Texas man sentenced to prison for having gun while under protective order - Emerson

Cleveland Plain Dealer ^ | 1/24/03 | AP

[robertpaulsen]

tpaine, I'm with DugwayDuke on this one.I am a firm believer in the RKBA, I own guns and practice with them, I have been a dues paying member of the NRA for a number of years, and I vote against those who are running on a platform of gun control.

So when I say that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to the states, it's not because of some agenda of mine, it's just a fact. Since Californians have faced that fact, it gives them the incentive to write a RKBA proposition to add to the California state constitution.

Has nothing to do with this thread, but I just wanted to weigh in.

[Cultural Jihad]

Calling reasonable restrictions to gun ownership 'treason' is itself unreasonable, unless you also want to help out the Venceremos Brigade and the Aryan Brotherhood smuggle 2nd Amendment weapons into their jail cells for them.

The whole basis of our legal system is the question of 'What would a reasonable person do?' Perhaps when more and more people embrace your brand of irrationality, then the law will drift in your direction. Legalizing drug abuse will help accelerate that process toward normalizing irrationality, by the way.

[Cultural Jihad]

A most reasonable post.

[RabidBartender]

"No, you cannot possess a firearm while in prison."

I've often wondered how today's 'everything in black & white' interpreters of the Constitution explained that, with the 'shall not be infringed' and all.

[robertpaulsen]

Here's an interesting link for you. It says, in part:

"The Bill of Rights was understood, at its ratification, to be a bar on the actions of the federal government. Many people today find this to be an incredible fact. The fact is, prior to incorporation (14th amendment, 1868), discussed below, the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states. This is, however, quite in line with what the Constitution was originally designed to be: a framework for the federal government. In other words, though the federal government was banned from violating the freedom of the press, states were free to regulate the press. For the most part, this was not an issue, because the state constitutions all had bills of rights, and many of the rights protected by the states mirrored those in the federal Bill, and many went further than the federal Bill."

"Thus in the early 1960's, the Establishment Clause, the right to counsel, the rights of free speech, assembly, and petition, and the right against unreasonable searches and seizures were quickly incorporated. Since the early 60's, almost every clause in the Bill of Rights has been incorporated (notable exceptions are the 2nd and 3rd Amendments, the grand jury indictment clause of the 5th Amendment, and the 7th Amendment)."

Some have added the 9th to the list of exceptions. The 10th is a moot point regarding personal rights. Basically, the Bill of (personal) Rights are the first eight.

[Eagle Eye]

I've often wondered how today's 'everything in black & white' interpreters of the Constitution explained that, with the 'shall not be infringed' and all.

You have got to be kidding. A child should be able to explain that one.

Please tell me that you are not under the illusion that even the most ardent 2A supporters believe in RKBA for prisoners?

"Resonsable restrictions" would include removing arms from a prisoner upon arrest and incarceration, but cannot include removing them upon a routine court injuction.

Gun laws don't make people more responsible, conscientious, or safe. They do, however, create new classes of criminals with every legislative act.

[wcbtinman]

"...not to mention he will be imprisoned for 2.5 years for simply owning a gun....."

Not to mention that as a convicted felon, he may never own a gun again.

[wcbtinman]

You found all of those restrictions in the 2nd Amendment? I guess I need to re-read it.

The only correct statement you made was "No, you cannot possess a firearm while in prison." That is because you forfeit you Constitutional rights when you are afforded due process and incarcerated.

As to the rest of your ignorance, there are other laws that provide penalties for not using good judgement and consideration of you neighbors, but they are not 2nd Amendment based.

Only you have invented a 'balancing test'.

[RabidBartender]

It doesn't matter what the most ardent 2A supporters believe, it only matters what the Constitution says. The FF didn't put 'reasonable restrictions' in the Bill of Rights.

However, if the USSC rules that that these same 'reasonable restrictions' are indeed valid and become the law of the land - would it make sense to agree that any other gun control restrictions that is argued up to the USSC level (including Lautenberg, weapons for felons, etc..) be considered 'reasonable restrictions' as well?

Don't get me wrong, I am against this same thing - I just would like to see the justification for having it both ways.

[Eagle Eye]

Don't get me wrong, I am against this same thing - I just would like to see the justification for having it both ways.

Don't bother me with stupid arguments. If you cannot provide some sort of proof that anyone advocates RKBA for incarcerated persons or that the founders advocated the same (and quotes will show that they didn't) then don't even bring this topic up because nobody is wanting both ways as you state.

[Cultural Jihad]

"State law says 50 feet from a road, 300 feet from a occupied bldg."

Do you consider those restrictions "reasonable"?

Hmmm. I clicked on "View Replies" and it said "No replies."

[RabidBartender]

There's certainly no need to get freaking snippy with me for asking a simple question. If you're unable to answer, then simply don't respond. I simply asked - where (if not in the constitution) is it stated that prisoners lose the right to bear arms. Sure, it's a common sense thing (DUH) But where is it written? Is it left to the states? Is there a specific US Code that states it?

Secondly, don't read into what I type and accuse me of saying things I didn't - I never said 'that anyone advocates RKBA for incarcerated persons or that the founcers advocated the same'.

I'm simply looking for where the justification is for it. If you're one of those few posters who has nothing to add but snide comments or insults, please do me a favor and don't bother replying to my posts. Thanks.

[PatrioticAmerican]

"the First Amendment as written explicitly limits the actions of Congress."

So, the states could restrict freedom of speech and the press and religion?

[PatrioticAmerican]

"It doesn't matter what the most ardent 2A supporters believe, it only matters what the Constitution says."

Actually, in all reality, it is "Might is Right". We only have those freedoms we are willing to fight for. Words on paper are meaningless when faced with an armed adversary. When that adversary is your very own government, you are in a pickle.

[Eagle Eye]

Don't get me wrong, I am against this same thing - I just would like to see the justification for having it both ways.

Who wants to have it both ways and where did they suggest that? It is a stupid as dicussing whether or not your neighbor should have a nuke.

Should me where anyone 'wants it both ways' or admit that you are inventing the situation.

[tomswiftjr]

Wow, that happened to me in 1980! Judge awarded my ex-wife 90% of my post-tax take home pay. When I told him I didn't make that much money he said: "Better start!"

[Roscoe]

Calling reasonable restrictions to gun ownership 'treason' is itself unreasonable, unless you also want to help out the Venceremos Brigade and the Aryan Brotherhood smuggle 2nd Amendment weapons into their jail cells for them.

"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws." -- John Adams

[Poohbah]

So, the states could restrict freedom of speech and the press and religion?

Prior to the 14th Amendment, they could--and did. Heck, some states even had official churches (which the establishment clause forbade Congress from doing).

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Wow, that happened to me in 1980! Judge awarded my ex-wife 90% of my post-tax take home pay. When I told him I didn't make that much money he said: "Better start!"

Glad to hear you survived. I hope the judge is in Hell now.

[Mark17]

This is BS.

Much of what passes today as "divorce laws" is BS.