• 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.

N.C. Supreme Court Reverses FElony Firearms Act

mekender

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
462
Location
, ,
imported post

It is a bit more complex than that. The guy HAD his rights reinstated. Then after 17 years of them being reinstated, a new law was passed that took his right to own guns away. The court found this law AS APPLIED to him to be unconstitutional.

The law will still stand for probably 99% of convicted felons.
 

david.ross

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
1,241
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
imported post

So. I'm curious.

I realize different states have different systems.

Is this a case of "You can't punish someone retroactively through passing a new law" thing? I can't remember if this was in Alaska, but one state tried to list a convicted sex offender, he appealed, the courts stated the guy to be removed.

Would this be similar? Anyone after the law was passed, which didn't have their rights restored, be barred from owning a firearm?

Does this mean convicted felons have no chance of reinstating their second amendment rights in NC or after reinstating rights they can own a firearm?

I do realize the ban still applies to people who are felons.
 

mekender

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
462
Location
, ,
imported post

insane.kangaroo wrote:
So. I'm curious.

I realize different states have different systems.

Is this a case of "You can't punish someone retroactively through passing a new law" thing? I can't remember if this was in Alaska, but one state tried to list a convicted sex offender, he appealed, the courts stated the guy to be removed.

Would this be similar? Anyone after the law was passed, which didn't have their rights restored, be barred from owning a firearm?

Does this mean convicted felons have no chance of reinstating their second amendment rights in NC or after reinstating rights they can own a firearm?

I do realize the ban still applies to people who are felons.
It appears that the 2004 law removes the chance for them to have their firearms rights restored... though it hasnt passed the court room test on that aspect.
 

david.ross

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
1,241
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
imported post

I actually don't understand why someone must be punished their whole life for a mistake.

There are dumb laws which result in a felony, which would ruin a person's life. Hell, I can't remember which state, but someone was placed in a sex offender's database for masturbating some type of kid or animal doll(probably Louisiana or Kentucky).

I'm absolutely for "constitutional rights" restoration, even social security rights, if the person has truly changed.

You see it in the news all the time, where kids do something stupid. Some kids which commit murder are tried as adults.

Below is an example by thoughts....
I'm sorry to sound biased, but when did people actually listen to the kid's side of the story? Kid kills his/her parents and gets a felony rap when the kid was only trying to "get help" the only way he knew? Abuse doesn't only take form physically, but mentally(I disagree with calling mental issues non-physical). A kid "fixes" their life only to be punished further, most likely resulting in a suicide 1-3 years later.

There was one story, where the kid actually had a decent judge. I was amazed at the absolute ignorance and stupidity of fellow NRA members. People were calling the courthouse telling them to "Hang the kid" because he shot a member of the family.

Of course there could be some rules or regulations designing some sort of council, at the cost of the requesting party to restore such rights. It just "makes sense."

This is a small part discussing my view of rights restorations.
 

mekender

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
462
Location
, ,
imported post

The argument against banning felons from owning guns is very simple... all you have to do is point out that it is a felony to wear a mask in public in VA (§ 18.2-422). There is no logical justification why that act should bar someone from owning a firearm.
 

david.ross

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
1,241
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
imported post

>.>...

Wearing a fursuit in Virginia is a felony... interesting. I wonder what amusement parks do? The statute doesn't state "for entertainment purposes."

Hanging out at a furmeet in fursuit doesn't meet any of those qualifications.
 
Top