Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Lawyer [William Louis Poss] challenges lifetime gun ban for felons. MJS' Vilmetti

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Lawyer [William Louis Poss] challenges lifetime gun ban for felons. MJS' Vilmetti

    http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/105208759.html
    Quote Originally Posted by MJS' Vilmetti
    Wisconsin's law banning all felons from ever possessing a gun violates the 2nd Amendment, according to a lawyer for a man who has challenged the long-standing prohibition.

    Assistant Public Defender William Louis Poss, of Black River Falls, makes the argument in a motion to dismiss a felon in possession charge against Daniel Rueden of Spencer.
    [...]
    Poss recently won a Clark County trial court ruling that Wisconsin's ban on concealed weapons is unconstitutional, citing some of the same cases he uses in Rueden's case.

    [...]

    As in that case, Poss cites recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that expressly extended to the states the 2nd Amendment's right to keep guns. The cases, from 2008 and 2010, overturned gun bans in Washington, D.C. and Chicago.

    Poss argues that states can't deny a fundamental right completely, for life, without the law passing strict scrutiny, that is, it must justified by a compelling government interest, be narrowly tailored to protec that interest, and be the least restrictive means of protecting it.

    The argument goes like this: the ban denies all felons, no matter the nature of their offense, or long ago it occurred or how law-ablding they have been since. Therefore, it is overbroad, and improper.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    I had seen something about this posted a little while ago on the forum but this is definitely a better article and is very well written and about as objective as the press gets IMHO.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  3. #3
    Regular Member metalman383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eau Claire WI, ,
    Posts
    283
    I think there should be different classifications of felonies. My good friend, who is 35 now, got busted with a fairly good amount of pot, when he was 19. He paid huge fines, and sat two months in jail. He is now barred from possesing a firearm for life. He has no other records. He loves hunting, but can only do it with a bow, and of course he can't vote. Should a non-violent, dumb move as a kid, keep him from protecting his wife and three little girls for life?

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by metalman383 View Post
    I think there should be different classifications of felonies. My good friend, who is 35 now, got busted with a fairly good amount of pot, when he was 19. He paid huge fines, and sat two months in jail. He is now barred from possesing a firearm for life. He has no other records. He loves hunting, but can only do it with a bow, and of course he can't vote. Should a non-violent, dumb move as a kid, keep him from protecting his wife and three little girls for life?
    I've said it before and I'll say it again. I think the answer; at least initially, is specific due process to have the right disabled. That is; it is something else the jury must decide in a trial. This would keep it from being an automatic. Secondly, one must be able to petition to have the right restored.

    In the case in question. A man is found guilty for writing a bad check but the jury decides that he shouldn't have his 2A rights revoked because the crime was not violent and had nothing to do with firearms.

    A second example would be a person who is found guilty of assault and the jury decided he should have his rights disabled. A number of years later, after proving his responsibility to society, there is no reason that he shouldn't be able to have his rights restored.
    Last edited by Brass Magnet; 10-20-2010 at 01:52 PM.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Should a citizen with demonstrated bad judgement be allowed to vote?

  6. #6
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    Should a citizen with demonstrated bad judgement be allowed to vote?
    If that was the case and equal in it's application the government could say "well you're obese and obviously have no self control and your judgment is skewed. You should not be allowed to carry or use a firearm, drive a vehicle or vote."

    I don't believe that's far off from where liberals would like to be in the future.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Walt_Kowalski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ashburn, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    355

    Exclamation

    A right is a right. I think that the law restricting felonious possession of firearm is plain STUPID. Its not like the unreformed violent felons that want a gun, can't get one anyways. A reformed felon should have the right to protect his family as much as a citizen...

    ...want to make a law? Then make a law that says previously convicted felons, that commit a crime with a firearm, are subject to mandatory prison time of X (and it better be hard labor)
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"
    -- George Washington

  8. #8
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt_Kowalski View Post
    A right is a right. I think that the law restricting felonious possession of firearm is plain STUPID. Its not like the unreformed violent felons that want a gun, can't get one anyways. A reformed felon should have the right to protect his family as much as a citizen...

    ...want to make a law? Then make a law that says previously convicted felons, that commit a crime with a firearm, are subject to mandatory prison time of X (and it better be hard labor)
    Yes - it is a slippery slope that many don't want to address simply because it doesn't concern them. Or so they think.

  9. #9
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    Should a citizen with demonstrated bad judgement be allowed to vote?
    If that were the case, all Obama voters should be banned for life!

  10. #10
    Regular Member Viper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Just outside Madistan
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    If that were the case, all Obama voters should be banned for life!
    +1

    I was thinking the very same thing.
    Rick
    "Don't draw fire, it irritates the people around you."

  11. #11
    Regular Member Hunting Mama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Not deep enough in the Woods, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    If that were the case, all Obama voters should be banned for life!
    Right On! Seeing as we will be paying for their votes for the rest of our lives and our children's, and our grand-children's lives.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •