Fed Court Denies Navy Veteran From Owning Gun Due To 1968 Misdemeanor
Return to Board  •  Menu  •  Bottom  Page 1 of 3  
Message
Fed Court Denies Navy Veteran From Owning Gun Due To 1968 Misdemeanor
Posted by wickowick on 1/12 at 12:50 pm
LINK

quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court says a Maryland veteran can’t own a gun because of a misdemeanor assault conviction more than four decades ago.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Friday turned away an appeal from 68-year-old Navy veteran Jefferson Wayne Schrader, who sued after failing a 2008 background check.

Schrader was convicted of misdemeanor assault and battery and fined $100 after a fistfight in Annapolis, Md., in 1968.

Federal law says gun owners cannot have a state misdemeanor conviction with a possible sentence of more than two years. In 1968, Maryland did not have a maximum prison penalty for misdemeanor assault.

The appeals court agreed Schrader could have been given more than two years in prison, and so he is ineligible to own a gun.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by lsu13lsu on 1/12 at 12:54 pm to wickowick
Wow.

"The government is not going to take your guns." "We just want guns out of the wrong people's hands." "We just want to do stricter background checks."



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by los angeles tiger on 1/12 at 12:56 pm to lsu13lsu
How the hell is it that the government must know this when it is a guaranteed right found in the Bill of Rights?

It is fricking bull shite nonsense.




Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Kcrad on 1/12 at 12:57 pm to lsu13lsu
Are these rules additive?

Someone with two convictions, would they add both sentences together???



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by wickowick on 1/12 at 12:58 pm to los angeles tiger
quote:

It is fricking bull shite nonsense.


I mean the guy has a history right, look at the pattern, once in 68 years...



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Meauxjeaux on 1/12 at 1:10 pm to wickowick
The screws are tightening.

In the cc classes I'm in right now we just finished discussion of the crossover of guns and medicine.

If you have ever been prescribed an anti depressent prepare to have your license app subjected to extra scrutiny today.

Tomorrow prepare to have it denied.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by ForeLSU on 1/12 at 1:18 pm to wickowick
stupid interpretation of the reg...however I'm failing to understand what him being a Navy Veteran adds to the story


Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by wickowick on 1/12 at 1:19 pm to ForeLSU
quote:

however I'm failing to understand what him being a Navy Veteran adds to the story


I agree, it shouldn't matter...



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Tigah in the ATL on 1/12 at 1:19 pm to los angeles tiger
quote:

when it is a guaranteed right found in the Bill of Rights?

rights are not absolute. you should know this.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by los angeles tiger on 1/12 at 1:20 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:

rights are not absolute. you should know this.


Please stop posting, because rights are not absolute. You have no right to speak anymore.





Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Tim on 1/12 at 1:20 pm to ForeLSU
this is why I disagree with the mental health avenue...mental health diagnosis is very fluid, depending on which MD you are talking to...you think this administration hasn't thought this through...keep believing they have our best interest at heart, freedoms will be lost...forever!


Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by TheFolker on 1/12 at 1:21 pm to Meauxjeaux
quote:

If you have ever been prescribed an anti depressent prepare to have your license app subjected to extra scrutiny today.


Which will result in fewer people seeking the treatment they need.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by los angeles tiger on 1/12 at 1:29 pm to TheFolker
This is so stupid because I can go out and buy a gun a street. It's pretty easy to do. Yet government is too busy with this type of of bull shite to someone like this Navy Vet while having a revolving door for criminals that have been arrested multiple times and always have guns.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by CarrolltonTiger on 1/12 at 2:04 pm to los angeles tiger
quote:

In 1968, Maryland did not have a maximum prison penalty for misdemeanor assault.


Doesn't anyone find this even more outrageous?



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by SpartyGator on 1/12 at 2:04 pm to wickowick
And from over 40 yrs ago? What a crock of shite..


Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Tigah in the ATL on 1/12 at 2:18 pm to ForeLSU
quote:

Navy Veteran adds to the story
appeal to emotion



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by los angeles tiger on 1/12 at 2:20 pm to CarrolltonTiger
quote:

Doesn't anyone find this even more outrageous?


It's outrageous but I am not shocked since living in California.


This post was edited on 1/12 at 2:21 pm

Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Teddy Ruxpin on 1/12 at 2:22 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:

appeal to emotion


Ya most likely. However, it is odd, and perhaps another angle, to suggest that as a Navy veteran, our country trusted him with at least weapon training, and therefore, this would appear to be sillier considering he was entrusted with weapons for national defense, but cannot be trusted to protect himself.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by los angeles tiger on 1/12 at 2:25 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
Obama admitted to doing lots of drugs and doing such is something that is more than a misdemeanor. How in the hell can such a man be president and make such decisions about war if a Navy Vet isn't allowed to purchase a gun due to a misdemeanor from 1968?
Let's not forget that he is pushing for gun control yet has associations and friendships with domestic terrorists that killed other Americans.


This post was edited on 1/12 at 2:27 pm

Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by TrueTiger on 1/12 at 2:37 pm to wickowick
There is federal law that provides a procedure for felons to apply to the BATF to have their firearms rights restored. It is Title 18 United States Code section 925(c).

BUT there is a catch-22. Congress has defunded the section of the BATF that processes these applications. Since there is no money to do them, they don't do them.

Here is a little article where it was explained to a convicted congressman:

Judge explains BATF defunding




Reply  •  Back to Top  •  Refresh
Return to Board
Jump to Page   

           Page 1 of 3           

 

 Message Boards
 Tiger Rant
 Score Board
 Recruiting Board
 SEC Rant
 SEC Score Board
 Saints Talk
 Pelicans Talk
 More Sports Board
 Soccer Board
 O-T Lounge
 Tech Board
 Outdoor Board
 Movie/TV Board
 Music Board
 Political Talk
 Money Talk
 Fark Board
 Gaming Board
 Fantasy Sports
 Food and Drink Board
 Ticket Exchange
 Help Board
 

 News
 LSU
 More Sports
 Sports Lite
 

 Other Options
 >> Search
 

 SECRant.com Links
 SEC Rant
 SEC Score Board
 SEC Recruiting
 SEC Tickets
 Off-Topic Board
 

 Geaux.com Dining Guide
 New Orleans
 Baton Rouge
 

 Site Features (Full Version)
 Home Page
 LSU Football Schedule
 Pick'em Home Page
 
Back to top
Sign In 
View in: Desktop
Copyright ©2014 TigerDroppings.com.