SCOTUS: No Guns For Any Domestic Violence Offenders

Teal Lantern · Post by **Teal Lantern** » March 27th, 2014, 2:43 pm

http://bearingarms.com/supreme-court-no ... offenders/
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-cou ... z2xADZSukX

Court decided that anyone convicted of felony or misdemeanor domestic violence is barred from owning a gun, regardless of whether or not there was proof of injury.

This ruling overturns rulings in several regions, which stated the ban on gun ownership only applied to convictions where violent use of force was proven, typically in the form of cuts, scrapes, bruises, etc .

So, raise your voice after getting endlessly nagged about b.s., add a fake "he hit me" claim, then you can forever lose your right to basic self-defense -- still in effect, long after you and the original lying banshee have parted ways.

momopi · Post by **momopi** » March 27th, 2014, 6:16 pm

IMO the biggest issue with gun-rights advocates in this country is the NRA. They're supposed to be a civil rights group that advocates the protection of the Second Amendment. Instead, the NRA today is a conservative/republican club with bad PR and right-wing political agenda that has alienated the liberal/democrat/moderate gun owners.

The 2nd Amendment is for all law-biding U.S. citizens regardless of race, age, gender, sexual orientation, and political affiliation.

Cornfed · Post by **Cornfed** » March 27th, 2014, 6:36 pm

momopi wrote:The 2nd Amendment is for all law-biding U.S. citizens regardless of race, age, gender, sexual orientation, and political affiliation.

I don't see how it applies to females.

momopi · Post by **momopi** » March 28th, 2014, 9:34 am

Cornfed wrote:
momopi wrote:The 2nd Amendment is for all law-biding U.S. citizens regardless of race, age, gender, sexual orientation, and political affiliation.
I don't see how it applies to females.

Moretorque · Post by **Moretorque** » March 28th, 2014, 10:10 am

momopi wrote:
Cornfed wrote:
momopi wrote:The 2nd Amendment is for all law-biding U.S. citizens regardless of race, age, gender, sexual orientation, and political affiliation.
I don't see how it applies to females.

We've already been long invaded by England just as Japan has when they set the Kings bank up.

Teal Lantern · Post by **Teal Lantern** » March 28th, 2014, 7:29 pm

momopi · Post by **momopi** » March 29th, 2014, 12:56 pm

Teal Lantern wrote:Some citizens have to do more law-abiding than others.
Witaschekâ€™s treatment was in sharp contrast to that given NBC news personality David Gregory, who went on air with a 30-round AR-15 magazine during a broadcast of Meet the Press. Merely possessing such an accessory is illegal in the city, but the same prosecutorâ€™s office that charged Witaschek never pursued charges against the journalist.

That decision actually came directly from the DC Attorney General Irvin Nathan, who invoked the First Amendment to justify his "prosecutorial discretion" to decline criminal charges. Gun forums had a field day over this.

Here's the latest piece that's generating a storm here in CA:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/0 ... n-running/