bushmaster1313
Member
Specifically, a case where the issue was removal of a constitutional right by a misdemeanor and not the ex post facto issue.
I don't know why some people choose to characterize that case as something that it is not.
WTH? There is nothing at all complicated about reading the actual facts in the case, and seeing that it is NOT a challenge of 18USC922(g)(9). I'm not a lawyer and I was able to find the facts, despite the propaganda posted that tried to claim the case is something it is not.Because our laws are INCREDIBLY COMPLICATED and people get confused easily...
That is simply not true. There is nothing in the UCMJ that requires a Dishonorable Discharge simply because someone got a conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence (MCDV). In fact it would be unlikely that the military would be able to send someone out on a Dishonorable Discharge over that. However, it is true the person would need to be discharged, but not a Dishonorable Discharge, from the military because there is no exception for possessing firearms for government duty for those convicted of a MCDV.There other side of DV conviction is that if your military it will get you a Dishonarable Discharcharge which alone will get you a life time ban.
Gee. I'm so sorry your fragile ego was hurt, but your "2c" was blatant BS. If you don't want to get called out for posting false info then get your facts straight BEFORE posting. What you posted about is a matter of objective fact, not subjective opinion, and therefore pointing out that it's untrue is not hindering open discussion.Gee. Thanks for correcting me. Open discusion without fear of reprimand is the only way to spread the actual facts. I understand you may be frustrated by our lack of actual knowledge but all I ways trying to do was put in my 2c.
Do you mean "retroactive," implying that it's ex post facto law? Then no it's not. The prohibition on possessing firearms and ammunition applies to actions that occur AFTER the law was passed. Meaning a person convicted of a MCDV can only be punished for possessing a firearm or ammunition after the law went into affect, not for possession of firearms and ammunition before the law went into affect.Correct me if I am wrong but didn't they make Lautenberg retrospective. Surely that makes it an unjust law in itself.
Nothing I said was incorrect at all. I dealt with this in the military as an active duty and reserve officer, including as a Special Agent with a military criminal investigative organization (MCIO). I've also dealt with it a law enforcement officer after leaving the military.you guys are both right and wrong at the same time . lautenburger act is from a nj senator names lautenburger . the military looks at it as you have been lautenburgered and does discharge anyone prohibited from posesion of a firearm but it is not a dishonerable. The term is General Discharge for administrative reasons. And as such would not preclude you from the remedys of lautenburger and if corrected you could have your rights restored
and reinlist if you so wished aftewards. as for the retroactive comment it is well known if you were found guilty of Domestic Violence before the act went into effect you were still prohibited even tho lautenburger did not exist at the time of conviction. There were literaly thousands of police officers that had been in fights with there spouses that paid the fine and pled guilty to DV that were terminated because of this law. Remedys for lautenburger are to the best of my knowledge
TOTAL exspoungement of your record <in ohio they dont do this>
And a court order of Restoration of rights <in ohio a drug dealer can get this>
a Pardon from the Govenor of the state you live in.
restoration of rights from the attorny general of the state you live in <fat chance there.
ant of course dont get busted for DV in the first place .
As you can tell i have done alot of research on this subject it is a bad law intended fo be a good law but has been corrupted since it started
Good grief, you too choose not to learn the facts?What Nulook45 said; a Dishonorable Discharge requires a court-martial conviction. This is the equivalent (for any offense that can warrant a court-martial) of a civilian felony.