Posted on Nov 8, 2023
SCOTUS justices confronted with their own 'historical tradition' rule in pivotal gun case
2.63K
3
1
2
2
0
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in a case with major implications for the future of gun rights. In an appeal from a ruling by the most conservative appeals court in the nation, the Biden administration asked the justices to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers by refining the law handed down by a ruling handed down by the Court in 2022.
SCOTUS justices confronted with their own 'historical tradition' rule in pivotal gun case
Posted from lawandcrime.com
Domestic Violence
Firearms and Guns
Supreme Court
Conservative
Law
Posted 1 y ago
Responses: 1
1
1
0
This is yet another case that arises partly out of a really stupid charging decision at the local level and partly out of abuses that have made a mockery out of what should have been a good law.
Rahimi is no angel -- and almost certainly should not be running around with a gun -- but the decision to charge him for unlawful possession of a firearm BASED ON AN OLD EPO was simply the last of the stupid decisions that brought about this case. He should have been charged and prosecuted for the laundry list of serious crimes he committed - which would have avoided all this nonsense.
The entire notion of "misdemeanor domestic violence" is a mixture of stupidity and abuse. Serious crimes are felonies, misdemeanors are crimes that don't meet the threshold of being serious. The very concept of a Violent Misdemeanor is an oxymoron!
Stripping an enumerated constitutional right as a routine part of a frequently abused local court order is ridiculous enough -- making that part of federal law even when the local court does not include any ban on firearms is completely egregious.
Rahimi is no angel -- and almost certainly should not be running around with a gun -- but the decision to charge him for unlawful possession of a firearm BASED ON AN OLD EPO was simply the last of the stupid decisions that brought about this case. He should have been charged and prosecuted for the laundry list of serious crimes he committed - which would have avoided all this nonsense.
The entire notion of "misdemeanor domestic violence" is a mixture of stupidity and abuse. Serious crimes are felonies, misdemeanors are crimes that don't meet the threshold of being serious. The very concept of a Violent Misdemeanor is an oxymoron!
Stripping an enumerated constitutional right as a routine part of a frequently abused local court order is ridiculous enough -- making that part of federal law even when the local court does not include any ban on firearms is completely egregious.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google