Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Showing Original Post only (View all)

hue

(4,949 posts)
Wed Mar 26, 2014, 01:59 PM Mar 2014

US top court rules domestic abusers can't own guns [View all]

Source: CENT NEWS

United States - The US Supreme Court in a unanimous ruling Wednesday upheld a federal law barring anyone convicted of even a minor domestic violence charge from ever owning a gun.

The nine justices of the top court ruled against James Castleman, who argued that his past conviction in Tennessee of misdemeanor domestic assault against the mother of his child shouldn't keep him from owning a firearm under federal law.

Castleman had been charged with illegal possession of a firearm when he and his wife were later accused of trafficking weapons on the black market. One of these weapons was found at the scene of a crime in Chicago.

An appeals court in Tennessee had agreed with Castleman's contention that the Tennessee definition of misdemeanor domestic assault is less strict than the federal one, and that the incident for which he was convicted did not include physical force as described under the federal law.

But the Supreme Court overruled that decision.

Progressive Justice Sonia Sotomayor said Castleman's arguments "are unpersuasive" and the court saw "no anomaly in grouping domestic abusers convicted of generic assault or battery offenses together with the others whom (federal law) disqualifies from gun ownership."

The top court thus upholds the federal law on gun ownership, which is more strict than those of most states.

Read more: http://www.centnews.com/Politics/US-top-court-rules-domestic-abusers-can-t-own-guns/S-2014-03-26/50365.html

48 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Good. nt enlightenment Mar 2014 #1
+1 sakabatou Mar 2014 #36
It will be interesting to see if states actually step up and address this retrospectively... hlthe2b Mar 2014 #2
There should be uniformity as to how the states define domestic violence hack89 Mar 2014 #5
Pretty sure most states already enforce the Lautenberg Amendment. AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #8
This ruling prevent many of the Tea/Repukes/NRA from owing their firearms! hue Mar 2014 #3
This ruling will prevent many from owning firearms, uncommonlink Mar 2014 #6
Domestic abuse isn't tied to one party. eggplant Mar 2014 #16
Very true. hue Mar 2014 #18
I'm afraid it wont stop them from owning them, Mr.Bill Mar 2014 #29
It won't, any more than making drugs illegal keeps people from using them. Jgarrick Mar 2014 #30
I agree... Deuce Mar 2014 #38
MRA and gundamentalist blogs will be in total meltdown today. alp227 Mar 2014 #4
As will the Gungeon. KamaAina Mar 2014 #14
Doubtful. uncommonlink Mar 2014 #17
Make that four- I agree with it. Your interlocutor needs to be reminded of... friendly_iconoclast Mar 2014 #25
No - this is a 17 year old law hack89 Mar 2014 #31
Wait....! Is that a CAMEL'S NOSE I see?!? n/t TygrBright Mar 2014 #7
This isn't a new thing. This has been the law since what, 1986? AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #9
The Supreme Court gets something right for a change! perdita9 Mar 2014 #10
NRA Flipout in 3..2..1.. berni_mccoy Mar 2014 #11
NRA gun rights nuts heads exploding kimbutgar Mar 2014 #12
cool bowens43 Mar 2014 #13
I might even break strict protocol and head over to the Gungeon KamaAina Mar 2014 #15
It's not even posted there. uncommonlink Mar 2014 #19
Welcome back!!! LanternWaste Mar 2014 #21
Welcome back? uncommonlink Mar 2014 #24
+100 billh58 Mar 2014 #35
What about the returnee that speaks rather Loudly against guns? friendly_iconoclast Mar 2014 #39
Still trying to figure out what welcome back means. uncommonlink Mar 2014 #40
He's implying you're a zombie, a previously banned poster under a new name friendly_iconoclast Mar 2014 #42
Zombie? What an interesting way to describe a banned person. uncommonlink Mar 2014 #43
I'll let Wikipedia explain: friendly_iconoclast Mar 2014 #44
Ok. uncommonlink Mar 2014 #45
You will find support for the law hack89 Mar 2014 #32
this is huge samsingh Mar 2014 #20
You won't hear any complaints from me. Castleman was convicted after due process... friendly_iconoclast Mar 2014 #28
I hope Rachel does a segment on this. (nt) Paladin Mar 2014 #22
K&R. This is a good ruling friendly_iconoclast Mar 2014 #23
Excellent! n/t RKP5637 Mar 2014 #26
Here is the actual opinion happyslug Mar 2014 #27
Very good. nt awoke_in_2003 Mar 2014 #33
Good ruling Gothmog Mar 2014 #34
Dear nra DiverDave Mar 2014 #37
This is good. marble falls Mar 2014 #41
Let me get this straight... derby378 Mar 2014 #46
You obviously don't have much experience with intoxicated farm animals. nt hack89 Mar 2014 #48
Their reputations actually matter to them? dickthegrouch Mar 2014 #47
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»US top court rules domest...