.
And while we’re at it- let’s dismantle the divorce-industrial-TV complex
this is a strange thing in relation to gun purchase and ownership, misdemeanor domestic violence.
According to federal law, ans as stated by the ATF;
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/what-misdemeanor-crime-domestic-violence
” a conviction would not be disabling if it has been expunged or set aside”
(that’s disabling for gun purchase and ownership).
yet, in all 50 states its possible to get a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction “expunged” (after a period of time) by simply petitioning the court to do so. However, not many ever do it then spend the rest of their lives bitching about not being able to buy a gun because of it when all they had to do was get it expunged.
then there is the problem of the state. Some states still count the conviction as disqualifying for gun purchase or ownership even if the conviction has been expunged and the FFL’s in the state are forced to go through the state to submit for the background check. This lets the state interceded and deny the application their self and the ATF never sees it.
misdemeanor domestic violence is the only disqualifying offense that you can have expunged or set aside and then qualify under federal law yet still not qualify under some states laws even though the expungement or being set aside essentially nullifies the conviction for fire arms purposes.
The Supreme Court cannot enforce its rulings/opinions. Why bother with a hearing when you know the lower courts will simply ignore it.
Biden ignores them all the time. Now the DOJ is starting search word warrants using Google. This is really going to get interesting.
So we file suit against SCOTUS itself, in their capacity as useless idiots!
no, you can’t sue the SCOTUS. You can’t sue the SCOTUS Justices for something dealing with their actions as Justices of the Supreme Court. You can sue the U.S. Government though.
While I’m sure you’re right what law prohibits the SCOTUS from being sued in a court of law?
Wow!
So, for the 12,000th time, I guess I have to say that NO government what’s their citizens armed. 3 Cases down, 2 to go. Then we can all whine about how the repubs betrayed us…again.
for the 12,001st time.
NO GOVERNMENT WANTS ITS CITIZENS ARMED. None, no exceptions.
Comments are closed.