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

Skip to comments.

U.S. HOUSE BANS GUN POSSESSION BY SEX OFFENDERS (VPC EMAIL)
VPC EMAIL | 9-14-2005 | Josh Sugarmann

Posted on 09/14/2005 8:45:50 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan

U.S. HOUSE BANS GUN POSSESSION BY SEX OFFENDERS
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:10:51 -0500

Dear Violence Policy Center Action Network Member:

Today members of the U.S. House approved on a voice vote an amendment offered by Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) to prohibit gun possession by individuals convicted of misdemeanor sex offenses against minors. The Nadler amendment is necessary to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous, known sex offenders. Although current federal law prohibits the transfer to, or possession by, a person convicted of a felony sex offense, it is legal under federal law for persons convicted of misdemeanor sex crimes to buy, sell, and possess firearms. The VPC worked with House members to ensure passage of this important public safety measure. The amendment was added to H.R. 3132, the "Children's Safety Act of 2005," a bill intended to make improvements to the national sex offender registration program.

The Nadler amendment is modeled on the highly successful Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban, a provision the VPC worked hard to add to federal law in 1996 that prohibits gun possession by persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses. In 2002 alone, misdemeanor domestic violence convictions accounted for more than 12 percent of rejections of firearm purchases by the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

Current federal law allows gun possession by persons convicted of misdemeanor sex offenses against minors despite the fact that many states require sex offenders convicted of such misdemeanor crimes to register.

For example-

--New York requires registration by sex offenders convicted of misdemeanor crimes including sexual abuse in the third degree, forcible touching, and sexual misconduct.

--Illinois requires registration by sex offenders convicted of the misdemeanor crimes of indecent solicitation of a child, sexual exploitation of a child, criminal sexual abuse, and any attempt to commit any of these offenses.

--Utah requires registration as a sex offender by persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of lewdness involving a child and enticing a minor over the Internet.

The Violence Policy Center will now work hard in the U.S. Senate to ensure that this important measure to protect children from armed sex offenders becomes law.

Thank you, as always, for your support of the work of the Violence Policy Center.

To learn more, visit www.vpc.org.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; guns; jerrodnadler; sexoffenders; vpc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last

1 posted on 09/14/2005 8:45:56 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

Oh yeah like these sleazebags are gonna care about this law.

The brady bunch strikes again...


2 posted on 09/14/2005 8:48:24 PM PDT by ChefKeith ( If Diplomacy worked, then we would be sitting here talking...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

I don't think the sex offender's primary tool is a gun.

They are banning the wrong thing, as usual.


3 posted on 09/14/2005 8:49:56 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

"misdemeanor sex offenses against minors"

That sounds eerily bad - considering the source. How much you wanna bet that would include calling someone a "bitch" etc?

There is a specific reason why a leftist radical would include this odd wording on another GUN CONTROL BILL!

I have begun to wonder about the equal protection under the law and the equal application of laws and the Constitution. It is slowly but surely eroding away.


4 posted on 09/14/2005 8:50:22 PM PDT by hombre_sincero (www.sigmaitsys.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

No to Nadler and his anti-gun bill.


5 posted on 09/14/2005 8:52:24 PM PDT by claudiustg (Vote for one Democrat, vote for them all...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBrow

The misdemeanor part has me undecided.


6 posted on 09/14/2005 8:52:24 PM PDT by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
This is also the same bill that gives queers protection from "hate crimes".
7 posted on 09/14/2005 8:54:02 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (Cindy Sheehan, Pat Buchanan, John Conyers, and David Duke Are Just Different Sides of the Same Coin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hombre_sincero
Ding! You are right!

Look, Felons already cannot buy a gun. Most Sex Offenses are felonies. I cannot even think of what a misdemeanor Sex Offense is.

Once they get to the misdemeanor Sex Offenders, they will go after speeders.

Dont be so quick to think that this is a good idea.

8 posted on 09/14/2005 8:54:04 PM PDT by keithtoo (Howard Dean's Democratic Party: Traitors, Haters, and Vacillators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: claudiustg

Has he passed 350 pounds yet? He's what 5'5" or so?


9 posted on 09/14/2005 8:54:17 PM PDT by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee

He must have put his full weight behind this anti-gun legislation. He would never take serious action against sex offenders. This is just another brick in the anti-gun wall.


10 posted on 09/14/2005 8:57:25 PM PDT by claudiustg (Vote for one Democrat, vote for them all...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
A foot in the door, an inch at a time. Next, maybe just any old misdemeanor will do, and no guns for you.
11 posted on 09/14/2005 9:01:47 PM PDT by UbonGhostrider (Fire for effect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee

..shall not be infringed.

Remember the lautenberg Amendment to VAWA? Who wants more of that?


12 posted on 09/14/2005 9:01:53 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

This is total bull***t. This has nothing to do with sex, or children, or safety. This is another Democratic snake in the tent.


13 posted on 09/14/2005 9:03:33 PM PDT by Sender (Team Infidel USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UbonGhostrider
Next, maybe just any old misdemeanor will do, and no guns for you.

You got that right. Next, the 'highly successful' program of denying guns to speeders and people who homeschool.

14 posted on 09/14/2005 9:05:20 PM PDT by Sender (Team Infidel USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: keithtoo
I cannot even think of what a misdemeanor Sex Offense is.

This page lists "Indecent exposure, house of ill fame, lewd conduct, annoy/molest children, prostitution, obscene matter, and failing to register as a sex offender."

15 posted on 09/14/2005 9:11:01 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

Right now, felons are generally denied the right to bear arms.

Revising the law to deny the 2nd ammendment to misdemeanor offendors is the camels nose under the tent.

Once the precedent has been established, that a misdemeanor is sufficient to lose your rights for life, the goal post will be moved, and another offense will be added to the list.

We are talking about losing your citizenship rights for life. The bar for this should be set high. If the offense does not rate a felony rap, it doesn't rate punishment for life.


16 posted on 09/14/2005 9:26:09 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Indecent exposure is considered a "misdemeanor sex offense".

"A charge of indecent exposure claims that the defendant displayed his/her body inappropriately in public. Usually, but not always, an indecent exposure charge involves displaying one's genitals to one or more persons, often with the intention of shocking the viewer and giving the person accused of indecent exposure a sexual charge. The specific requirements for charging an individual with indecent exposure can vary a great deal between states, however, and persons have been charged with indecent exposure for actions ranging from walking naked past a window in their homes to wearing a Speedo and cut-off shirt into a fast food restaurant while on vacation at a lake."

17 posted on 09/14/2005 9:46:42 PM PDT by rmmcdaniell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marron
Revising the law to deny the 2nd ammendment to misdemeanor offendors is the camels nose under the tent.

Nope, the nose went under the tent when felons were barred from firearms. Self defense is a God-given right to any free man.

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334 (Julian P. Boyd, Ed., 1950).

18 posted on 09/14/2005 9:51:19 PM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
List of Misdemeanor Sex Offenses:

Indecent Exposure
Annoying Children
Obscene Matter
Lewd or Lascivious Conduct
Prostitution and Solicitation
Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor
Statutory Rape
Sexual Assault

In other words if you are 21 and give your 20 year old buddy a beer (and are convincted) you are a sex offendor and no guns for life.

19 posted on 09/14/2005 9:54:59 PM PDT by rmmcdaniell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
The Nadler amendment would be without merit if our legislatures would make every sexual assault of any type on a child a felony.
20 posted on 09/14/2005 9:57:26 PM PDT by kublia khan (absolute war brings total victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 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