Felon thinks he has the right to bear arms

Felon thinks he has the right to bear arms

This is a discussion on Felon thinks he has the right to bear arms within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Guns ruling spawns legal challenges by felons By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer 45 minutes ago Twice convicted of felonies, James Francis Barton Jr. faces ...

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 47

Thread: Felon thinks he has the right to bear arms

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179

    Felon thinks he has the right to bear arms

    Guns ruling spawns legal challenges by felons By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
    45 minutes ago



    Twice convicted of felonies, James Francis Barton Jr. faces charges of violating a federal law barring felons from owning guns after police found seven pistols, three shotguns and five rifles at his home south of Pittsburgh.

    As a defense, Barton and several other defendants in federal gun cases argue that last month's Supreme Court ruling allows them to keep loaded handguns at home for self-defense.

    "Felons, such as Barton, have the need and the right to protect themselves and their families by keeping firearms in their home," says David Chontos, Barton's court-appointed lawyer.

    Chontos and other criminal defense lawyers say the high court's decision means federal laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of people convicted of felonies and crimes of domestic violence are unconstitutional as long as the weapons are needed for self-defense.

    So far, federal judges uniformly have agreed these restrictions are unchanged by the Supreme Court's landmark interpretation of the Second Amendment.

    "The line I'm proposing, at the home, is entirely consistent" with the Supreme Court ruling, said Chontos, a lawyer in Turtle Creek, Pa. A court hearing on the issue is scheduled for late July.

    The legal attacks by Chontos and other criminal defense lawyers are separate from civil lawsuits by the National Rifle Association and others challenging handgun bans in Chicago and its suburbs as well as a total ban on guns in public housing units in San Francisco.

    People on both sides of the gun control issue say they expect numerous attacks against local, state and federal laws based on the high court's 5-4 ruling that struck down the District of Columbia's ban on handguns. The opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia also suggested, however, that many gun control measures could remain in place.

    Denis Henigan, vice president for law and policy at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said Scalia essentially was reassuring people that the laws keeping guns from felons and people with mental illness and out of government buildings and schools would withstand challenges. But Henigan said he is not surprised by felons pressing for gun-ownership rights.

    "The court has cast us into uncharted waters here. There is no question about that," Henigan said.

    "There is now uncertainty where there was none before," he said. "Gun laws were routinely upheld and they were considered policy issues to be decided by legislatures."

    At the Justice Department, spokesman Erik Ablin said the agency's lawyers "will continue to defend vigorously the constitutionality, under the Second Amendment, of all federal firearms laws and will respond to particular challenges in court."

    Cities' outright bans on handguns probably are the most vulnerable laws following the Supreme Court ruling. Many lawyers and Second Amendment experts believe that restrictions on gun ownership in public housing also will be difficult to defend.

    The question for courts will be whether the government has more power when it acts as a landlord, as it does in public housing, than in general.

    "I think there's a very substantial chance that these kinds of ordinances will be struck down because they are aimed at people who have shown no reason to be viewed as untrustworthy," said Eugene Volokh, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, who has written about gun rights.

    San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has said the city will defend the policy as good for public safety. "Is there anyone out there who really believes that we need more guns in public housing?" Newsom said when the suit was filed a day after the Supreme Court ruled on Washington's handgun ban.

    In the District of Columbia, the city housing authority is considering whether its prohibition on firearms in public housing can survive the court ruling, spokeswoman Dena Michaelson said.

    But Volokh and some gun rights proponents said people convicted of crimes are less likely to succeed in their challenges.

    "Many felons may need self defense more than you and I, but the government has extra justification for limiting that right because they have proven themselves to be untrustworthy," Volokh said.

    Judges may find it harder to resolve cases in which nonviolent criminals, particularly those whose only offense happened long ago, are charged with gun possession.

    "Do you think Scooter Libby should have a gun?" asked Douglas Berman, a law professor at Ohio State University who says the ruling will complicate the work of the courts, prosecutors and police. He was referring to former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who was convicted of perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI in the CIA leak investigation.

    A more plausible case for being allowed a gun might be made by someone now in his 50s or 60s who was convicted as a teenager of taking a car for a joyride, said Stephen P. Halbrook, a gun rights supporter and lawyer. "You might have a court look at that differently," Halbrook said.

    The Supreme Court has a case on its calendar for the fall that could indicate whether the justices are inclined to expand their ruling.

    In United States v. Hayes, the government is asking the court to reinstate a conviction for possession of a gun for someone previously convicted of a domestic violence crime. In 1994, Randy Hayes received a year of probation after pleading guilty to beating his wife.

    The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the conviction because the West Virginia law Hayes violated does not specifically deal with domestic violence crimes. The question for the high court, then, is a technical one: whether the law has to include domestic violence to be used in the future to prevent someone from owning guns?

    Advocates on both sides of the gun control debate will be watching closely to see whether the court's D.C. decision is relevant to the Hayes case and, if so, how.
    I believe SCOTUS ruled that people not barred from legally owning a firearm had the right to keep a firearm for self defense not people that have been convicted of felonies and as such are barred from legally owning a firearm in the first place
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .


  2. #2
    kpw
    kpw is offline
    VIP Member Array kpw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,160
    I'm all for felons of non-violent crimes to be able to have their rights re-instated at some point in their lives but this guy was convicted of beating his wife.

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    There are non violent felons that can petition the courts to have their gun rights restored but under the brady bill if convicted of domestic violence you can never own a gun and this guy will be serving time behind bars.
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  4. #4
    Distinguished Member Array bandit383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,681
    Quite an arsenal: seven pistols, three shotguns and five rifles....to protect the house.

