To: NormsRevenge
Bean, a well-known businessman, was convicted of violating Mexican law after officers found 200 rounds of bullets in his car during a dinner trip across the border four years ago. And why exactly should a violation of a Mexican law be a felony in the US ???
It's not like those twerps down south are respecting any of our laws.
To: Centurion2000
And why exactly should a violation of a Mexican law be a felony in the US ??? That is the most insane part. Increasingly, asking a legal question of this nature gets you a stream of nonsense from lawyers that convinces me they are all insane or doing hard drugs.
To: Centurion2000
My thought as well. Also, since the anti rights crowd likes to make such hay with the use of the word "felon", doesn't this "crime" seem a little penny-ante for felony status anyway? Class C Misdemeanor might be more like it, even if the jurisdictional issues were straightened out.
To: Centurion2000
And why exactly should a violation of a Mexican law be a felony in the US ??? No habla Senor Bush?
To: Centurion2000
Bean was incarcerated in Mexico for approximately six months before being released to the custody of the United States under the International Prisoner Transfer Treaty. He thereafter spent another month in federal prison before being released under supervision. As a convicted felon, under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) Bean lost all rights to possess firearms. Section 925(c) of the statute, however, provides a means for relief from the firearms disabilities. Upon completion of his period of supervision in July, 1999, Bean petitioned the BATF for such relief so that he might return to his business.
At issue herein is the action and inaction of Congress since 1992. For this nigh decade, Congress has stated in its annual budget appropriation bill that "none of the funds appropriated herein shall be available to investigate or act upon applications for relief from Federal firearms disabilities under 18 U.S.C § 925(c)."(3) Because the BATF could not use any appropriated funds to fulfill its responsibilities under the statute, it sent Bean a notice that it would not act upon his request due to the congressional action. Bean then petitioned the district court, contending that the BATF's letter denied his petition and exhausted his administrative remedies.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/615167/posts
57 posted on
12/10/2002 2:50:02 PM PST by
pad 34
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson