Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Ninth Circuit: Felon Has ‘Right to Possess Firearm for Self-Defense’
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Blue Heeler" data-source="post: 4263272" data-attributes="member: 46613"><p>Interesting on a variety of levels. </p><p></p><p>Wonder if they will be revising the 4473? </p><p></p><p>If I understand this case, the poster boy for this case (Duarte) is a five time felon and a member of a LA street gang. Makes me wonder who was funding this through appeals and why? The 9th Circuit going pro-gun rights or pro-felon?</p><p></p><p>I am kind of leaning to saying non-violent criminals who did time/restitution can have their rights restored. I agree with the above post from James Bell that there should not be a “blanket” rule but a “conditional” rule that if certain conditions are met, they can be restored. </p><p></p><p>Not sure about non-violent habitual offenders like in this case.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Blue Heeler, post: 4263272, member: 46613"] Interesting on a variety of levels. Wonder if they will be revising the 4473? If I understand this case, the poster boy for this case (Duarte) is a five time felon and a member of a LA street gang. Makes me wonder who was funding this through appeals and why? The 9th Circuit going pro-gun rights or pro-felon? I am kind of leaning to saying non-violent criminals who did time/restitution can have their rights restored. I agree with the above post from James Bell that there should not be a “blanket” rule but a “conditional” rule that if certain conditions are met, they can be restored. Not sure about non-violent habitual offenders like in this case. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Ninth Circuit: Felon Has ‘Right to Possess Firearm for Self-Defense’
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
