• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Legal musings on BFPE jurisdiction

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10204461518090797961&q=angelsea&hl=en&as_sdt=4,7

Reading the case above ^^ angelsea productions v. Connecticut commission on human rights, supreme court decision
in conjunction with various federal court ruling regarding the right to obtain and maintain proficiency of firearms..and the requirement of the BFPE to act promptly (that varies in as far as time goes - depends on circumstances) ...

And looking at the supreme court decision regarding that commission's inaction resulting in their jurisdiction being divested ... I would think that all BPFE cases not heard within 6 months divests the board with jurisdiction in the cases. Why? Because you have the right to practice to maintain your proficiency with your gun and you cannot take your handgun to a range (or leave your home) w/o a permit.

So any cases past 6 months (the time period that the Army has stated that when range time is needed to
maintain proficiency) would divest the BPFE of jurisdiction in the cases.

This argument has never been made before ..... \

Thoughts?
 
Top