- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Red flag laws are unconstitutional, so says the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:20 pm
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:20 pm
Decision
AG Garland Statement
quote:
The question presented in this case is not whether prohibiting the
possession of firearms by someone subject to a domestic violence restraining
order is a laudable policy goal. The question is whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), a specific statute that does so, is constitutional under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. In the light of N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol arse’n, Inc. v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022), it is not.
quote:
Through that lens, we conclude that § 922(g)(8)’s ban on possession of firearms is an “outlier[] that our ancestors would never have accepted.” Id. Therefore, the statute is unconstitutional, and Rahimi’s conviction under that statute must be vacated.
AG Garland Statement
quote:
The Justice Department tonight issued the following statement from Attorney General Merrick B. Garland following the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in United States v. Rahimi.
“Nearly 30 years ago, Congress determined that a person who is subject to a court order that restrains him or her from threatening an intimate partner or child cannot lawfully possess a firearm. Whether analyzed through the lens of Supreme Court precedent, or of the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment, that statute is constitutional. Accordingly, the Department will seek further review of the Fifth Circuit’s contrary decision.”
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:22 pm to WPBTiger
Garland can eat his own jimmy.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:25 pm to WPBTiger
Garland: You have made your ruling, now let's see you enforce it.
Bastards will just ignore the court and do whatever the hell they want.
Bastards will just ignore the court and do whatever the hell they want.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:31 pm to WPBTiger
quote:To be clear, this is NOT what they ruled.
Red flag laws are unconstitutional, so says the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
They ruled that one SPECIFIC statute (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)) does not pass Constitutional muster.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:40 pm to AggieHank86
Well, aren’t red flag laws about passing statutes that prohibit gun possession based on criteria that often have nothing to do with a violation of the law.
But Garland doesn’t seem to understand what the ruling is about either.
The 5th Circuit was ruling on the statute, not a specific judge’s condition of a separation (protective) order.
But Garland doesn’t seem to understand what the ruling is about either.
quote:
Nearly 30 years ago, Congress determined that a person who is subject to a court order that restrains him or her from threatening an intimate partner or child cannot lawfully possess a firearm.
The 5th Circuit was ruling on the statute, not a specific judge’s condition of a separation (protective) order.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:44 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
DOJ can suck it.
I never get my panties in a wad over 2nd amendment stories. I'm not disarming, no matter what they say. I'm in my 70s and have lived a good life. At this point, I would just as soon go out in a shootout on my property as any of the usual ways old people die.
This post was edited on 2/3/23 at 3:46 pm
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:50 pm to Milf n Cookies
quote:
I'm in my 70s and have lived a good life
You could also think about your kids and grandkids (assuming you have them). That's a decent reason to get your panties in a wad. However, you're also old enough to know that the noose only gets tighter, never looser. We're screwed, in the end. I just want to be able to rest in peace in a few decades knowing I kept up the fight for the rights of my kids and friends.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:50 pm to Jimbeaux
quote:The net effect of the ruling may well be what you think it will be, but that is not the question. This specific ruling was limited to one specific statute.
Red flag laws are unconstitutional, so says the 5th Circuit Court of Appealsquote:Well, aren’t red flag laws about passing statutes that prohibit gun possession based on criteria that often have nothing to do with a violation of the law.
To be clear, this is NOT what they ruled. They ruled that one SPECIFIC statute (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)) does not pass Constitutional muster.
quote:That was a political press release, not a legal brief. I think he probably understands the ruling.
But Garland doesn’t seem to understand what the ruling is about either.quote:
Nearly 30 years ago, Congress determined that a person who is subject to a court order that restrains him or her from threatening an intimate partner or child cannot lawfully possess a firearm.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:50 pm to Milf n Cookies
quote:
by Milf n Cookies
quote:
I'm in my 70s
Posted on 2/3/23 at 3:55 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
That was a political press release, not a legal brief. I think he probably understands the ruling.
Maybe he should speak like a law man when expounding on legal matters instead of like a politician.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 4:09 pm to WPBTiger
I would love it if they had the balls to say that all gun laws\regulations are unconstitutional. They are all an infringement. The second amendment is written in very plain english but politicians, judges and bureaucrats have used their power to circumvent its real meaning.
If the government wishes to make any laws infringing on the right to bear arms the only truly legal way is with an amendment.
If the government wishes to make any laws infringing on the right to bear arms the only truly legal way is with an amendment.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 4:16 pm to WPBTiger
quote:
restrains him or her from threatening an intimate partner or child cannot lawfully possess a firearm.
I wonder if the the Democrats/lefties will ever realize that their fear porn usage of "protecting children" will fall on deaf ears, due to their purposeful diabolical wanted destruction of the innocence of our children. Can't support/push the disgusting vileness they do onto children one day, and expect to use them as a crutch to push out a God given right actually enshrined in our law.
I know I know..they'll never realize the error of their ways. Vile humans...the whole Democrat Party lot.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 4:23 pm to WPBTiger
quote:”It’s a start.”
Red flag laws are unconstitutional, so says the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
Now strike down “checkpoints” and IRS/law enforcement seizures without due process, EPA’s tyrannical dominion over private land, the NFA, no-knock warrants, etc…
Posted on 2/3/23 at 4:34 pm to KAGTASTIC
quote:
I wonder if the the Democrats/lefties will ever realize that their fear porn usage of "protecting children" will fall on deaf ears
It's been working on white women since August 1920, when the 19th Amendment was passed. COVID rules proved this again. Think of the children! Think of their grandparents! Think of the bus driver?
They use it because it works. And until women as a whole pull their heads out of their nether regions, the will continue to be treated as idiots who buy bullshite arguments in the name of perceived safety. Because they do, by and large.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 4:40 pm to Milf n Cookies
quote:
I'm in my 70s and have lived a good life. At this point, I would just as soon go out in a shootout on my property as any of the usual ways old people die.
I'm with you - in fact I was thinking of that when I was about your age when I first said - "a life sentences is not that much of an obstacle to me" - I heard it in several forms of jokes, but is is absolute logic for me.
Now, with the degradation of society in the past two decades, it is even more applicable.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 4:47 pm to LemmyLives
Yes they have used it as a part of their playbook and it definitely works. I should have been clearer with that it will start to fall on deaf ears. Sometimes I forget my audience on here, as most of us are done placating to the left even a little. They have lost all moral credibility as the last few yrs has brought a lot to light that the layman can now see, not just we conspiracy theorists.
We need stronger people on the Right to call them out on this kind of thing. There was a time we would be able to find even ground when women and children are in danger, but no more when they are doing what they are doing to women, young women, and children. It's back to reality basics or nothing.
We need stronger people on the Right to call them out on this kind of thing. There was a time we would be able to find even ground when women and children are in danger, but no more when they are doing what they are doing to women, young women, and children. It's back to reality basics or nothing.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News