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

Skip to comments.

HIGH COURT BOLSTERS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GUN BAN LAW
Associated Press ^ | March 26, 2014 | Associated Press

Posted on 03/26/2014 12:30:59 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
Decision was unanimous. Opinion for the Court by Sotomayor; concurrence by Scalia (who reads the statute's "physical force" language more narrowly than the majority, but still concludes there was enough here to convict). And, surprisingly, a concurrence by Alito and Thomas, which reads the statute more broadly than the majority (according to them, even a slap is enough to constitute "physical force").
1 posted on 03/26/2014 12:30:59 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
The Court's opinion is here .
2 posted on 03/26/2014 12:31:46 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

only about a half a dozen more reasons to ban, and we’ll be great Britain.


3 posted on 03/26/2014 12:36:26 PM PDT by willywill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Even with my first wife, I was never a “hitter”. But “physical force” could be pretty broadly defined to include the action of husbands AND wives in most marriages at one time or another, especially in their younger years.

My ex pushed me so hard in the chest once tht she fell backwards on her butt. If that had been on camera and I had pressed misdemeaner domestic abuse charges and she was convicted, she could never own a gun.

But maybe this involves more serious physical force.


4 posted on 03/26/2014 12:37:32 PM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
The Court's opinion is here .

The Court's opinion is getting to be irrelevant.

5 posted on 03/26/2014 12:39:48 PM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (Truth sounds like hate...to those who hate truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Next will be a ban on persons convicted (or plea bargaining) to any misdemeanor.


6 posted on 03/26/2014 12:41:21 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
But maybe this involves more serious physical force.

The defendant's misdemeanor conviction was under a Tennessee law which required "physical harm" to the victim, which was why even Scalia (who reads the federal statute more narrowly than the majority) was OK with saying he can't possess a gun. What surprised me was the Alito-Thomas concurrence, which says even a slap would be enough. But they tend to read statutes literally.

7 posted on 03/26/2014 12:43:17 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

The only justice you find today is the justice you make for yourself.


8 posted on 03/26/2014 12:43:41 PM PDT by Noumenon (Resistance. Restoration. Retribution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; GregNH; Salvation; ...

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

9 posted on 03/26/2014 12:44:05 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Moving towards a banana republic every day.....


10 posted on 03/26/2014 12:44:19 PM PDT by Red in Blue PA (When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty.-Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

I decided long ago that I WILL own guns no matter what laws the government may pass or what the Supreme Court rules constitutional... and by the look of the 85% of Connecticut so called “assault” weapon owners who ignored the registration laws, I’m far from alone...


11 posted on 03/26/2014 12:44:38 PM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

If I am on a jury and charges based on federal or state gun control laws are at issue - I will never find enough evidence presented for a guilty vote. And, yes I will look the judge in the eye and tell I will follow the law as he claims it is.


12 posted on 03/26/2014 12:45:59 PM PDT by Mechanicos (When did we amend the Constitution for a 2nd Federal Prohibition?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

It doesn’t get much easier than this kind of misdemeanor, to take away a persons freedom forever, and people know it, and use it in arguments.

Many gun owners and concealed carry people are finding themselves being forced into passivity even in casual arguments, people know that a simple phone call can bring down on your head, the biggest and darkest events of your entire life.


13 posted on 03/26/2014 12:46:42 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Libertarianism offers the transitory concepts and dialogue to move from conservatism, to liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

“But maybe this involves more serious physical force.”

Actually, I think the court said the exact opposite: “no proof of physical violence is required to support the domestic violence charge”

So, it appears a mere allegation is enough.


14 posted on 03/26/2014 12:47:00 PM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

If there’s a victory here it’s a capital “V” Victory against becoming involved in any domestic relationship. People who argued this case might well have wished they made this a larger point.

Remember that quaint bit of crap about sanctity of marriage, a special relationship, in which spouses couldn’t be compelled to testify against each other because of the importance of family. It seems special isn’t so special anymore.


15 posted on 03/26/2014 12:47:01 PM PDT by Steamburg (Other people's money is the only language a politician respects)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Yet another reason why young men should never marry. Ever.

The law is so grossly stacked against men by “feminists” that the only prudent course of action is to boycott marriage and the legal snares that women’s groups have created for men.


16 posted on 03/26/2014 12:47:30 PM PDT by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

If this is just a Federal law, it doesn’t mean anything. The Obama administration says that Federal laws are not valid if you don’t like them. Today we march, tomorrow we vote.


17 posted on 03/26/2014 12:48:26 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Trust no one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg

Exactly.

And as a result, my advice to young men is to not allow a woman to so much as move a toothbrush into your bathroom. When she comes over to spend the night, make sure she leaves with all her crap in the morning.

If she protests, tell her that’s how all the women on the roster get treated.


18 posted on 03/26/2014 12:49:13 PM PDT by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
We are all violent domestic abusers now.
19 posted on 03/26/2014 12:49:44 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
...where no proof of physical violence is required...

So all liberals have to do is get the list of homes owned by registered gun owners, make up some excuse purporting some kind of "attack" and then the gun owner loses his right to own guns. Where, again, is this stipulated in the Constitution?

20 posted on 03/26/2014 12:53:13 PM PDT by jeffc (The U.S. media are our enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-62 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