SAF Joins Amicus to Supreme Court Case

Not a lawyer but I think Mr Torres is going to lose,there are loads of current crimes that weren't crimes 240+ years ago.
Now had he tried to get his record expunged he might have had better chance.
 
Not a lawyer but I think Mr Torres is going to lose,there are loads of current crimes that weren't crimes 240+ years ago.
Now had he tried to get his record expunged he might have had better chance.

Well, I think the point of this particular article is the tack that the SAF is taking, right ?

In their amicus argument, SAF and its partners note, “There is no tradition of disarming peaceable citizens. Nor is there any tradition of limiting the Second Amendment to ‘virtuous’ citizens. Historically, nonviolent criminals who demonstrated no violent propensity were not prohibited from keeping arms. Indeed, some laws expressly allowed them to keep arms.
 
What SAF ia saying is good, but if " arguing that the crimes for which he was convicted were not felonies at the time of the Founding Fathers. " is actually in the filing this is a seriously bad case for SCOTUS to take up. A loss would further clarify that they can take rights and a win could establish an "at the time of our founding fathers" view of the 2nd, which would play well with the anti's stand that the founders never intended the people to have the kind of arms we have today, because those also didn't exist back them.
 
Back
Top Bottom