Shredding of reasonable gun control laws by courts

[DeSanto]

The court decision saying this man should own guns was AFTER he had committed those irresponsible actions.

That’s not how I read it. As I understand it, the appeals court ruling was to vacate the illegal gun possession conviction.

A federal grand jury had indicted Rahimi for possessing a firearm while under a domestic violence restraining order in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)

Rahimi moved to dismiss that indictment on the ground that § 922(g)(8) is unconstitutional.

Basically the law that makes it illegal to possess a fire arm because someone put a restraining order out on you… is unconstitutional. And I agree! Anyone can put a restraining order out on someone without going to court or having to prove their accusations are true.

 

[vibise]

Translation: she was caught in a lie

Nope.
I am just not willing to jump through your hoops.
The post is there.

 

[vibise]

If she has a PRO against him, then the law assumes he is entering her home to harm her.

Depends on the state. Many states have what is known as "Castle Doctrine", which I'll let your mom and dad explain to you.

How do you know? What's your evidence that she broke the law?

Only in the straw man argument you've created.

There are plenty of women in prison for killing their abusers.

And I already pointed out the 20 year sentence given to a women who just fired into a wall to let her abuser she meant business.

Giving women guns and telling them to shoot away is only going to get them arrested and faced with an expensive court case at best.

 

[vibise]

Translation: she was caught in a lie

post 69 was the post that first mentioned that hundreds of yards distance. A post that was not by me. but it was a post I responded to.

 

[vibise]

Yeah, this is pretty common with her. She makes something up and then challenges you to find a post she never made.

The post about hundreds of yards between the abuser and the victim was not made by me. post 69

 

[vibise]

That’s not how I read it. As I understand it, the appeals court ruling was to vacate the illegal gun possession conviction.

A federal grand jury had indicted Rahimi for possessing a firearm while under a domestic violence restraining order in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)

Rahimi moved to dismiss that indictment on the ground that § 922(g)(8) is unconstitutional.

Basically the law that makes it illegal to possess a fire arm because someone put a restraining order out on you… is unconstitutional. And I agree! Anyone can put a restraining order out on someone without going to court or having to prove their accusations are true.

So you think Rahimi, given all his actions, which were considered in removing his gun rights, should have as many guns as he wants?

What the court did was to ensure that this guy, and everyone like him, can keep their guns no matter how irresponsible and dangerous they are.

Would you want to live next door to that guy?

 

[glenlogie]

Nope.
I am just not willing to jump through your hoops.
The post is there.

Knowing you, if it actually existed, you would have loudly proclaimed the number of the post. You are a fraud.

 

[glenlogie]

There are plenty of women in prison for killing their abusers.

And I already pointed out the 20 year sentence given to a women who just fired into a wall to let her abuser she meant business.

Giving women guns and telling them to shoot away is only going to get them arrested and faced with an expensive court case at best.

So every man in the whole world wants to put all women in jail.

 

[glenlogie]

The post about hundreds of yards between the abuser and the victim was not made by me. post 69

Normal people read that sentence to mean a bullet can travel that far, not that the abuser is that far away.

 

[Mike McK]

So you think Rahimi, given all his actions, which were considered in removing his gun rights, should have as many guns as he wants?

No, but I do believe he's entitled to due process.

What the court did was to ensure that this guy, and everyone like him, can keep their guns no matter how irresponsible and dangerous they are.

Could you please quote that portion of the decision?

Would you want to live next door to that guy?

No, but I would rather take my chances living next door to him than to live in a country where citizens are not entitled to due process.

 

[Mike McK]

There are plenty of women in prison for killing their abusers.

Yes, there are.

But that wasn't your claim. You said that any woman who acted in self defense would go to prison.

Not every woman who kills her abuser is acting in self defense.

And I already pointed out the 20 year sentence given to a women who just fired into a wall to let her abuser she meant business.

Well, of course. Did you really think she could break the law and not be held accountable for it?

Twenty years is so excessive that it makes me doubt the truth of this claim, but if she acted as you described, then, yes, she did break the law.

Giving women guns and telling them to shoot away is only going to get them arrested and faced with an expensive court case at best.

I agree. That's why we were all so shocked that China Joe was stupid enough to tell women to take a shotgun and fire warning shots.

But, like they say, morons gonna moron.

 

[Mike McK]

Nope.
I am just not willing to jump through your hoops.

No one is asking you to jump through hoops, only to back up your claims, the same as any grownup would be asked to do.

 

[vibise]

No, but I do believe he's entitled to due process.

Could you please quote that portion of the decision?

No, but I would rather take my chances living next door to him than to live in a country where citizens are not entitled to due process.

I already quoted that part of the decision.

I gather that you would live next door to him as long as you had your own guns and could engage in a shootout if necessary. Maybe where you live the other neighbors would be fine with that and, with their own guns, would happily join in.

 

[DeSanto]

So you think Rahimi, given all his actions, which were considered in removing his gun rights, should have as many guns as he wants?

That’s not what I’m saying. If he was shooting at people and did all those things he was accused of, he should have to be tried and convicted of the crimes he committed, which are felonies, which would result in losing his right to posses a fire arm.

But! I don’t think one should lose their right to possess a fire arm merely because someone put a restraining order out against them. Anyone can do that. Anyone can make an allegation against you and put a restraining order out on you without going to court and having to prove you are guilty of a crime.

What the court did was to ensure that this guy, and everyone like him, can keep their guns no matter how irresponsible and dangerous they are.

That’s not true. You’re overreacting.

Would you want to live next door to that guy?

Your appeals to emotion are irrelevant to the facts of the argument.

 

[Reformedguy]

Nope.
I am just not willing to jump through your hoops.
The post is there.

Then produce it

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Really. If he just enters her home she can shoot him?
I though breaking and entering was not justification for shooting (see threads on Ashli Babbitt)

Sure, and after she confidently shoots the guy, the cops will arrest her and she will have a nice long prison sentence.

Not the LW terrorist that murdered Ashli.



He is popular with LW terrorists.

The woman is a victim if she has a gun and uses it, or if she doesn't and he kills or maims her.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Nope.
I am just not willing to jump through your hoops.
The post is there.

Since you won't produce it, we conclude it isn't "there".

 

[glenlogie]

Since you won't produce it, we conclude it isn't "there".

You are quoting her. ?

 

[mikeT]

Since you won't produce it, we conclude it isn't "there".

Much like your CV.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Much like your CV.

Glad you mention that. Your dishonest atheeist clusters keep making stuff up without looking at it.

God calls that lying. Your clusters also lie about God.

And

“Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One.
Despise Jews