|
|
Post by MLB on Feb 4, 2011 11:03:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 5, 2011 11:12:14 GMT -5
....We need more women in our country like Ann Coutler .
...Nonsense is disarming the rights of the Law Abiding Citizens, to allow the bad elements to wreak their destruction on the innocent.
|
|
|
|
Post by TMan on Feb 6, 2011 3:49:50 GMT -5
I don't have any statistics on crime rates, but guns in China aren't permitted, and therefore they don't have the killings via handguns that we have in the USA. However, if you commit a crime in China, you will go to prison for a long time, and their prisons aren't the social clubs that the ones in the USA are. So if it works in China, why wouldn't banning all guns and anyone caught with a gun goes to prison for life, work in the USA? Oops, forgot - the Chinese don't have the ACLU and bleeding heart liberals. A person commits a crime in the USA and it is the societies fault because he wasn't properly educated, or provided for.  |
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 6, 2011 9:17:57 GMT -5
...In Our country, the courts panders to the rights of the criminal element. The first offender plea and the catch & release programs are just two of the liberal programs to keep the criminals alive and kicking in our society. These are two examples : This happened last week. ...Lets put the ACLU to the test with our Second Amendment ...Does The NAACP support an Individual Right to “Keep and Bear Arms”, under The Second Amendment ?
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 6, 2011 9:38:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 6, 2011 9:41:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 6, 2011 9:46:46 GMT -5
Hilary 0. Shelton was instrumental in ushering through to passage The National Assault Weapons Ban and The Brady Handgun Law ACLU, NAACP, Other Rights Groups File Suit Against Arizona's SB 1070 " The American Civil Liberties Union, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People were among groups that filed the latest challenge." "Selling Our Rights for 30 Pieces of Silver" Frank Lautenberg on Civil Rights Democratic Sr Senator (NJ) Frank Lautenberg on Gun Control Frank Lautenberg - Democrat The Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban (1996) was an amendment to the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997 which was passed by the 104th US Congress in the Fall of 1996. Officially known as 'Gun Ban for Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence' -- 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)'[1], 'Public Law 104-208'[2] and is often referred to as the Lautenberg Amendment after its sponsor, Frank Lautenberg.
The Lautenberg Act conflicts with State Laws that are in effect that do not impose a statute under federal law, and or state laws preventing persons from owning a firearm, ammunition, or possessing of such items.
In Example: A person convicted of Domestic Violene in Texas is charged with and convicted of a Misdemeanor Charge Class A. A person convicted of Domestic Violence in very few other states Domestic Violence is charged as a felony.
In all states a violation of a protective order, as well as any other act of Domestic Violence while a protective order is in place is Considered a Felony and the Charges that were initially filed will automatically become a felony charge of Domestic Violence.
The Lautenberg Amendment and or Act does not specify to whether or not a Felony Conviction of Domestic Violence whether by plea, or by Deferred Adjudication or a Misdemeanor Charge of Domestic Violence should fall under the act.
The Lautenberg Amendment excludes all persons convicted of any type of Domestic Violence, or the Subject of a Magistrates Protective order from owning or possessing any type of Firearm, Ammunition, and or other types of weapons that involve a projectile device. The nation's police forces are up in arms over a new federal gun control law that could strip thousands of them of their guns and jobs. Most police organizations have enthusiastically supported every gun control scheme President Clinton has put forward. Few Americans realized that such legislation almost always contained an exemption for the policemen themselves regarding their official duties. But poetic justice may finally have arrived. Unfortunately, its arrival also heralds the decimation of constitutional rights of a million or more other Americans.
Last September 28, as part of a massive appropriations bill, Congress passed the so-called Lautenberg Act, which greatly increases the number of Americans prohibited by federal law from owning firearms. For the first time, thanks to an amendment by Georgia's Rep. Bob Barr, law-enforcement officials are not exempt from the nation's gun control laws.
The Lautenberg Act prohibits anyone from owning a gun or possessing any ammunition who has ever been convicted of a misdemeanor involving the use or attempted use of physical force or the threatened use of a deadly weapon against a spouse, child, or intimate partner. (People with any felony conviction have been prohibited from owning guns since 1968.) Any person with such a misdemeanor on his record who is found in possession of a gun or even of a single bullet can face a $250,000 fine and 10 years in prison — longer than the average convicted murderer serves in this country.
Gerald Arenberg, executive director of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, observed that the act "has thrown the whole world into confusion for cops." Victor Kappeler, director of the Criminal Justice Graduate Program at Eastern Kentucky University, estimated that if accurate reporting of all such police domestic violence occurred, and if all such assaults were fully prosecuted, 10% of the nation's law-enforcement officials (70,000 individuals) could be found guilty and thus banned from possessing a firearm under the new law. THE LAUTENBERG DOMESTIC CONFISCATION LAW
Analysis by
Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
(703)321-8585
WHAT DOES THE LAUTENBERG LAW DO?
