« Cory Maye gets a new trial! | Main | Attempted hijack of Maesrk Alabama »
7th Circuit questions ban on gun ownership by misdemeanor DV defendants
There's quite a discussion at the Volokh Conspiracy, regarding today's decision that calls into question the Lautenberg Amendment. The court concludes that the law should be given intermediate scrutiny (in part because the firearm was possessed for hunting rather than self-defense), vacates the conviction and sends that case back for more fact-finding. The wording certainly indicates that the court is taking the challenge seriously and wants the parties to do so as well. Opinion here.
Hat tip to readers Todd, and to Alice Beard.
Comments
Your link is broken.
http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=08-3770_002.pdf
Posted by: NM at November 18, 2009 07:57 PM
If it were not FOR the judges and their incorrect decisions, these issues would not arise. It's time for We the People to take our proper place and tell the courts to f--k themselves. Blackstone said it best:
For, whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself: there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.
Sir William Blackstone, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book I, Chp3, pg.205/6
Unlearn the lies you were taught. The Courts are NOT in charge, they work FOR us. The courts cannot interpret their superior, the Constitution. That is another lie made BY the courts to usurp authority.
Does one have the legitimate authority to define one's superior? I think not.
Posted by: fwb at November 19, 2009 10:04 AM
I understand that FWB, BUT we're talking about the same .gov that controls education. Do you REALLY want the products of public education and congressionally controlled mandates to decide what is and isn't constitutional?
When you go down that path you start down the mob rule, tyranny of the majority, areas. I'm not quite sure what the proper actions should be, a simple "not in the constitution so you can't do it" or put it to a vote, but I lean towards the "not in there" given the alternative. We've gotten too far astray of the constitution so I guess that'd be a good place to start looking for answers.
Posted by: Tom at November 20, 2009 04:17 PM
7TH CIRCUIT COURT
Posted by: TODD OWENS at November 21, 2009 01:04 PM