|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
MO: Missouri supreme court upholds ban on felons possessing firearms
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Supreme Court of Missouri on Tuesday ruled [opinion, PDF] that a statute prohibiting convicted felons from possessing firearms does not violate the Missouri Constitution's right to bear arms. The appellant, Santonio McCoy, was convicted under Section 571.070.1(1) [text] making it illegal for offenders convicted of prior felonies to possess firearms and appealed arguing it violated the Missouri Constitution's right to bear arms as provided by Article 1, Section 23 [text].
Ed.: The controlling version of the MO constitution in this case was prior to the recent RKBA amendment. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/20/2015)
|
What is really at issue here, and which is conspicuously absent, is any reference to "violent felons".
A felony is a felony is a felony, ISN'T necessarily a "felony".
The term is used to disqualify non-violent offenders who have served their sentences, who pose no physical danger to themselves or society.
This differentiation must be addressed by the Court, and straightened out. It certainly is unjust. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