The Lautenberg Domestic Confiscation provision was signed into law on September 30, 1996, as section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion of the omnibus appropriations bill. It adds to the list of "prohibited persons" persons convicted of a "... misdemeanor involving domestic violence."
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE A "PROHIBITED PERSON"?
If you become a prohibited person, you can never again own or acquire a firearm of any type. The only exception is if you are subsequently pardoned or otherwise have your criminal record expunged.
WHAT IS A MISDEMEANOR?
A misdemeanor is a crime carrying a potential penalty of as little as one day in jail, irrespective of whether the person serves actual jail time. In other words, the law imposes a lifetime gun ban on offenses which, in many cases, are very minor in nature.
WHAT TYPE OF MISDEMEANOR CONVICTION WOULD CAUSE ME TO BECOME A "PROHIBITED PERSON"?
The Lautenberg language defines "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" to include a misdemeanor that involves "the use or attempted use of physical force" against a family member. Hence, any actual or attempted violence against a spouse or son or daughter would certainly, if prosecuted successfully as a misdemeanor, subject you to a lifetime gun ban. In many jurisdictions, spanking your kids could result in a conviction which would prohibit you from ever again owning a firearm.
WOULD THE MISDEMEANOR HAVE TO INVOLVE VIOLENCE OR ATTEMPTED VIOLENCE?
No. We have seen that a misdemeanor involving violence (however slight) or attempted violence against a spouse, son, or daughter would certainly be covered. But the definition of "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" goes on to include "the threatened use of a deadly weapon." Thus, a threat against a family member would also subject the offender to a lifetime gun ban, even if the threat were joking or the person making the threat did not have the wherewithal to carry it out.
DOES THE NEW LAW APPLY TO PAST CRIMES?
Yes. A misdemeanor committed fifty years ago would still subject an individual to a lifetime gun ban, even if he or she has lived a happily married life with the "victim" during the intervening period.
HOW LONG DOES A "PROHIBITED PERSON" HAVE TO TURN IN ALL HIS OR HER FIREARMS?
The law provides for no grace period. Technically, any newly created "prohibited person" is currently in danger of a felony conviction.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
It means that, if you are a "prohibited person" and you are convicted of possessing a firearm, you will be guilty of a felony which could subject you to a $250,000 fine and a ten year prison sentence.
WHAT ABOUT POLICEMEN AND SOLDIERS?
There is no exemption for law enforcement officials or members of the armed services. These persons, if they have been convicted of even minor misdemeanors against their spouses, will have to be disarmed and fired.
WHAT ABOUT BATTERED WOMEN WHO DEFENDED THEMSELVES?
There is no exemption for battered women who received minor misdemeanor convictions after they used force to defend themselves against their battering spouses. There are many battered women who fall into this category. They will now be unable to use firearms to protect themselves against their abusive and threatening husbands, even if they feel that their lives are endangered.
WHAT ARE THE LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE LAW?
Because the law now imposes lifetime gun bans on persons who, in some cases, have engaged in no actual violence or attempted violence, it will only be a matter of time before anti-gun activists try to impose lifetime guns bans in non-domestic situations of minor misdemeanors involving violence (such as fist fights). Ultimately, an effort to impose a lifetime gun ban on all persons convicted of misdemeanors will be made.
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 6, 2011 10:04:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 6, 2011 11:10:52 GMT -5
The Supreme Court Ruled in Favor of The 2nd
District oF Columbia AND
Adrian M. Fentffi, MAYOR OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
PETITIONERS
V.
DicK Anthonffi Heller,
RESPONDENT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER
Amici Briefs
Amici Briefs in Support of Petitioners
Amicus Brief of Am. Acad. of Pediatrics
Amicus Brief of the ABA
Amici Brief of Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, et al.
Amicus Brief of City of Chicago
Amici Brief of Coalition of Civil Rights groups
Amici Brief of Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, et al.
Amici Brief of D.A.'s
Amici Brief of Former Dep't of Justice Officials
Amici Brief of Historians
Amici Brief of U.S. Cities et al.
Amici Brief of Members of Congress
Amicus Brief of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund
Amici Brief of National Network to End Domestic Violence, et al.
Amici Brief of New York et al.
Amici Brief of Professors Erwin Chemerinsky and Adam Winkler
Amici Brief of Crim. Justice Professors
Amici Brief of Linguistics Professors
Amici Brief of Violence Policy Center et al.
Amici Briefs in Support of Respondent
Amicus Brief of Academics
Amici Brief of Academics for the Second Amendment
Amicus Brief of Alaska Outdoor Council
Amicus Brief of American Center for Law and Justice
Amicus Brief of American Civil Rights Union
Amicus Brief of American Legislative Exchange Council
Amici Brief of Association of American Physicians and Surgeons
Amici Brief of Buckeye Firearms Foundation, et al.
