Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wyoming sues feds over gun rights
The Casper [WY] Star-Tribune ^ | May 10, 2006 | TOM MORTON

Posted on 05/11/2006 10:42:47 AM PDT by archy

Wyoming sues feds over gun rights

By TOM MORTON

Star-Tribune staff writer

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Wyoming is suing the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in U.S. District Court, centers on whether its the federal government or the state that has the final authority to restore gun rights to those guilty of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses.

Under federal law, people convicted of any misdemeanor crime of domestic violence used to be prohibited from possessing a firearm. In 1986, that changed: Those convicted could own a gun if their records were expunged.

A new Wyoming law, passed in 2004, set up a process for letting people convicted of misdemeanor offenses -- including, but not specifically, domestic violence acts -- regain their gun rights. The state, however, used a different definition of "expunge," setting off a series of battles with ATF.

In July 2005, ATF said it would notify federally licensed firearms dealers that concealed weapons permits from Wyoming were invalid unless the state changed its law.

Monday's lawsuit is the state's most recent response.

"The BATF's actions are an illegal attempt to force BATF's will upon the Wyoming Attorney General and Wyoming's duly elected legislature," wrote Attorney General Pat Crank and Senior Assistant Attorney General C. Levi Martin.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Wyoming; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: atf; bang; banglist; freestatewyoming; fsp; fsw; jackbootedthugs; jbt; libertarians; rkba; wy; wyoming
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

1 posted on 05/11/2006 10:42:49 AM PDT by archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: archy; Becki; Joe Brower; Eaker; Faraday; hookman; jmc813; Lurker; MileHi; monkeywrench; Mulder; ...
FSW ping!


2 posted on 05/11/2006 10:44:04 AM PDT by archy (I am General Tso. This is my Chief of Staff, Colonel Sanders....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: archy

Good for Wyoming.


3 posted on 05/11/2006 10:45:09 AM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: archy

Good for Wisconsin.


4 posted on 05/11/2006 10:45:27 AM PDT by Feiny (Now go bang your heads on your desks until something useful comes out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: archy

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms ... What a freakin' bunch of ass clowns.


From my cold dead hands.


5 posted on 05/11/2006 10:45:53 AM PDT by BigTom85 (Proud Gun Owner and Member of NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: archy

Would you please ping me to any of your Wyoming pings?

Thanks!

RA


6 posted on 05/11/2006 10:45:54 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: archy
BATFE, Worst Agency Ever!


7 posted on 05/11/2006 10:49:57 AM PDT by American_Centurion (No, I don't trust the government to automatically do the right thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: archy
State's rights are virtually none existant any more.

Now, thru administrative law, the Second Amendment is attacked. Sneaky.

There is a shadow government left by the Clintoons, I am convinced.

8 posted on 05/11/2006 10:52:04 AM PDT by llevrok (When they come to take my guns, I will give them the lead first....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: archy
ATFE should be the name of a convenience store, not a Federal agency.

Those clowns should be putting tax stamps on whiskey bottles and cigarettes and nothing else. If it were up to me I'd make sure those stamps had to be licked, one at a time. None of that self-adhesive stuff, no way.

L

9 posted on 05/11/2006 10:52:42 AM PDT by Lurker (Anyone who doesn't demand an immediate end to illegal immigration is aiding the flesh trade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: archy

I wish someone would sue Mass. and CA
If you own a gun in either state you are a criminal don't you know.


10 posted on 05/11/2006 10:53:42 AM PDT by DM1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: archy

Bump for Wyoming's courage in facing down the jackbooted thugs of the ATF.


12 posted on 05/11/2006 11:11:11 AM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kenth

ditto.


13 posted on 05/11/2006 11:13:39 AM PDT by proudpapa (of three.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DM1

Recon they need border walls around them thar states? To keep them away from usn's since we ain't as smart as they is.


14 posted on 05/11/2006 11:14:31 AM PDT by catmanblack. (he is the great I AM-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Would you please ping me to any of your Wyoming pings?

Thanks!

