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

Skip to comments.

Fed Court Denies Navy Veteran From Owning Gun Due To 1968 Misdemeanor
CBS DC ^ | 1/11/2013 | unknown

Posted on 01/12/2013 2:12:05 PM PST by middlegeorgian

Edited on 01/12/2013 3:46:02 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

WASHINGTON (AP) ó A federal appeals court says a Maryland veteran canít own a gun because of a misdemeanor assault conviction more than four decades ago.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Friday turned away an appeal from 68-year-old Navy veteran Jefferson Wayne Schrader, who sued after failing a 2008 background check.


(Excerpt) Read more at washington.cbslocal.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; US: Maryland
KEYWORDS: banglist; govtabuse; guncontrol; maryland; secondamendment; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: middlegeorgian

You know, this kind of thing doesn’t make sense.

Either someone is a danger to society or he isn’t.

And if someone is a danger to society then he should be taken off the streets altogether.

But if someone’s acts do not justify his being taken of the streets, then he should be left alone to enjoy the same rights as any free citizen.


21 posted on 01/12/2013 3:00:17 PM PST by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian

If the old Squid could get in contact with me, I’d sell him a weapon today...


22 posted on 01/12/2013 3:02:38 PM PST by SgtBob (Freedom is not for the faint of heart. Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SgtBob

G. Gordon Liddy said that he did not own any firearms. His wife owns them all, and there is one in every room.


23 posted on 01/12/2013 3:10:29 PM PST by Psalm 144 (Capitol to the districts: "May the odds be ever in your favor.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian

I thought misdemeanor crimes had punishments of a year or less.


24 posted on 01/12/2013 3:16:51 PM PST by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tomkat; coloradan

Ah, jeez—how did I misread that?

My apologies to coloradan, who was quite right!


25 posted on 01/12/2013 3:26:42 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144

True, but my point is a private sale, is what it is....private.

Cheers!


26 posted on 01/12/2013 3:27:33 PM PST by SgtBob (Freedom is not for the faint of heart. Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: coloradan

The Lautenberg amendment is the one that denies firearms possession to a person classified a “domestic violence offender,” regardless of the penalty. The fellow in the OP is covered by a different clause in the federal morass of infringement on the RKBA; “has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.”


27 posted on 01/12/2013 3:36:06 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian

Can Mr. Schrader get his record expunged?


28 posted on 01/12/2013 3:39:51 PM PST by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: novemberslady
-- Can Mr. Schrader get his record expunged? --

He can ask.

Keep in mind, this isn't just the court ruling (which is obnoxious), but there is a federal prosecutor on the other side, pushing the argument that this man is not fit to possesses a firearm.

There are literally hundreds of cases like this, and quite a few where the courts beclown themselves. They get away with it because they have the power.

I am of the firm view that the federal courts are deliberately intellectually corrupt when it comes to the RKBA. Unfaithful to the law, etc.

29 posted on 01/12/2013 3:44:45 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
I did an expungement for someone a couple of years ago.

It wasn't difficult, just tedious.

Maybe the prosecutor is really out to get him.
30 posted on 01/12/2013 3:52:04 PM PST by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: xrmusn

“Remember from a few years back when they were giving boys, who were acting like boys in school, Ritalin or whatever ‘control drug’ was in fashion, were denied access to enlisting.”

Wow..They use to give that stuff out like penny candy..!


31 posted on 01/12/2013 3:58:11 PM PST by unread
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian

Ex post facto law.


32 posted on 01/12/2013 3:58:30 PM PST by Spirochete (Sic transit gloria mundi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eva
When did the Lautenberg amendment go into effect?

I seem to recall that this law was made retroactive, so it doesn't much matter.

Not that it's right, but that's the way it is.

33 posted on 01/12/2013 4:01:01 PM PST by cayuga (The next Crusade will be a war of annihilation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian
Rent-a-Gun-

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to rent and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

34 posted on 01/12/2013 4:05:57 PM PST by bunkerhill7 ( yup!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian
A fist fight forty years ago.......I guess he'd be lucky he still had his fists in today's bat-shit crazy country.

FMCDH(BITS)

35 posted on 01/12/2013 4:05:59 PM PST by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spirochete
Ex post facto law.

And that's why the bill's sponsor, everyone in Congress who voted for it and all the judges who approved it should be hung from lampposts.

36 posted on 01/12/2013 4:47:20 PM PST by cayuga (A gov't that can take your AR-15 can take anything else it wants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian

The person who wrote that headline needs to enroll in an adult literacy program.


37 posted on 01/12/2013 5:26:54 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian; Abundy; Albion Wilde; AlwaysFree; AnnaSASsyFR; bayliving; BFM; ...

Maryland “Freak State” PING!


38 posted on 01/12/2013 9:14:28 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: middlegeorgian

I despise the way the elite gets to choose what citizens can protect himself and his family and who cannot. This is not how it’s supposed to happen. I don’t see any qualifiers or rather disqualifiers in the 2A!


39 posted on 01/13/2013 6:06:08 AM PST by New Jersey Realist (America: home of the free because of the brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cayuga

>>When did the Lautenberg amendment go into effect?
>
>I seem to recall that this law was made retroactive, so it doesn’t much matter.

It very much does — any Law which alters punishments already given (sentencing) to a greater amount is an Ex Post Facto law.
See Caulder v. Bull.


40 posted on 01/13/2013 5:29:44 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 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