HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Would a new federal gun l...

Mon Jul 14, 2014, 09:28 PM

 

Would a new federal gun law that addresses this problem be too restrictive for strict 2A adherents?

3 replies, 604 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 3 replies Author Time Post
Reply Would a new federal gun law that addresses this problem be too restrictive for strict 2A adherents? (Original post)
Scuba Jul 2014 OP
HereSince1628 Jul 2014 #1
Lee-Lee Jul 2014 #2
ManiacJoe Jul 2014 #3

Response to Scuba (Original post)

Mon Jul 14, 2014, 10:05 PM

1. I counted states three times and came up with 30 red



Maybe my bifocals????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Mon Jul 14, 2014, 10:40 PM

2. Too vague and needs clarification

 

'Stalking" means something a little different in every state under the law, and between some states varies wildly.

Here is what Federal law says about gun ownership:

The Gun Control Act (GCA) makes it unlawful for certain categories of persons to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms. 18 USC 922(g). Transfers of firearms to any such prohibited persons are also unlawful. 18 USC 922(d).

These categories include any person:

Under indictment or information in any court for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

who is a fugitive from justice;

who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance;

who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;

who is an illegal alien;

who has been discharged from the military under dishonorable conditions;

who has renounced his or her United States citizenship;

who is subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner; or

who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence (enacted by the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997, Pub. L. No. 104-208, effective September 30, 1996). 18 USC 922(g) and (n).


I bolded the part that seems to come into play here. In those states the max punishment for stalking is evidently less than a year. Since the graphic is uncited and without explanation, that is the only explanation I can see.

If so, the problem isn't federal law, it is that state laws are not adequate with regards to how they punish stalkers. For example here in NC a first offense is class A1 misdemeanor, so punishable by 60 days max. A second offense is a felony.

That said, stalking victims as a matter of course are advised to, and walked through the process of getting an order of protection from the stalker, and with that order the person is prohibited from owning firearms anyway. Also stalking is rarely the only charge that is put forward when it occurs so there is usually a greater charge with it that can exceed the 1 year rule.

It would be hard to make a federal law addressing it unless you made all 50 states uniform in how they defined "stalking", or it would apply to someone in state A where the same actions in state B wouldn't be considered "stalking".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lee-Lee (Reply #2)

Mon Jul 14, 2014, 11:51 PM

3. Excellent answer!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread