Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: driftdiver
There shall be no ex post facto laws.
139 posted on 12/27/2012 12:11:01 PM PST by Red in Blue PA (Read SCOTUS Castle Rock vs Gonzales before dialing 911!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]


To: Red in Blue PA
"There shall be no ex post facto laws."

An ex post facto law would allow prosecutions of people who violated the law before it was passed and not afterward. To use a so-called assault weapons ban as an example, it would allow for prosecution of everyone who owned high capacity semi-auto rifles in the past but not necessarily after the law was passed.

A Congress willing to pass such a ban could do so and have it enforced, although such a law would be unconstitutional. Another example is the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act)--unconstitutional in more ways than one but still enforced (e.g., Emerson case, Supremes refused to hear).

We need to write our members of congress, and more importantly for some of us, our state assembly members, including Democrats. Even Democrats have many constituents who own the items on the ban lists. Firearms, especially the "tacticool" looking stuff, are in style.


207 posted on 12/27/2012 3:57:09 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson