Posted on 05/07/2018 5:36:32 AM PDT by marktwain
At the time of the founding, there were only seven crimes that were considered felonies. They were murder, rape, manslaughter, robbery, sodomy, larceny, arson, mayhem, and burglary.
Violent crimes should restrict gun ownership. But then the definition of violence would change. In todays world offending is a violent crime.
Treason?
The Second Amendment has to mean something as a matter of law, policy debates aside. Overbroad policies ignoring a constitutional amendment are inexcusable.
Every time something happens we expect a law. Things need to go to civil court, not criminal court.................
You mean applies the Constitution. If he had applied the law then the plaintiff wouldn't be allowed to own a firearm.
. Felonies are defined in federal law as crimes for which a person may be imprisoned for more than a year.
Good question on treason. Here is a little history but is uk. still looking.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason_Felony_Act_1848
That's nine.
Treason?
Fewer that 40 prosecutions?
https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/treason.htm
That’s nine.
may·hem
NOUN
violent or damaging disorder; chaos.
“complete mayhem broke out”
synonyms: chaos · disorder · confusion · havoc · bedlam · pandemonium · tumult · uproar · turmoil · madness · madhouse · hullabaloo · all hell broken loose · [more]
Sodomy
Sodomy is generally anal or oral sex between people or sexual activity between a person and a non-human animal (bestiality), but may also include any non-procreative sexual activity. Originally the term sodomy, which is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible, was commonly restricted to anal sex.
I wonder if sodomy has ever been taken off the books in federal Law?
Only remains in 12 states?
Bare minimum, the law needs to be changed from "felony that could have a sentence of over one year" to "felony sentenced to more than one year" to revoke Second Amendment rights.
And the entire Lautenberg amendment needs to be repealed.
Thanks for catching that.
I thought I had corrected it.
We need to have Congress clarify the law. We need to another category separating out all these things being called a felony.
As a member of a prosecutor’s office for many years, it saddens me that people aren’t permitted to pay their debt to society and have ALL their rights restored upon release. This idea of perpetual punishment is just wrong, as far as I’m concerned. If they break the law again, jail them again. But if they’re out of jail, they should have ALL rights restored.
You mean applies the Constitution. If he had applied the law then the plaintiff wouldn’t be allowed to own a firearm.
Not according to California...
Thanks, Dean. Good news.
Could it be "cruel and unusual"?
It certainly could. Cruel and unusual punishment has been defined as “Punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. Cruel and unusual punishment includes torture, deliberately degrading punishment, or punishment that is too severe for the crime committed.” I think this violates that last category: too severe for the crime committed. Disenfranchising someone and preventing someone from defending themselves are both pretty severe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.