Only CBS Covers Dramatic Increase In Support For Second Amendment
Only CBS News on Thursday covered a new poll showing a dramatic increase in support for the Second Amendment. NewsBusters: ABC, NBC Skip Poll Finding Massive Support for the Second ...
By: yazchat
Original post:
Only CBS Covers Dramatic Increase In Support For Second Amendment - Video
World News - December 11, 2014 - Second Amendment, Intelligence Authorization Act marijuana news
Stories covered on this December 11, 2014 edition of the Nightly World News: -A recent Pew Research Center poll reveals support for the Second Amendment and ...
By: NoWorldOrder.com
Scott of Rogue Reflections @Gavin Seim I-594, Second Amendment Rally in Olympia,WA
Rogue Reflections https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYO3f6FE37dafWxL5kv314A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzKhVRzCrWY Gavin Seim sponsors I-594, Second Amendment Rally in ...
By: ekennye and linda
View post:
Scott of Rogue Reflections @Gavin Seim I-594, Second Amendment Rally in Olympia,WA - Video
Below is another excerpt from the second edition of Love, Roberts & Klingele, Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction: Law, Policy & Practice (West/NACDL, 2d ed. 2015)(forthcoming), this one about challenges to firearms-related collateral consequences, based on the constitutional right to bear arms. Note that the government has appealed the district courts decision in Binderup v. Holdercited in note 8, discussed here a few weeks ago. Binderup is acivil rights action in which the court held that the federal felon-in-possession statute could not constitutionally be applied to an individual convicted of a non-violent sex offense in 1998 and sentenced to probation. This case, the first in which a federal court invalidated a federal statute on Second Amendment grounds, is likely to provide an early opportunity for the court of appeals to consider an issue that most commentators and some courts believe was left unresolved by the Supreme Court in D.C. v. Heller.
Alan Gura, who represents Mr. Binderup and argued both Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago in the Supreme Court, has promised to give us a comment about the Binderup appeal and other pending Second Amendment challenges to felony dispossession laws involving people with dated non-violent convictions. The tricky and fascinating question presented by these as-applied challenges is what criteria should be used to test whether an individual with a criminal conviction is within the class historically barredbarred from Second Amendment protections or is no more dangerous than a typical law-abiding citizen. U.S. v. Barton, 633 F.3d 168, 174 (3d Cir. 2011).Criminal defense lawyers representing clients on felon-in-possession charges, and anyone seeking restoration of firearms rights after conviction, should keep an eye on this space. (I was told several years ago that a substantial percentage of the requests for full pardon pending in the Justice Department are from people seeking restoration of firearms privileges. It strikes me as exceedingly strange that people with dated non-violent federal convictions should have to petition the president to regain what we may soon learn are their constitutional rights, but that is the situation the Supreme Court left us with their dubious 1995 decision in Beecham v. U.S.).
2:36. Firearms restrictions Second Amendment challenges to felony dispossession laws
In 2008, the Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller[1] that the Second Amendment confers a personal, fundamental right to possess a firearm, thus opening an entirely new basis for defending against the application of statutes making it a crime for convicted felons to possess firearms.[2]Heller itself anticipated and sought to deflect constitutional challenges to conviction-based firearms restrictions by declaring them to be longstanding and presumptively lawful[3]but some lower courts have characterized this statement as dictum, and scholars have questioned its historical accuracy.[4]
While every federal court to have considered the issue post-Heller has rejected a Second Amendment challenge to the federal statute barring convicted felons from possessing firearms,[5] three federal courts of appeal have suggested that categorical firearms bans may not survive rational basis review as applied to individuals convicted of nonviolent felonies.[6]
In U.S. v. Barton, the Third Circuit noted that a successful as applied challenger
must present facts about himself and his background that distinguish his circumstances from those of persons historically barred from Second Amendment protections. For instance, a felon convicted of a minor, non-violent crime might show that he is no more dangerous than a typical law-abiding citizen. Similarly, a court might find that a felon whose crime of conviction is decades-old poses no continuing threat to society.[7]
The first case to sustain an as-applied challenge to the federal felon-in-possession statute relied upon this language from Barton in finding that an individual convicted of a non-violent sex offense and sentenced to probation sixteen years before could not be prosecuted under it.[8] Earlier, the North Carolina Supreme Court relied upon the right to bear arms provision of its state constitution in refusing to apply a newly enacted categorical dispossession statute to an individual whose conviction was decades old, whose firearms rights had been restored under an earlier law, and who had long since demonstrated his rehabilitation.[9]
[1] District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 171 L. Ed. 2d 637 (2008).
More here:
Second Amendment challenges to felon-in-possession laws ...
Pro Gun vs Pro Second Amendment
Matt #39;s Facebook Profile https://www.facebook.com/neverenuffammotacticool NeverEnuffAmmo Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/pages/Neverenuffammo/481494785...
By: NeverEnuffAmmo
See the original post:
Pro Gun vs Pro Second Amendment - Video