I sure will, and you're of course most welcome.

15 posted on 05/11/2006 11:14:55 AM PDT by archy (I am General Tso. This is my Chief of Staff, Colonel Sanders....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: archy

I run into this across the nation and jurisdictions.

The same thing is called different names.

It does boil down to 6 of one 1/2 dozen of the other.

only a bureacrat would love this.


16 posted on 05/11/2006 11:18:51 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DM1

Really, are you should lay off the MSM koolaid. I know hundreds of legal gun owning Californians. We also have lots of hunting in this state. Care to elaborate how that can come about if owning firearms here is illegal?


17 posted on 05/11/2006 11:41:06 AM PDT by tertiary01 (The Pubs have become a one dimensional party.(My way or the highway))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tertiary01

they must mean outlawing by regulation into inconvenience.

This is akin to Clintonista Mineta who continues to make the armed airline pilot program SO incovieninet and burdensome with rules that it functionally does not exist.


18 posted on 05/11/2006 11:51:25 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: archy

Thanks my friend. :-)


19 posted on 05/11/2006 12:04:55 PM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

There are lots (probably numbering over a million) of active gun owners in this state and all the gun stores in my area are doing well. As far as the climate of inconvenience, that is a problem but not unsurmountable, and there are the liberal antigun pockets like SF.

I am hardly an expert but I can see with my own two eyes. No one I know goes out in the woods unarmed.


20 posted on 05/11/2006 12:11:44 PM PDT by tertiary01 (The Pubs have become a one dimensional party.(My way or the highway))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Double bumpity bump!


21 posted on 05/11/2006 12:21:56 PM PDT by beltfed308 (Cloth or link. Happiness is a perfect trunnion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: tertiary01

"Care to elaborate how that can come about if owning firearms here is illegal?"
easy there take some valium and relax i am being melodramatic.
I know MA royally stinks for gun owners - i am a gun owner and fled to NH from MA in part to escape these liberal whackos. I could go on and on about MA and how it sucks there for gun owners. As for CA i read that MA and CA had the toughest gun laws for a state in the nation. Therefore i came to the conclusion that they had similar restrictions. Did not mean to get your panties in a twist over it so relax.


22 posted on 05/11/2006 12:35:26 PM PDT by DM1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DM1

Everythings okay, panties untwisted.


23 posted on 05/11/2006 12:39:00 PM PDT by tertiary01 (The Pubs have become a one dimensional party.(My way or the highway))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: archy

This article is not clear. It references several different issues but does not explain any of them well enough for someone not keeping track of Wyoming's disputes to understand just what the conflict is.


24 posted on 05/11/2006 12:43:44 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
This article is not clear.

That's a frequent complaint of Casper ST readers, and one that's drawing some interest in the startup of a competing daily newspaper in the region.

25 posted on 05/11/2006 1:00:10 PM PDT by archy (I am General Tso. This is my Chief of Staff, Colonel Sanders....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: archy

Yeah, it would be nice to know what the differences in the definitions of "expunge" are. One would think that would be an important thing to tell the reader.


26 posted on 05/11/2006 1:04:03 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
ATFE should be the name of a convenience store, not a Federal agency.

They were known as the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Unit [ATTU] back in the early 1960s, when a half-dozen or so of them were stationed at the Texas School Book Depository in Dealey Plaza on 22 November 1963 where they identified themselves as *Secret Service Agents.*

Funny how they don't like to be reminded about that....

"...[FBI Agent James] Hosty told the [House] Select Committee that at the time of the assassination 'Frank' Ellsworth...had indicated that he had been in the grassy knoll area and for some reason identified himself as a Secret Service Agent.' 8 Ellsworth, deposed by the Committee, denied Hosty's allegation. We know, however, that he was in the immediate area.9 Interestingly, he and seven other ATF agents were among the first law enforcement personnel of any description to reach the sixth floor of the TSBD. If Ellsworth was in the vicinity, it remains to be asked how Hosty knew about it. (Peter Dale Scott, "Deep Politics," pg. 274)

"In 1963, if you would have asked me if I was a Secret Service agent, I most likely would have answered yes-our roles overlapped that much." (Frank Ellsworth to author Gus Russo in 1994, "Live By The Sword," pg. 473)10

Is Ellsworth admitting he is the knoll agent? If so, then why did he deny it to the HSCA? Reflecting on the timing of Officer Smith seeing the knoll agent, if Ellsworth left his fellow agents and drifted over to the knoll area immediately after the shooting he may have been the man Smith saw. According to testimony, this didn't happen.

