2nd Amendment protects housemates of convicted felons

Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by Whitewolf, Nov 24, 2010.

  1. Whitewolf

    Whitewolf Member

    US District Court in Penn rules Second Amendment Protects Gun Possession by the Housemates of Felons.

    Full text: United States vs Huet
  2. dunkel

    dunkel New Member

    Sounds like a good ruling, if I'm reading it correct. Basically, don't take away the rights of one person because another person is a felon.

    I wonder what other practical applications there might be for this concept. Think about it...the reason we have many of the gun restrictions that we currently have is that there are criminals who commit crimes with guns, right? So one might reasonably argue, based on this ruling, that MY rights as a law abiding gun owner should not be infringed because YOU commit a crime with a gun.

    Very interesting.

  3. Phil1979

    Phil1979 Member Georgia Carry

    Well, criminals doing bad things with guns is the reason forwarded by gun-grabbers, as to why they support and pass laws infringing on citizens' 2nd Amendment Rights. But (as you know), that's not their real reason.

    Anyway, I digress. As long as that's their stated reason, that's good enough concerning the law and where this goes. Your insight and analysis on this is not merely interesting, it's excellent.

    Like you, I have a feeling this ruling may go a long way toward helping overturn unconstitutional firearm laws.
  4. Macktee

    Macktee New Member

    Maybe there is hope after all...

    Sounds like a good ruling. Let's see how long before it's overturned.





    etc., etc., etc.....
  5. Fallschirmjäger

    Fallschirmjäger I watch the watchers

    If the 'theory' is that because there is a felon in the house, that someone else should be denied a firearm to prevent its use by the felon then ....
    ... households with a felon should be prevented from voting because they might be representing the felon's vote instead of their own. (Which, may not be that far fetched, considering how many people do bother enough to vote on their own.)
  6. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    This Court obviously knows something about guns and has a beef with the way the Federal prosecutors tried to portray this Yugo SKS as an assault weapon, as if that somehow made it illegal.

    I have to say, this is a close case. On page 4, it says that federal agents talked to the wife, who admitted that she knew her husband had been "showing off" this particular SKS rifle to other people. She was upset about this and told him not to do it, but it seems clear to me that she did see him (or otherwise come to know) that he WAS handling her rifle, which she chose to keep handy in the closet where her husband, or anybody else in the house, could grab it easily.

    So once she knows that her husband ( a convicted felon who loves guns and who got in trouble years ago for having an illegal gun) has been handling her SKS rifle (even against her wishes), did she have a duty to lock it up or otherwise put it out of his reach?

    This court says "NO." She did not have a duty to deny herself access to her gun out of an ill-founded fear that one day her husband might violate the law by taking possession of it.
    And the court says that if the husband took the gun, there is no evidence that this is something the wife wanted to happen, or assisted with, or tried to bring about. So this Court indicates that if a felon takes a gun from a non-felon law-abiding gun owner without that gun owner's permission, there's only one criminal-- the felon.

    I'll go along with that.

    But other courts might rule differently, and find that there IS a duty to take affirmative steps to keep your gun away from a felon-spouse who you know has an interest in guns and who has in the past handled your gun in violation of your verbal instructions.
  7. ber950

    ber950 Active Member

    I could see another court ruling that way. However, SCOTUS could easily see that as establishing a "Safe Storage" provision that Heller declared unconstitutional. That Heller decision really is a pinhole in the heart of gun control logic. Some of this will take years to sort out.
  8. Whitewolf

    Whitewolf Member

  9. GAGunOwner

    GAGunOwner Active Member

    I lot of gun control comes from racism or a general desire to disarm the populace.