Amici Brief of Cato Institute and Professor Joyce Lee Malcolm
Amicus Brief of Center for Individual Freedom
Amici Brief of Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Amicus Brief of Congress of Racial Equality
Amici Brief of Criminologists
Amici Brief of Disabled Veterans for Self-Defense
Amicus Brief of Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund
Amici Brief of Former Justice Department officials
Amicus Brief of Foundation for Free Expression
Amicus Brief of Foundation for Moral Law
Amicus Brief of GeorgiaCarry.org
Amicus Brief of Goldwater Institute
Amicus Brief of Grass Roots of South Carolina
Amici Brief of Gun Owners of America
Amicus Brief of Heartland Institute
Amicus Brief of Institute for Justice
Amici Brief of International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association
Amici Brief of International Scholars
Amicus Brief of Jeanette Moll
Amici Brief of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
Amicus Brief of Joseph B. Scarnati
Amicus Brief of Libertarian National Committee
Amicus Brief of Liberty Legal Institute
Amici Brief of Maj. Gen. Altenburg, et al.
Amicus Brief of Maricopa County Attorney's Office
Amici Brief of Members of Congress and Vice-President Cheney
Amicus Brief of Mountain States Legal Foundation
Amicus Brief of National Rifle Association
Amicus Brief of National Shooting Sports Foundation
Amicus Brief of Paragon Foundation
Amici Brief of Pink Pistols
Amici Brief of Retired Military Officers
Amicus Brief of Rutherford Institute
Amicus Brief of Second Amendment Foundation
Amicus Brief of Southeastern Legal Foundation
Amici Brief of State Firearms Associations
Amici Brief of Texas, et al.
Amicus Brief of Virginia1774.org
Amici Brief of Women legislators et al.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER
Amici Briefs BRIEF FOR BRADY CENTER The Attorneys and Associate Justices also discussed the use of the word "Arms" in reference to The Right To Keep And Bear Arms. When used in the preamble, as they referred to in maintaining a an Organized Militia, they also presented the position that "Arms" was in reference to Military Weapons. I thought "Arms" was considered to be the language, at the time of our founding fathers, when referring to Firearms. I then wondered how "Arms" was introduced into our language; so, I looked up the translations for Weapons. Weapon : Any Tool Used For Fighting
Translations for: Weapon
Dansk (Danish)
n. - v?ben
v. tr. - armere, gribe til v?ben
Fran?ais (French)
n. - (lit, fig) arme
v. tr. - armer
Italiano (Italian)
arma
Portugu?s (Portuguese)
n. - arma (f), defesa (f)
Espa?ol (Spanish)
n. - arma, proyectil
v. tr. - armar
I then looked up some quotes from some of our founding fathers, on their use and application for "Arms" when referring to Civilians. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms".
Thomas Jefferson
"Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion... in private self-defense".
John Adams
After listening to the oral arguments, from these Attorneys, I'm convinced that the Supreme Court acted entirely on their own, in ruling on this case. The vote was 5 to 4, therefore, I feel there are 4 Justices on The Supreme Court who would have been hung at another time in this nation's history. |
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 6, 2011 13:44:19 GMT -5
....Most of the Anti-Gun Democrats, that I have seen, is also Race Baiting Flim-Flam Artist; Case in Point :
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Feb 6, 2011 15:03:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by blueglass on Jan 14, 2013 23:04:01 GMT -5
It makes me wonder just How they designate a Assault Weapon when there is No real class of such a thing. Probably the Uneducated picking what they think they are with absolutely No knowledge to prove their points at all. Just more candidates for the Stupid Boxs.
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Jan 16, 2013 2:07:32 GMT -5
It makes me wonder just How they designate a Assault Weapon when there is No real class of such a thing. Probably the Uneducated picking what they think they are with absolutely No knowledge to prove their points at all. Just more candidates for the Stupid Boxs. |
|
|
|
Post by blueglass on Jan 20, 2013 20:51:37 GMT -5
Trivia, In China if you are convicted of a capital crime its the death sentence. They start by driving you from town to town in a Army style truck where they kick your teeth out in the town square to start. They give a speech stating how bad you are and then go down the road to the next village where it happens again. Village after village They remove some more teeth and beat on him some more as well. After the troops get tired in a few hours of this hard work the victem is shot and his family is charged for the price of the bullet before they get his remains back. Approx $1.38 in our money. Was in a article I read recently. No bleeding hearts there to stand up for him at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Jan 20, 2013 22:37:17 GMT -5
.....blueglass; The Days of Stiff Penalties has taken a back seat to reform, in our lopsided dysfunctional justice system. Some people cannot grasp hold, of the fact, why crime rates are rising to elevated levels.
|
|
|
|
Post by blueglass on Jan 21, 2013 22:17:09 GMT -5
Its the same here as well with too many bleeding heart idiots who never want to blame the real culprit. The Criminal themselves who do these sick crimes, they always want to find some poor excuse for them to walk away from it with A small slap on the back of the hand approach which is total crap.
|
|