· Other ATF Agents

The text below is from a US Secret Service document given to JFK Lancer by author Gus Russo regarding a memo from Alcohol and Tobacco Tax regarding their agents in Dealey Plaza on the day of the assassination. (A&TT was the old name of ATF.) Both ATF and Secret Service had treasury ID's. Even so, the Booth documents state the agents were searching the TSBD, not the knoll. 11

CO-2-34,030

U.S. SECRET SERVICE
TO: Chief - Attn. Inspr. Kelly
FROM: SAIC Sorrels, Dallas (initialed)
SUBJECT: Report as to A&TT Investigators searching Texas School Book Depository Bldg., Dallas, TX, after assassination of President Kennedy.

There is enclosed a memorandum dated Jan. 14, 1964, submitted by Mr. Carl R. Booth, Jr. Supervisor in Charge, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax, Dallas, TX, regarding their Special Investigators and others having assisted in search of the Texas School Book Depository Building after assassination of President Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963. A copy of this memorandum is being retained in Dallas office.

27 posted on 05/11/2006 1:11:38 PM PDT by archy (I am General Tso. This is my Chief of Staff, Colonel Sanders....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

ping


28 posted on 05/11/2006 1:13:36 PM PDT by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: archy
ATF said it would notify federally licensed firearms dealers that concealed weapons permits from Wyoming were invalid unless the state changed its law

Can someone explain to me exactly what this would accomplish? I haven't looked it up, but somehow I feel certain that a concealed carry permit is not required in Wyoming to purchase firearms. And reciprocal recognition of carry permits are a matter of state law, so many states already don't honor Wyoming permits. And the states that do aren't likely to be bound by any such BATFE pronouncement, since the states don't have to require ANY permit to allow residents or non-residents to carry concealed in the state. And federally licensed firearms dealers in states that do require permits certainly aren't in a position to go around arresting visiting Wyoming residents who are carrying concealed with only a Wyoming permit.

29 posted on 05/11/2006 1:59:15 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
Can someone explain to me exactly what this would accomplish? I haven't looked it up, but somehow I feel certain that a concealed carry permit is not required in Wyoming to purchase firearms. And reciprocal recognition of carry permits are a matter of state law, so many states already don't honor Wyoming permits.

Just Alabama, Alaska ,Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia,Idaho,Indiana, Kentucky,Louisiana,, Michigan, Minnesota,Mississippi,Missouri,Montana,New Hampshire,New Mexico,North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma,Pennsylvania,South Carolina,South Dakota,Tennessee,Texas,Utah,Vermont, and Virginia.

Those that do not are generally eitherb those that refuse to issue permits to their own citizens, or those that require a state-scored course of fire as a part of the application process.

And the states that do aren't likely to be bound by any such BATFE pronouncement, since the states don't have to require ANY permit to allow residents or non-residents to carry concealed in the state. And federally licensed firearms dealers in states that do require permits certainly aren't in a position to go around arresting visiting Wyoming residents who are carrying concealed with only a Wyoming permit.

That appears to be the point that the Wyoming A.G. is trying to make. And, of course, as an attorney, he is required to report violations of law even when they are committed by federal agents and agencies.

United States Code, Title 18, U.S. Criminal Code;
Part I, Chapter 13, § 241:

Conspiracy against rights


If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured— They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.


30 posted on 05/11/2006 2:17:17 PM PDT by archy (I am General Tso. This is my Chief of Staff, Colonel Sanders....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: freepatriot32; Abram; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Allosaurs_r_us; Americanwolf; ...
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
31 posted on 05/11/2006 2:26:54 PM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/gasoline_and_government.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: BigTom85

LOL, ATF should be a convenience store!


