Posted on 06/27/2016 9:17:13 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
On Monday, in the case of Voisine v. the United States, the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision that prohibits people convicted of domestic violence from purchasing guns in a 6-2 vote, according to SCOTUSBlog.
This was the case of two Maine men who were convicted on state domestic violence charges and then found with firearms and charged with violating a federal law that prohibits domestic abusers from having firearms," reads the live blog. "The question was whether their convictions qualified under the statute."
(Excerpt) Read more at aol.com ...
The conclusion of the opinion:
“The federal ban on firearms possession applies to any person with a prior misdemeanor conviction for the “use . . . of physical force” against a domestic relation. §921(a)(33)(A). That language, naturally read, encompasses acts of force undertaken recklessly—i.e., with conscious disregard of a substantial risk of harm. And the state-law backdrop to that provision, which included misdemeanor assault statutes covering reckless conduct in a significant majority of jurisdictions, indicates that Congress meant just what it said. Each petitioner’s possession of a gun, following a conviction under Maine law for abusing a domestic partner, therefore violates §922(g)(9). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals. It is so ordered.”
Dissenters were Justices Thomas and Sotomayor
---Justice Antonin Scalia
I have mixed feelings about this case. It is so easy to go through life without being convicted of domestic violence. If things start getting that weird in your marriage, just leave. Forget about who is right and who is wrong. Just leave and work things out later.
Give me a break.
A woman walks up and sits down by a guy at the bar and says “I’ve never seen you around here before.”
The guy says “No, you haven’t. I’ve been in prison.”
The woman asks “What did you do?”
“I took an axe and chopped my wife up into little pieces.”
The woman says “Oh, then you’re single.”
Hey! If felons can vote, then they certainly can buy and own guns.
Weird, too. The most conservative and most liberal court members were the sole dissenters.
But felons in VA can vote and buy guns
Yes, a weird lineup. Alito voted with the majority.
The 4th was decimated decades ago, thanks to the drug war (and with much support from some Freepers).
No it doesn't; the preamble to the Bill of Rights says clearly what the purpose of the Bill of Rights is:
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.The whole purpose is to restrain the government; if we were to let the government ignore those restrictions at it pleases then there is nothing to stop the government from enacting tyranny. — IOW, what you are conditionally agreeing to is the polar opposite of the intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Shall not be infringed, as long as you have a background check, or are mentally stable, or not on a no-fly list.
Shame on FFL Dealers for making $$$ hand over fist while pissing all over the Constitution. Shame on us for allowing it to happen.
Exactly. People are already charged with assault for throwing a french fry at someone. And they believe anything the woman says.
How can that stand? Snowflakes and vindictive people run around getting restraining orders all the time.
That’s good advice. Also, it may cause people to just never bother getting married, which helps the left’s goal to breakdown the family.
I'm not agreeing to it, I'm merely observing what it is. The government breaks the constitutional pact with impunity, and uses hand-waving as a front.
The government already ignores the restrictions, while claiming to be abiding by them. The same words are used to justify deliberately unequal application of the law (elites get away with things the serfs and peons are jailed for), and outright violation of the principles embodied in the Constitution. The government snoops at will, without warrant, and if it needs to justify it, it will try. worst that happens if it fails to justify it is the court tosses the evidence.
Who wants to sleep with one eye open all the time? :)
Thanks to the Lautenberg Amendment and this SCOTUS decision, you now lose your Second Amendment rights on a misdemeanor Domestic Abuse conviction.
It’s not so much that they think they would resort to violence, but the fear that their spouse may sometime down the line may want out of the marriage and just accuse them of it.
Too bad so many people these days are selfish and don’t have good marriages such as yours.
This home is not a prison. ;-)
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.