Media Headlines Lie About Rahimi Second Amendment Case

AmmoLand ^ | November 17, 2023 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

The Rahimi case oral arguments have been heard by the Supreme Court. It was bumped to the head of the line by the Biden administration. At its core, the case is not about domestic violence. It is about whether fundamental rights, enumerated in the Bill of Rights, can be nullified by a judge in a civil hearing with almost no due process. No jury trial, no right to a lawyer, no criminal conviction. From the Fifth Circuit decision on the case:

Perhaps most importantly, the Government’s proffered interpretation lacks any true limiting principle. Under the Government’s reading, Congress could remove “unordinary” or “irresponsible” or “non-law abiding” people—however expediently defined—from the scope of the Second Amendment. Could speeders be stripped of their right to keep and bear arms? Political nonconformists? People who do not recycle or drive an electric vehicle? One easily gets the point: Neither Heller nor Bruen countenances such a malleable scope of the Second Amendment’s protections; to the contrary, the Supreme Court has made clear that “the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans,” Heller,554 U.S. at 581.Rahimi, while hardly a model citizen, is nonetheless part of the political community entitled to the Second Amendment’s guarantees, all other things equal.

The dominant media headlines ignore the crux of the case. In headline after headline, they claim the case is whether people who commit domestic violence can be disarmed. Nothing in the case challenges the power of the government to disarm people who are convicted of domestic violence. Rahimi was never convicted of domestic violence.

Here are some of the gaslighting headlines:

• From the BBC US & Canada: Should domestic abusers have guns? US Supreme Court will decide in United States v Rahimi
  

[marktwain]

The Rahimi restraining order case is about Constitutional rights and due process.

It has little relationship to domestic violence.

[Dead Corpse]

If it wasn’t for lies and half-truths... There would be very little coming from the MSM at all...

[PROCON]

RKBA Ping List

This Ping List is for all news pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.

FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from this Ping List.

More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.

[MileHi]

Nothing in the case challenges the power of the government to disarm people who are convicted of domestic violence.

Considering what now constitutes "domestic violence" perhaps it should.

[Ancesthntr]

Honestly, it doesn’t matter if the media lies about this. Oral arguments have been presented, and briefs submitted by both sides and various amici. The news media, as much of a bunch of lying, gun-grabbing, Leftist a$$wipes as they are, don’t matter at this point.

[antidemoncrat]

Slowly but surely Biden’s handlers (Soros, Obama, Lame Street Media, Social Media Billionaires, and Democratic Party) are trying to destroy the Constitution and replace it with a “living Document”. What is a “living Document”? A document that be changed to fit whatever their policy is that day.

[nagant]

Rahimi is not a hill I would want to die on. Rahimi is not a good person.

[marktwain]

Rahimi is not a hill I would want to die on. Rahimi is not a good person.

This is why AG Merrick Garland pushed the Rahimi case to the head of the line at the Supreme Court. Garland is hoping to have emotion override logic and the rule of law.

[AnAmericanMother]

Just because you don't like somebody, just because he is accused of being "not a good person" - he is nonetheless entitled to his Constitutional rights until and unless he is convicted of a felony depriving him of those rights.

This is why we strike from juries people who admit to having prejudged the defendant. You decide a case on the evidence and the law -- not your personal preference or news stories.

Believe me, if you permit that, it will eventually bite you in the posterior.

[SheepWhisperer]

Rahimi is not a good person.

***

Hopefully the court doesn’t rule on “feelings”, but upon the law of the Republic.

[Still Thinking]

Lautenberg has to go, it’s a travesty.

[Still Thinking]

Yes, it should, but one step at a time.

[MileHi]

Agree

[Still Thinking]

Yes, it should, but one step at a time.

[5th MEB]

Whether or not Rahimi is a “good person” has no relevance to this case, it’s whether or not he can be deprived of his rights without a trial or conviction.

Should he be allowed to have a firearm; I don’t know enough about his history with his significant other or any other people involved in his life to make that decision.

If he is so dangerous why is he allowed to be still on the streets?