32 posted on 05/11/2006 2:46:18 PM PDT by proud_yank (A liberal's 'generosity' is limited to the funds available in someone else's account.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tertiary01; DM1
I wish someone would sue Mass. and CA If you own a gun in either state you are a criminal don't you know. 10 DM1

Really, are you should lay off the MSM koolaid.
I know hundreds of legal gun owning Californians. We also have lots of hunting in this state. Care to elaborate how that can come about if owning firearms here is illegal? 17 t01

Koolaid? --
Owning the wrong kinds of firearms is 'illegal' in CA. -- And selling any gun, or even giving them to your heirs - [except thru a dealer] makes you a criminal.
Don't defend CA's gun grabbing 'laws'. They are some of the worse in the USA.

33 posted on 05/11/2006 3:05:26 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: archy

Am on my way there for blackpowder muzzleloader competition week after next. Thank God to be able to breathe free air for awhile.

God bless Wyoming!


34 posted on 05/11/2006 3:18:33 PM PDT by NaughtiusMaximus (Join me! Every night I pray for Global Warming . (And I think it's beginning to work.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NaughtiusMaximus

Molon Labe

35 posted on 05/11/2006 4:04:50 PM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Truth has become so rare and precious she is always attended to by a bodyguard of lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

Yeah, damn my Howitzer was just confiscated.

Come on, that poster made a blanket statement with no qualifiers. Every state has their regulations of which California has some of the worst, but there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of gun owners here.


36 posted on 05/11/2006 6:20:12 PM PDT by tertiary01 (The Pubs have become a one dimensional party.(My way or the highway))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: tertiary01; DM1

ping to post about you.


37 posted on 05/11/2006 6:27:06 PM PDT by tertiary01 (The Pubs have become a one dimensional party.(My way or the highway))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: tertiary01
tertiary01 wrote:

Yeah, damn my Howitzer was just confiscated.

Cute. Confiscated semi-auto "assault weapons" are going to be the problem, as you well know.

Come on, that poster made a blanket statement with no qualifiers. Every state has their regulations of which California has some of the worst, but there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of gun owners here.

California's confiscatory 'laws' go far beyond mere regulations.
Beats me why you're so unconcerned about them, -- but it sure helps explain why we're saddled with them.. Millions like you have their heads in the sand.

38 posted on 05/11/2006 6:40:07 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: archy

39 posted on 05/11/2006 7:05:11 PM PDT by Liberty Valance (Where'd all the good people go?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
ATF said it would notify federally licensed firearms dealers that concealed weapons permits from Wyoming were invalid unless the state changed its law

Can someone explain to me exactly what this would accomplish?

In many states, the ATF has OK'd the sale -- via licensed dealers -- of firearms without going through the "Instant Check" system, IF the purchaser holds a state-issued CCW license. This does not apply to all states, but from the context, I surmise that Wyoming is -- or rather, was -- one of those states that the ATF has given the approval.

By prohibiting dealers from making sales to CCW holders on the basis of the CCW license, they are forcing the purchasers through the "Instant Check" system, where, presumably, they will be flagged, and denied.

This would of course have no effect on person-to-person sales (presuming they are legal in Wyoming), other than to probably make them illegal. (By "no effect", I mean that they would not prevent them, whereas the FFL prohibition will indeed prevent such sales via licensed dealers.)

As I read somewhere a while back, the ATF is indeed authorized by statute to restore gun rights on an individual basis -- however, Our Glorious Leaders in Congress have opted to refuse to fund any such rights-restoration by ATF -- and ATF has complied with that lack of funding by refusing to restore any rights.

So, a person who, thirty or forty years ago caught himself a "paper violation" sufficient to deny him his gun rights -- and has since that time led an exemplary life -- will find himself absolutely unable to have his rights restored, even though he is entitled by law to petition for such restoration. His attempt to petition for restoration will be refused.

