Michelle Lane v. Eric Holder, Jr. -- Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

This is a discussion on Michelle Lane v. Eric Holder, Jr. -- Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; [Re-posted from a VA-ALERT with prior approval of VCDL] [First person singular pronouns (I, my, mine, etc) and PVC reference Philip Van Cleave, President VCDL] ...

Results 1 to 14 of 14
Like Tree9Likes
  • 3 Post By DaveH
  • 2 Post By oakchas
  • 1 Post By BigStick
  • 2 Post By BigJon10125
  • 1 Post By noway2

Thread: Michelle Lane v. Eric Holder, Jr. -- Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    Thumbs up Michelle Lane v. Eric Holder, Jr. -- Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

    [Re-posted from a VA-ALERT with prior approval of VCDL]

    [First person singular pronouns (I, my, mine, etc) and PVC reference Philip Van Cleave, President VCDL]

    Today, Tuesday, October 23, I sat in on a case being heard by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond. A panel of three judges heard the appeal of a case represented by gun-lawyer Alan Gura (of D.C. vs Heller fame).

    The case, Michelle Lane v. Eric Holder, Jr., is about overturning the federal law that prohibits a person from directly buying a handgun from a dealer who is in another state. The argument is that federal law causes financial harm to the gun owner due to an artificially small number of dealers in his home state he can use to transfer a handgun. In the case of D.C., there is only ONE dealer. That dealer is in a government-created monopoly position and can charge whatever he wants for the transfer and D.C. gun owners are stuck having to pay that fee if they want a gun.

    Virginia is also being sued. The Virginia legal council told the panel that Virginia would allow a handgun to be transferred directly to an out-of-state gun owner if only the federal government would not block such a transaction. I'm glad that we have the Administration on record so that if the federal law changes due to this lawsuit, out-of-state residents will be able to start buying handguns directly from dealers in Virginia immediately. If the federal law is overturned, it would also open the door to Virginia residents buying handguns directly from dealers in other states.

    Imagine being on vacation in Texas and being able to purchase and take possession of a handgun from a Texas dealer while on that trip! Currently, you could buy the gun, but would have to have it shipped to a dealer in Virginia, who would then transfer the gun to you once you show up in their store. So to have that gun in Texas, you would first have to return to Virginia to get the handgun from a Virginia dealer and then continue your vacation in Texas. :-(

    More stupid gun control that needs to be thrown out.

    The panel will rule on this matter at some point in the future, possibly in 2013.

    Tomorrow Alan will present another case to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, Raymond Woollard v. Dennis Gallagher, which is attempting to overturn Maryland's "may-issue" CHP law. That would make Maryland a "shall-issue" state, like Virginia. I will be there to watch the proceedings.


    VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL).

    VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.

    VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org [http://www.vcdl.org/]
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,091
    Boy, wouldn't it be nice if that passed?

    I mean it's an NICS check... the first word is NATIONAL... If I pass a NICS check here in Iowa... I'm gonna pass the same check in Tennessee... Why not be able to take possession under state laws?
    The Old Anglo and msgt/ret like this.
    All that said....
    It could be worse.
    __________________________________________________
    "The History of our Revolution will be one continued Lye from one end to the other."
    John Adams

  4. #3
    Member Array Harvester's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    I mean it's an NICS check... the first word is NATIONAL... If I pass a NICS check here in Iowa... I'm gonna pass the same check in Tennessee... Why not be able to take possession under state laws?
    Soo much this!
    Molon Labe

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member Array BigStick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Gig Harbor, WA
    Posts
    1,455
    I think that the "commerce clause" argument is WAY overused in the federal regulation game. For me, just about anytime you reduce federal involvement or regulations, I am happy. It would be interesting to hear the anti complaints though. What would they be? Obviously that blood will run in the streets, but where and why?

    I would say that criminals already buy guns wherever they are/want. Why shouldn't law abiding citizens be able to. It will be up to the citizens to know the rules and restrictions in their local state as to which guns are legal to bring back home. That could cause some problems, but mostly in CA, IL or other states with rediculous restrictions.
    BigJon10125 likes this.
    Walk softly ...

