SAF wins PA restoratiuon of rights suit

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Tyeraxus

    Ultimate Member
    May 15, 2012
    1,165
    East Tennessee
    So it's not a restoration of rights, but a full declaration that 922(g)(1) as applied to Binderup is unconstitutional. Legal eagles, how big is this?
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,394
    Westminster USA
    From SAF
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]​

    [FONT=&quot]
    [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Fed. Court Ruling Opens Door To Gun Rights Restoration For Certain Misdemeanors[/FONT]

    BELLEVUE, WA — The Second Amendment Foundation has quietly won a significant federal court victory in a Pennsylvania case in which the judge has ruled that a man convicted of a serious misdemeanor crime several years ago, but who has demonstrated that he “would present no more threat to the community” than an average law-abiding citizen, may not lose his Second Amendment rights under a federal gun control statute known as 922(g)(1).
    The ruling, by Judge James Knoll Gardner for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, says that application of that statute to the plaintiff, Daniel Binderup, “violates the Second Amendment.”
    “This case could provide a building block upon which similar cases in which people are convicted of non-violent misdemeanors might be challenged because they have lost their right to keep and bear arms as a result,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “Under existing federal law, many people convicted of state-level misdemeanors have lost their Second Amendment rights, essentially because they’ve been lumped together with convicted felons.
    “One should not lose his or her constitutional rights for certain non-violent indiscretions that occur once in a lifetime,” he added.
    Following his guilty plea in 1998, Binderup lost his Second Amendment rights and disposed of all of his firearms legally. In November 2013, he filed a complaint against Attorney General Eric Holder and B. Todd Jones, director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. SAF provided legal support through attorneys Alan Gura and Douglas T. Gould.


    [FONT=&quot]The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot]
    [/FONT]​
    [FONT=&quot]
    [/FONT]​
    [FONT=&quot]
    [/FONT]​
    [FONT=&quot]< Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family >[/FONT]​
    Copyright © 2014 Second Amendment Foundation, All Rights Reserved.​
    [FONT=&quot]Second Amendment Foundation
    James Madison Building
    12500 N.E. Tenth Place
    Bellevue, WA 98005[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Voice: 425-454-7012
    Toll Free: 800-426-4302
    FAX: 425-451-3959
    email: InformationRequest@saf.org[/FONT]​

     

    Indiana Jones

    Wolverine
    Mar 18, 2011
    19,480
    CCN
    what was the nature of his crime and future crimes?

    and "filed a complaint agains eric holder". Complaint number 5649461564615618941561879415618745715487486156489454461848914561486434867546145614864 ???
     

    Knuckle Dragger

    Active Member
    May 7, 2012
    213
    Threre is already a thread on this http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=160990&highlight=binderup



    Corruption of a minor, having consensual sex with a 17 year old girl. I always thought that was Statutory Rape, but I didn't go to law school.

    The decision goes into exhaustive detail concerning the statutory scheme on this. In short, there are several levels of what one might lump into the catch-all "statutory rape" category. Because the relationship was consensual and the other part was of consenting age, but still under 18, statutory rape statutes of PA don't apply. Basically, this was the most they could charge him with.
     

    6-Pack

    NRA Life Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 17, 2013
    5,647
    Carroll Co.

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    So it's not a restoration of rights, but a full declaration that 922(g)(1) as applied to Binderup is unconstitutional. Legal eagles, how big is this?

    Significant, but not momentous . It applied existing 3d Circuit law to unique facts of a non-violent misdemeanant. Very good precedent for that. Note that the government filed a notice of appeal and the plaintiff filed a notice of cross appeal, to the 3d Circuit, so it is not over, not by a long shot. Docket number 14-4549 in the court of appeals. The Gov. brief is due Feb. 19
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,930
    Messages
    7,259,487
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom