I'm not sure drunk drivers qualify as non-violent criminals but i do endorse the idea that non-violent criminals should have the same gun rights as everyone else. Anyway, this ruling is important and i bet if it goes to the SC, the court will agree now that Kav is a justice.
Federal Judge Restores Non-Violent Offender’s Gun Rights Following Landmark Case
- Thread starter piettakid
- Start date
- Status
ontarget
Member
That must be a state law. My brother has had a DWI conviction from years ago and he never has a problem purchasing in MI.
Riomouse911
Member
Ya, I could see limiting gun rights for a habitual drunkard on his fourth DUI in seven years...or a person addicted to drugs being denied a firearm.., people like that show a total lack of responsibility and the potential for taking dumb actions. But millions of people err and have been arrested for DUI, so making one or two simple DUI convictions (without aggravating circumstances) the reason for denying a gun purchase for life is ludicrous.
Fine Figure of a Man
Member
How does a misdemeanor conviction warrant the denial of a constitutional right in the first place?
DannyLandrum
Member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2017
- Messages
- 439
VERY interesting indeed.
DeepSouth
Random Guy
Their is a such thing as a felony dui, although not in this case. It will be interesting to see where this leads, especially with “legal precedents” seemingly more important than the constitution sometimes.
DeepSouth
Random Guy
From the article
Though Holloway had only committed misdemeanors and only served 90 days of work release for his second offense, he was still considered a prohibited person and barred from firearms possession under federal law because his second conviction carried a possible sentence of up to five years in prison. Federal law says that those convicted of a misdemeanor with a potential prison sentence of more than two years are prohibited from possessing firearms...
RETG
Member
Problem is, we do not prosecute drunk drivers as seriously as we should in this country. They should all serve hard time in a prison for a year or two. So, not sure about taking their gun rights away would be legal and probably not in most states.
Fine Figure of a Man
Member
That plan loses support when prescription drugs are included as intoxicating substances.
Kaeto
Member
There is this island country in the Pacific ( I don't remember it's name.) where your first drunk driving offense is your last, As you are executed.
i'm all for throwing the book at drunk drivers - IF THEY'RE GUILTY. And that's the problem; you can't really be sure. Cops lie.
I would like to see loosing cell phone rights for driving while distracted repeat offenders especially if it results in injury or death.
Or at least restricted to dumb phones only.
It won't happen, but I think more people are killed by distracted driving than drunk driving now.
Just my opinion.
I support restoring rights for non violent offenders and even some charged with violent crimes since so much is considered violent/felony now.
Had to add last to stay within bounds of thread after my rant.
Or at least restricted to dumb phones only.
It won't happen, but I think more people are killed by distracted driving than drunk driving now.
Just my opinion.
I support restoring rights for non violent offenders and even some charged with violent crimes since so much is considered violent/felony now.
Had to add last to stay within bounds of thread after my rant.
Last edited:
Speedo66
Member
In some states a single conviction for DWI is a misdemeanor, but a second conviction raises it to a felony.
The standard of what blood alcohol level becomes a crime is high in this country, in Sweden one drink will put you over the legal level. And they jail people. Since that law was put into effect, their DWI stats plummeted. And their fines are income level based, not a set fee. The Swedish prince was caught speeding and he paid a princely sum, seriously.
Last edited:
BSA1
member
Will a more conservative Supreme Court move towards restoring the 2A rights of non-violent criminal convictions? Usually Conservatives on the Supreme Court support law enforcement and eroding our rights such as search & seizure.
How do white collar crimes involving not paying taxes, business regulations and environment create a danger to my life?
Since a felony is defined as being more than one year in jail many THR members may be surprised to learn they have committed or are committing a felony crime,
How do white collar crimes involving not paying taxes, business regulations and environment create a danger to my life?
Since a felony is defined as being more than one year in jail many THR members may be surprised to learn they have committed or are committing a felony crime,
theotherwaldo
Member
I can't help equating a drunk driver with a drunk shooter - except that the drunk driver is acting irresponsibly in a multi-ton projectile that can travel many miles before it gets stopped.
Still, if the law says to return gun rights to a reformed drunk driver, so be it.
Still, if the law says to return gun rights to a reformed drunk driver, so be it.
AlexanderA
Member
Apparently, under Pennsylvania law, a second misdemeanor DUI conviction elevates the whole matter to a felony. That's the only way the lifetime gun prohibition could come into play.
ETA: A "misdemeanor" with a 2-year potential prison sentence attached is for practical purposes a felony, regardless of what it's called.
Last edited:
AlexanderA
Member
Removal of gun disabilities for conviction of a crime should be an administrative matter. You shouldn't need to go to court. However, the mechanism hasn't been funded, although it exists on paper.
Tommygunn
Member
somethingbenign
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2017
- Messages
- 944
Just found out a friend's mom is a felon and her husband had to sell all his guns. Apparently with her first husband they had their taxes done by a guy that filed things wrong. They got convicted of tax evasion and now can't own firearms. I'm all for having non violent crimes not stripping away human rights.
tark
Member
A misdemeanor domestic violence conviction results in loss of 2nd Amendment rights. It shouldn't, but it does. When the question is asked on the 4473, it does not say "Felony domestic violence." It simply says "domestic Violence."
That's not quite correct. A felony is a crime where you COULD, not necessarily did, get a year in jail. Many people are convicted of felonies and never do a day in prison. And yet they lose their gun rights forever for a crime so minor it did not even warrant any prison time!!
Administrative matter?? What does that mean? That you should appear before a board of citizens and plead your case for restoration of gun rights? That is an invitation to bribery.
There should be set rules for this. If you go say 5 years without a felony conviction since the end of your sentence (including any probation or supervised release) then gun rights should be restored. Nothing sacred about the number 5. 3 or 10 would work also.
That's not a bad idea. Hitting a millionaire with a $500 fine is no penalty. Everyone convicted of DUI should do some jail time. Maybe just 30 days and maybe spread over 15 weekends. The rich would not like that.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