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array BigJon10125's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,063
    We already have a national policy on arms that is being ignored, it is called the constitution. If they just went back to what it says we would be good to go!
    dV8r and msgt/ret like this.
    BigJon


    "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt" ~ Mark Twain

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,824

    Michelle Lane v. Eric Holder, Jr. -- Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJon10125 View Post
    We already have a national policy on arms that is being ignored, it is called the constitution. If they just went back to what it says we would be good to go!
    That very well may be true, but in practical reality it isn't going to happen, at least in one jump. The rights protected by the 2nd have been chipped away at bit by bit, over time, by the courts and the legislatures. It wasn't until fairly recently that the trend even began reversing. As more people, estimated by a report I saw on msn this morning to be currently at 47% of households own guns, people will start taking their rights and responsibilities seriously. As this happens, tolerance for stupid, anti BS and 'restrictions' will wane.
    oakchas likes this.

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,091
    Quote Originally Posted by noway2 View Post
    That very well may be true, but in practical reality it isn't going to happen, at least in one jump. The rights protected by the 2nd have been chipped away at bit by bit, over time, by the courts and the legislatures. It wasn't until fairly recently that the trend even began reversing. As more people, estimated by a report I saw on msn this morning to be currently at 47% of households own guns, people will start taking their rights and responsibilities seriously. As this happens, tolerance for stupid, anti BS and 'restrictions' will wane.
    One can only hope...
    All that said....
    It could be worse.
    __________________________________________________
    "The History of our Revolution will be one continued Lye from one end to the other."
    John Adams

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array BigJon10125's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,063
    Agreed NoWay, it is wishful thinking, but it can happen and as you said the trend is reversing a bit. It should happen as that document was so genius it already had established a baseline for this and many other issues we face today. Fingers crossed and ready to vote!
    BigJon


    "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt" ~ Mark Twain

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    KCMO
    Posts
    3,413
    Very cool, but I think it will also take so time to get all the states laws off their books as well.

  11. #10
    Senior Member Array sdprof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Near the Black Hills of SD
    Posts
    965
    Is there any other product of any sort or type or classification, that the government prohibits you from buying in a state other than your residence?

    Booze? Nope, no problem. Cars, nope. Medicines? Fertilizer and diesel fuel? Nope, nope and nope.

    Just handguns.
    ~~~~~
    The only common sense gun legislation was written about 224 years ago.

    I carry always not because I go places trouble is likely, but because trouble has a habit of not staying in its assigned zone.

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array msgt/ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    7,079
    Personally I believe all of it should be done away with, prior to GCA 1968 you could order firearms through the mail and have them delivered to your home and there was no blood running in the streets back then either.
    When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
    "Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,599
    Hope they win the case.... that would be a game changer for those around DC, in Chicago, etc.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  14. #13
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    This won't change anything for me since I can't buy guns not approved in my state!

  15. #14
    Senior Member Array Spidey2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    887
    Quote Originally Posted by BigStick View Post
    I think that the "commerce clause" argument is WAY overused in the federal regulation game. For me, just about anytime you reduce federal involvement or regulations, I am happy. It would be interesting to hear the anti complaints though. What would they be? Obviously that blood will run in the streets, but where and why?

    I would say that criminals already buy guns wherever they are/want. Why shouldn't law abiding citizens be able to. It will be up to the citizens to know the rules and restrictions in their local state as to which guns are legal to bring back home. That could cause some problems, but mostly in CA, IL or other states with rediculous restrictions.
    Of course the commerce clause is abused. They used it to prosecute a Marijuana grower in CA because his legal growing of Marijuana affected the illegal market nationwide...... And SCOTUS agreed with them.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

4th circuit court of appeals ruling on maryland gun
,
case before the 4th u.s. circuit court of appeals in richmond alan gura
,
eric holder second amendment
,
fourth circuit court maryland handgun
,
lane v holder 2012
,

lane v. heller

,

maryland concealed carry appeal

,
maryland concealed carry october 23, 2012
,
maryland shall issue lane v. holder
,
woollard case fourth circuit court of appeals
,
woollard maryland concealed carry appeal oct 23
,
woollard v gallagher
Click on a term to search for related topics.