    Rick

  5. #5
    Member Array Fjolnirsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Oregon, the rainy part.
    Posts
    271
    If we can't trust them with a gun, they shouldn't be allowed out of prison, except in a body bag. Stripping someone permanently of rights creates a second, lower class of citizen. If he's too dangerous to be free, kill him. Otherwise, he has the same right as you or I to self defense. I realize this is outdated thinking, but oh well.
    "Water can flow, or it can crash. Be like water, my friend."-Bruce Lee

    My Blog

    "Luck, often enough, will save a man if his courage does hold."

  6. #6
    Member Array NKMG19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    408
    NRA Member

  7. #7
    Member Array Fjolnirsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Oregon, the rainy part.
    Posts
    271
    That's pretty odd. NKMG19, look at the time stamp on your post, and where it is in relation to the others...
    "Water can flow, or it can crash. Be like water, my friend."-Bruce Lee

    My Blog

    "Luck, often enough, will save a man if his courage does hold."

  8. #8
    Distinguished Member Array Der Alte's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Goldsboro, NC
    Posts
    1,843
    I'm not a felon but damn, that guy has more shotguns and rifles than I have. Guess I'll have to head for one of my local gun stores.
    Its a shame that youth is wasted on the young.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Array ntkb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Detroit Michigan
    Posts
    690
    According to the constitution if he is a citizen he has the right.
    Possession shows no intent to commit. If he can’t be trusted then why is he out in the street?

  10. #10
    Senior Member Array KenInColo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    991
    After all, FELONS are people too...

    Seriously though, the majority opinion in Heller did acknowledge that restrictions imposed, such as denying possession to FELONS were reasonable.
    An armed populace are called citizens.
    An unarmed populace are called subjects.

  11. #11
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,081

    Yes, but this isn't what Scalia wrote

    Quote Originally Posted by ntkb View Post
    According to the constitution if he is a citizen he has the right.
    Possession shows no intent to commit. If he canít be trusted then why is he out in the street?
    Scalia made it plain and clear that felons and the mentally ill did not have full rights and that some restrictions, rules and regulations, are OK so long as they don't effectively prohibit ownership (keeping).

    This case will go nowhere. The judges will laugh at the case.

    Restoring rights to felons is a separate issue. Maybe, for the non-violent kind; but then what about those who never used a knife, a gun, a fist, but defrauded pension funds and health care funds, and ruined lives in the process. These guys are as violent in their own way as the thug.

  12. #12
    Member Array Fjolnirsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Oregon, the rainy part.
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Scalia made it plain and clear that felons and the mentally ill did not have full rights and that some restrictions, rules and regulations, are OK so long as they don't effectively prohibit ownership (keeping).

    This case will go nowhere. The judges will laugh at the case.

    Restoring rights to felons is a separate issue. Maybe, for the non-violent kind; but then what about those who never used a knife, a gun, a fist, but defrauded pension funds and health care funds, and ruined lives in the process. These guys are as violent in their own way as the thug.
    This is true...
    "Water can flow, or it can crash. Be like water, my friend."-Bruce Lee

    My Blog

    "Luck, often enough, will save a man if his courage does hold."

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array obxned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    OBX, NC
    Posts
    2,655
    If he cannot be trusted, why is he out of prison?

    Because of short sentences from plea bargains and parole boards from Mars.
    "If we loose Freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the Last Place on Earth!" Ronald Reagan

  14. #14
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,081

    There are different kinds and levels of trust

    Quote Originally Posted by obxned View Post
    If he cannot be trusted, why is he out of prison?

    Because of short sentences from plea bargains and parole boards from Mars.
    There are different kinds and levels of trust. It may be OK for a felon to be out, but still not be fully trusted. There are no doubt felons who are out who can be fully trusted, and there are some who should never ever be let out of a maximum security cell.

    In general, I oppose giving felons voting rights, or gun rights, simply because these are a reasonable part of a reasonable amount of punishment.

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Scalia made it plain and clear that felons and the mentally ill did not have full rights and that some restrictions, rules and regulations, are OK so long as they don't effectively prohibit ownership (keeping).

    This case will go nowhere. The judges will laugh at the case.

    Restoring rights to felons is a separate issue. Maybe, for the non-violent kind; but then what about those who never used a knife, a gun, a fist, but defrauded pension funds and health care funds, and ruined lives in the process. These guys are as violent in their own way as the thug.
    +1 Hopyard...

    Under current law, these morons forfeited their right to own a firearm once they were convicted of a felony. Despite the Brady mouthpiece, this is not the proper application of Heller...these are not "uncharted waters"...nowhere in Heller did it overturn the prohibition of ownership of firearms by felons or other prohibited persons.

    The judge should throw the book at these guys...and remind him (and his atty) what Heller did say.
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. To Keep and Bear Arms
    By kdydak in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: February 20th, 2010, 10:02 PM
  2. NBA Player's Right to Bear Arms?
    By mmmgaspacho in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 11th, 2010, 10:23 AM
  3. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms
    By tns0038 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 15th, 2008, 09:24 AM
  4. Right to Keep and Bear Arms
    By farronwolf in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: April 18th, 2007, 06:58 AM
  5. Restoring Right To Bear Arms
    By Amnesia Wes in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: September 7th, 2006, 09:59 AM

Search tags for this page

can an x felon be denied the right to bear arms
,
federal felon right to bear arms
,
federal felons right to bear arms
,

felon right to bear arms texas

,
felon rights to bear arms in texas
,
felons in florida regain right to bare arms
,

felons right to bear arms

,

felons right to bear arms in texas

,

restore right to bear arms in oklahoma

,
right to bear arms in texas
,
right to have bare arms in detroit michigan
,
www.can a felon own a gun in texas if he moves to texas and has a felony in ohio.com
Click on a term to search for related topics.