Ninth Circuit: Felons can have firearms.

[MountainGirl]

God bless Bruen.

Ninth Circuit: Felon Has 'Right to Possess Firearm for Self-Defense'

A three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit decided that Steven Duarte, a felon, has a "right to possess a firearm for self-defense."

www.breitbart.com

From the article:

Bruen requires that gun control align with historical tradition and the intent of America’s founders. Bea and VanDyke did not believe the blanket prohibition against felons possessing firearms survived scrutiny.

Bea wrote:

We do not base our decision on the notion that felons should not be prohibited from possessing firearms. As a matter of policy, [the prohibition] may make a great deal of sense. But “[t]he very enumeration of the [Second Amendment] right” in our Constitution “takes out of [our] hands . . . the power to decide” for which Americans “th[at] right is really worth insisting upon.” (Heller).

He added:

Duarte is an American citizen, and thus one of “the people” whom the Second Amendment protects. The Second Amendment’s plain text and historically understood meaning therefore presumptively guarantee his individual right to possess a firearm for self-defense. The Government failed to rebut that presumption by demonstrating that permanently depriving Duarte of this fundamental right is otherwise consistent with our Nation’s history. We therefore hold that [the prohibition] violates Duarte’s Second Amendment rights and is unconstitutional as applied to him.

 

[popsgarland]

My question is....what felony was he convicted of?

 

[MountainGirl]

My question is....what felony was he convicted of?

Why would that matter?

 

[popsgarland]

Why would that matter?

Yes. A non violent felony like a returned check not picked up can lead to a fine and/or
probation for over 1 year. This could be the only felony that someone has committed
and would keep that person for having a gun.

I agree that a violent felon should not be able to own a gun.

ETA...I know 2 people with my 1st statement that have an LTC

 

[Gordo]

I read that it was only for Non-Violent offenders.
Which is good/bad.
That way if I'm convicted of felony speeding, at least I can keep my guns...
But so can drug dealers.

 

[popsgarland]

I read that it was only for Non-Violent offenders.
Which is good/bad.
That way if I'm convicted of felony speeding, at least I can keep my guns...
But so can drug dealers

 

[popsgarland]

I should have said...some non violent felonies.

 

[Big Green]

Rights are rights.

A whole different discussion is our “legal” system and that we generally fail to reform, rehabilitate, and make restitution to victims.

But, once one has made amends for their transgressions, one should be made whole again.

 

[popsgarland]

Rights are rights.

A whole different discussion is our “legal” system and that we generally fail to reform, rehabilitate, and make restitution to victims.

But, once one has made amends for their transgressions, one should be made whole again.

I would think that your last statement would mean that only one (1) felony was committed
and only certain felonies. Murder, rape, etc,etc,etc. should NOT be given any firearms

 

[MountainGirl]

I would think that your last statement would mean that only one (1) felony was committed
and only certain felonies. Murder, rape, etc,etc,etc. should NOT be given any firearms

Looks like we're going to disagree on this one.
Imo, natural God-given Rights, should not be modified nor infringed upon - which is actually what the Second Amendment says.

With luck, eventually it will be deemed there is no historical basis for BAFTE either.

 

[vmax]

Looks like we're going to disagree on this one.
Imo, natural God-given Rights, should not be modified nor infringed upon - which is actually what the Second Amendment says.

Does this apply to the 1st amendment also or just the 2nd?

 

[seeker_two]

Murder, rape, etc,etc,etc. should NOT be given any firearms

Agreed....considering those felonies should lead to swift executions....

 

[Younggun]

Looks like we're going to disagree on this one.
Imo, natural God-given Rights, should not be modified nor infringed upon - which is actually what the Second Amendment says.

With luck, eventually it will be deemed there is no historical basis for BAFTE either.

We have a god given right to freedom, yet we put violent people in prison.

 

[Younggun]

Guess I probably fall in the category of “if we can’t trust them with their rights, why do we release them back in to the public?”

 

[MountainGirl]

Does this apply to the 1st amendment also or just the 2nd?

It reads that way, i.e., restrictions on the Government.

"The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws respecting an establishment of religion; prohibiting the free exercise of religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances." (Wiki)

 

[MountainGirl]

We have a god given right to freedom, yet we put violent people in prison.

Based on choices they made.

 

[Younggun]

Based on choices they made.

So, you agree it’s ok to restrict a god given right.


Now back to the 2A….another god given right

 

[MountainGirl]

So, you agree it’s ok to restrict a god given right.


Now back to the 2A….another god given right

Are you suggesting that it's a God given right to murder someone? That's the choice I was referring to - to lead to their loss of freedom (incarceration/execution).

 

[majormadmax]

I wish they were as concerned about the rights of us law-abiding citizens as they are those of convicted felons!

 

[Younggun]

You said

Looks like we're going to disagree on this one.
Imo, natural God-given Rights, should not be modified nor infringed upon - which is actually what the Second Amendment says.

With luck, eventually it will be deemed there is no historical basis for BAFTE either.

To which I mentioned prison infringes on a god given right.

Are you suggesting that it's a God given right to murder someone? That's the choice I was referring to - to lead to their loss of freedom (incarceration/execution).

I have no idea how you jumped to this conclusion. I’m guessing you never skip leg day at the gym.

But no, I’m suggesting that your opinion on the 2A as presented in the first quote and previous posts imply you agree that felons should be able to possess firearms because it’s a god given right. My question was towards the discrepancy between the right to a firearm and the right to freedom in general.

IF you believe that someone can have there rights limited as punishment for a crime, it conflicts with your other posts in this thread regarding 2A rights for felons being protected as a god given right.