[boricua]

This is another victory for 2A - common sense prevails. The news report is a bit lengthy, that's why I didn't copy it in the thread.

Court: Criminal Record May Not Prevent Gun Ownership - Taking Liberties - CBS News

 

[Stevew]

Didn't some LEO lose their job over Heller? Will they have to be re-hired?

 

[searcher 45]

I am glad this kind of thing is getting sorted out.

 

[jumpwing]

Well that's just great. So now criminals are going to start carrying guns.

Oh, wait...

 

[Hopyard]

Really mixed feelings about this. It could cause some law makers to up the level of offense for domestic violence from misdemeanor to felony; and, an individual with a known propensity for violence perhaps really shouldn't be going about armed.

The other side of the coin is folks do mellow with experience and age and someone who does something stupid as a young twenty something does deserve some path to regain rights later in life.

 

[Hopyard]

Really mixed feelings about this. It could cause some law makers to up the level of offense for domestic violence from misdemeanor to felony; and, an individual with a known propensity for violence perhaps really shouldn't be going about armed.

The other side of the coin is folks do mellow with experience and age and someone who does something stupid as a young twenty something does deserve some path to regain rights later in life.

 

[JerryM]

It would seem reasonable to me to consider any degree of violence that occurred. I think that the definition of "domestic violence" is pretty broad. I have an impression that it might even include verbal "abuse."

If someone was not seriously injured, and it occurred 5 or more years ago plus having a spotless record since, I would not be adverse to the person owning a gun. That time frame is arbitrary.

I am glad to see it considered by high level courts.

Regards,
Jerry

 

[BikerRN]

I'm of the personal opinion that "back dating" the Domestic Abuse Laws as it pertains to gun ownersip/usage is against the rules of fair play, akin to the losing side changing the rules of Dodge Ball once they start to lose.

If, when the law was passed they said, "Anyone convicted from this date forward for Domestic Violence is barred from owning a gun" then I wouldn't have a problem with it, as we would all know the rules of the game before playing, or at least have access to the rules, and should know the ones that are important to us. If they can do this what's to keep them from passing a law that says, "Anyone convicted of speeding since 1932 is barred from owning a gun." That's not fair, and while fair is a place you go to eat cotton candy, it is deceitful and underhanded IMHO.

Biker

 

[nasal]

I'm confused...is "domestic violence" a separate crime in the eyes of the law, or is it a degree of assault? For example, I could beat someone up and be charged with assault. If I were to beat up my (hypothetical) wife, would I be charged with "domestic violence" or would I be charged with "assault that is domestic violence" kind of like we have different degrees of murder? Not to hijack the thread but I think there could be important distinctions regarding stuff like the burden of proof, etc.

 

[DPro.40]

It would now appear that if any charges are brought forth against someone, the charges will need to be specific and described as to what may outline the removal of a firearm. It appears a broad sweep of the "Domestic Violence" accusation isn't enough. It may bog
down the system in small details or it may prevent the wide spread abuses of the legal system. I hope it's for the good. I'm not worried. They haven't mentioned Felons. If they do, I suspect it will be subject to the same guidelines. This appears to be an isolated case. I doubt if the current administration will let it reach a federal level of review and kick it back to the states review. I suspect they are already concerned about the next re-election results and wouldn't want to tackle this issue now.

 

[Rob P.]

I'm confused...is "domestic violence" a separate crime in the eyes of the law, or is it a degree of assault? For example, I could beat someone up and be charged with assault. If I were to beat up my (hypothetical) wife, would I be charged with "domestic violence" or would I be charged with "assault that is domestic violence" kind of like we have different degrees of murder? Not to hijack the thread but I think there could be important distinctions regarding stuff like the burden of proof, etc.

DV is a form of "battery" not "assault." However, simple battery doesn't carry with it the problems of spousal battery/domestic violence.

A family member is in a special class because of the family bond. They can't "leave and go elsewhere" or be "extraordinarily aware" because the person who is harming them is family and has a right to be there. And, very few persons will act favorable to the advice that they just leave all their possessions and home behind on the off-chance that they will be victimized by their spouse.

Thus, DV is a worse crime than mere battery because of the special circumstances when it is committed.