Missouri Supreme Court case involves the 2nd Am Strict Scrutiny & Felon in possession

[usmarine0352_2005]

This is an interesting case. I wonder if it will lead to SCOTUS. I see no reason why the defendent wouldn't want it to go there if he loses in court.




Could this case decide what level of scrutiny is applied to the 2nd Amendment if it gets to SCOTUS?





http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Missouri-high-court-to-hear-felon-gun-rights-case-285113441.html

Missouri high court to hear felon gun-rights case



by Associated Press

KMOV.com

Posted on December 8, 2014 at 12:55 PM


JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) -- Just months after Missouri voters approved stronger constitutional gun rights, the new amendment is being put to the test by a convicted drug dealer who is citing it as a reason why his former felony shouldn't disqualify him from carrying a gun.

Schaefer, a Republican from Columbia who is running for attorney general, urged the court in a written brief to uphold the prohibition on felons possessing firearms. He argued that felons aren't truly "citizens" and thus shouldn't receive gun-rights protections.

Based on the constitution's new "strict scrutiny" requirement, "the state does not have a compelling government interest in banning all convicted felons under all circumstances from possessing firearms for life," Merritt's attorney, Assistant Public Defender Matthew Huckeby, wrote in a Supreme Court brief.

 

[stchman]

I've often heard that when someone serves their prison sentence, they have "paid their debt to society".

If this is indeed the case then when a person has served their time, their rights should be restored.

If someone cannot be trusted, then why release that person from prison?

IMO, a person should have his/her record cleaned if they are a law abiding citizen for 10 years after the crime. If a person is going to become a career criminal, they are not going to wait 10 years between crimes.

Also, since when has a law stopped a criminal from possessing a firearm?

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

I agree. Once you serve your sentence you are once again a citizen and should have all the rights of one such as voting.



I do think that a felon convicted of a violent crime should not be able to possess a gun. Do I think someone who got made a bad decision at 18 or 19 years old and broke into a car and stole an item and became a felon should not be able to have a gun 10 years after their sentence is served? No.

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

No one else knows about this, if it'll go to SCOTUS?

 

[AlexanderA]

I've often heard that when someone serves their prison sentence, they have "paid their debt to society".

The penalty for a crime includes other things besides prison time, such as the forfeiture of civil rights. These collateral penalties may not be overtly stated in the sentence, but they are nonetheless real, and potential criminals should be aware of them. So the "debt to society" does not end once the prison sentence is served. The remedy is to apply for a formal restoration of rights. Therefore, a gun ban is not necessarily for life if the person is truly rehabilitated and can prove it to a court or executive authority.

 

[Kleanbore]

No one else knows about this, if it'll go to SCOTUS?

How could anyone predict that?

 

[Sol]

Paid his debt to society?

The article said he was busted in 1986 for drugs, which made him a felon in the first place.

Then was busted with drugs and guns in 2013.

I'm guessing this won't make it to SCOTUS due to the fact he was in possesion of both drugs and guns during his arrest.

 

[Maggie]

If my memory is correct there is the ability to try and get your 2nd amendment rights restored on the federal level but, congress has refused to fund the program.

 

[Hypnogator]

Could this case decide what level of scrutiny is applied to the 2nd Amendment if it gets to SCOTUS?

No. SCOTUS will decide what level of scrutiny it will get IF the case ever gets there.