From the looks of it, ATF seems intent on ensuring that the mere fact that "their hands are tied" by Congress shall NOT be subjected to an end-run by the states. Sort of reminscent of Brer Rabbit begging not to be thrown into the briar patch.

40 posted on 05/11/2006 7:24:44 PM PDT by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

Yeah and I can see you are an expert on everything.

Buh bye.


41 posted on 05/11/2006 7:26:52 PM PDT by tertiary01 (The Pubs have become a one dimensional party.(My way or the highway))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: llevrok
There is a shadow government left by the Clintoons, I am convinced.

      Left by, but hardly started by.

42 posted on 05/11/2006 7:39:24 PM PDT by Celtman (It's never right to do wrong to do right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker

If you have a cc permit the gun dealer does not have to call the FBI to check out the buyer, so, by disregarding a CC permit the dealer would have to call the FBI for a purchase.


43 posted on 05/11/2006 7:53:30 PM PDT by eastforker (Under Cover FReeper going dark(too much 24))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
This article is not clear. It references several different issues but does not explain any of them well enough for someone not keeping track of Wyoming's disputes to understand just what the conflict is.

The following FReeppost contains the Associated Press report on the matter, as published in the Rocky Mountain News.

It is hopefully more clear for you than the CST piece.

44 posted on 05/12/2006 3:39:31 PM PDT by archy (I am General Tso. This is my Chief of Staff, Colonel Sanders....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

I read another take on this and what the ATF has a problem with Wyomings' definition of "expunged".

Apparently Wyoming does not physicaly destroy the records, and in fact they could be used to increase penalties should the person commit another offense in the future.

AFT is being pretty picky here imo, but then again I'm of the opinion they shouldn't even exist along with junk unconstituional gun laws like the Lautenberg Act.


45 posted on 05/12/2006 3:46:12 PM PDT by planekT ([---What a mess.---})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: archy

Thank you. Interestingly the US is claiming that the retention of the information about the conviction by the State means the record has not been truely expunged. That seems to be true.

I wonder in what order the federal laws where passed so that the expungement order came before or after the fed law regarding domestic violence?


46 posted on 05/13/2006 10:17:09 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: planekT

Seems as though the ATF is correct on this one and that the intention of the Congress is that there be no record of these convictions kept. If the State can dreg it up again it is not expunged by definition.


47 posted on 05/13/2006 10:19:24 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
Seems as though the ATF is correct on this one and that the intention of the Congress is that there be no record of these convictions kept. If the State can dreg it up again it is not expunged by definition.

What the feds are after is the power to *erase* past state records of misconduct by their own officers and agents, so that they need not fear state action for their own past misconduct or conspiracies to commit same.

If they don't get that, they're not going to let the peons of whom they feel they are the masters enjoy any such relief either.

48 posted on 05/15/2006 11:20:50 AM PDT by archy (I am General Tso. This is my Chief of Staff, Colonel Sanders....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: archy; justshutupandtakeit
An unconstitutional Federal 'law' prohibits anyone convicted of "a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" from possessing a firearm.

In 1986, Congress amended that bogus 'law' to allow states to set rules for restoring gun rights to people who've been pardoned or whose convictions have been "expunged, or set aside."

In 2004, Wyoming's legislature compounded, and agreed with the federal infringement by passing a 'law' meant to govern how such convictions could be expunged:
"-- Individuals would have to wait one year after completing their sentence; they would not qualify if their misdemeanor conviction involved the use or attempted use of a firearm; and they could not have any other convictions that prohibit them from owning guns. --"

The US Constitution is clear in that no level of government can infringe on our right to bear arms. -- A fiat prohibition on a persons RKBA's for "a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" is clearly an unreasonable regulation regardless if written by fed, state or local 'lawmakers'..

That sheriff in Bighorn County should refuse to enforce it.

49 posted on 05/15/2006 12:14:02 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: archy

Huh? There are no federal officers charged with crimes to be expunged.


50 posted on 05/15/2006 2:13:11 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson