Posted on 06/20/2012 5:32:58 PM PDT by neverdem
A federal judge in Chicago on Tuesday struck down a portion of the city’s firearm ordinance, calling it unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan ruled in favor of a Chicago man who challenged a section of the city’s gun law after he was denied a permit because of a misdemeanor conviction.
Der-Yeghiayan, in a 30-page ruling, called that part of the Chicago Firearm Ordinance “unconstitutionally void for vagueness,” and said it violated Shawn Gowder’s right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Gowder had filed a federal lawsuit challenging a portion of the ordinance that bars a person from obtaining a Chicago firearm permit if that person has been convicted “in any jurisdiction” of an “unlawful use of a weapon that is a firearm.” Under Chicago municipal code, it is unlawful for someone to possess a firearm without a Chicago firearm permit.
In Gowder’s case, he had been convicted in Illinois in 1995 with the unlawful use of a weapon. He was not accused of discharging a weapon illegally, however, but only with the possession of a firearm. At the time, the charge was a felony. But that law was challenged, according to the federal court opinion, and Gowder’s conviction was downgraded to a misdemeanor.
“The only thing that Mr. Gowder did was to own a firearm as he was entitled to do under the Second Amendment. As a result of that he was treated as a criminal by the City of Chicago when all he did was exercise his fundamental Second Amendment rights,” said his attorney, Stephen A. Kolodziej. “We think the City of Chicago’s actions in denying Mr. Gowder a firearm permit were punitive and draconian as well as violative of his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.”
Gowder does have an Illinois Firearm Owner’s Identification Card, but the City of Chicago denied a local permit, citing his conviction.
“There is something incongruent about a nonviolent person, who is not a felon, but who is convicted of a misdemeanor offense of simple possession of a firearm, being forever barred from exercising his constitutional right to defend himself in his own home in Chicago against felons or violent criminals,” Der-Yeghiayan wrote. “The same constitution that protects people’s right to bear arms prohibits this type of indiscriminate and arbitrary governmental regulation.”
In court filings, the city had urged Der-Yeghiayan to rule against Gowder, citing studies that indicated a greater likelihood that those convicted of misdemeanor crimes and who bought guns could be more trouble down the road.
“Handgun purchasers with at least one misdemeanor conviction had a 7.5 times higher risk for a later offense,” the city wrote, citing a study that Gowder’s lawyers said was flawed.
“The study importantly concluded that convicted misdemeanants like Plaintiff, who choose to own weapons — exactly what Plaintiff desired to do — are at an increased risk for committing future violent crimes,” the city countered.
The city’s ordinance on guns has long been contested, including in cases that went to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the city’s 28-year-old handgun ban.
Could we correct the problem with a simple amendment requiring penalties for any legislator who participates in the passage of any law that is ruled to be unconstitutional? A large fine and disqualification from holding any government office either elected or appointed might make them stop and think. I am just throwing this out for consideration.
What we need to do is toss out the gutless, immoral, incompetent oath breaking Mother luvvers who pass laws that are Unconstitutional.
Lawyers are the lowest form of human life and our Congress and Washington are full of the thieving socksuckers.
“Lawyers are the lowest form of human life and our Congress and Washington are full of the thieving socksuckers.”
Just wait until you need one. And someday you will.
I have needed them and they got paid——plenty
I wouldn’t trust one as far as I can throw them.
They attack each other in court, leave the court to go eat together have a beer and come back to the attack again.
You Know: Just like the Democrats and Republicans in Congress.
Liberals have lost the gun control issue as far as the public is concerned. It’s why dems don’t run on it. It’s why the doting court eunuchs in the MSM quit running stories about gun control. Dems told them to stop and they stopped.
FDR banned gold by Executive Order. It applied to everyone.
FDR banned gold by Executive Order. It applied to everyone.
Not true.
An executive order is an instruction to federal employees only.
editor-surveyor: Not as smart as I’d hoped he was
Posting it three times doesn’t make it correct.
Constitutionally, the executive can only order his own staff.
Perhaps you’re in love with judicial activism?
I posted fact-based history. In contrast, your ego isn’t letting you back down even in the face of overwhelming evidence that you were wrong.
Sad.
But, I get it. Now shut up and go away. Stop wasting my time. Now that I know what you are, you are dead to me.
So, by your limited cognition, everything that has happened in the past is correct?
The constitution does not allow executive orders directed to the people, whether your progressive mind likes it or not.
You don’t know what the Constitution says, and you certainly wouldn’t understand it.
Moreover, what I said was that FDR banned gold via Executive Order.
That happened.
You can pretend from down in your mama’s basement that gold was never banned, but such delusions are your crutch and have no bearing on actual world history facts.
It appears to be you that lacks the understanding.
FDR’s ‘ban’ was of limited scope: The dummies like you lost their gold; the cognoscenti kept their gold, knowing that they had nothing to worry about. I know lots of people that gained massively by hanging on to their property.
You can pretend that you understand, but your posts show that all you’re doing is playing parrot.
BTW, don’t be a Wikipedophile!
Oh, it’s you again. Yawn... Keep telling yourself whatever fantasies that you need to get you through your wasted life.
FO Obama, you have only one follower here: south crack.
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.