MN Supreme Court - I don't think this is right.

Do you think this is right?

  • Yes

    Votes: 57 79.2%

  • No

    Votes: 15 20.8%
  • Total voters
    72
Status
Not open for further replies.
U

usmarine0352_2005

member
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
2,796
.
Juvenile convictions can void adult gun rights

By Steve Karnowski
Associated Press
Updated: 06/02/2009 04:18:34 PM CDT

The Minnesota Court of Appeals says a man convicted of a violent crime when he was a juvenile doesn't have a Second Amendment right to possess a firearm.

Ryan Turnbull was convicted in Swift County in 2007 after a conservation officer saw him carrying a gun during hunting season in 2006. He had been found delinquent in juvenile court in 2004 of felony drive-by shooting and other charges.

Turnbull argued to the Court of Appeals his right to have a gun is protected by a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision last June that affirmed the right to have guns for self-defense in the home.

But the appeals court says that ruling was "very limited" in scope.

Turnbull's attorney says he expects to appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
Click to expand...



I think crimes you commit as a juvenile shouldn't strike against you as an adult.

Obviously extreme cases like premeditated murder or something like that are different.


I think this leads to a slippery slope. What do you think?

.
 
considering he was involved in a drive by shooting,I say he absolutely has no business with a gun, for self defense or otherwise.
 
Yep, it's right. Now, if we lived under a real justice system, and he had been freed after the 25 years in prison he deserved to serve for attempted murder among other things, then I'd maybe have a different opinion.
 
He was convicted of a drive-by shooting. I think the court was right in this case.

Now, a non-violent crime as a juvenile would be a different matter in my opinion and restoration of gun rights could make sense, depending on the circumstances.
 
This is one of these extreme cases.

But I'm talking in general.
Click to expand...
I don't think the court likes to rule in "general" terms. Leads to confusion, and the law doesn't like confusion of terms.
I think crimes you commit as a juvenile shouldn't strike against you as an adult.
Click to expand...
So, you should get a free pass until you are 18? My dad didn't subscribe to that notion, and I'm glad of it.
 
While I firmly believe this individual should NOT be afforded his right to keep and bear arms, I'm not certain, based on prior case law, that an act committed and prosecuted as a juvenile necessarily vacates one's Constitutional rights.

I have questions on whether he can now vote, or exercise other rights, or if those have been vacated as well.
 
Drive-by shootings don't qualify as a lawful use of a weapon. No, barring him from firearm ownership is legitimate.
 
well, the man was convicted of participating in a drive-by shooting.


i feel like if the legal system had a single ounce of applied logic, and moral integrity, the only question you could possibly ask on the subject of whether or not this idiot should be allowed to have a gun would read something like this:

"should prison inmates be allowed to purchase firearms?"

my opinion is this.

if you do a drive by and your 14, you go to big boy jail, along with your parental unit.
 
Ryan Turnbull was convicted in Swift County in 2007 after a conservation officer saw him carrying a gun during hunting season in 2006. He had been found delinquent in juvenile court in 2004 of felony drive-by shooting and other charges.
Click to expand...

sounds to me like he wasn't much older when he was found with a gun. in this case especially he shouldn't be allowed a firearm.
 
for serious crimes like murder and attempted murder, the concept of treating someone less than 18 with kid gloves is just moronic.

The guy should be behind bars.


Also, your juvy record doesn't disappear when you hit 18. It's just that whatever you do prior to 18 is sheilded from public record.

If a law states 'If you have had 2 or more DWIs you need to carry extra auto insurance' and your two DWI convictions were at ages 16 and 17...you still are covered by that law.

Sealed is different than expunged
 
Yes, but he has proven he hardly has the best judgement, his right was removed by due process, and prohibiting him from buying a firearm (ineffectively) is considered part of the punishment.

That's something people should consider--if you get caught doing these kinds of things, how are you supposed to protect yourself from the other thugs? I'm all for the violent convictions putting that choice on someone.

That said, people can change, and I'm also for giving felons a chance to get their records cleared and get their rights back after a time, easier than it is to now.
 
Sorry, but I tend to agree with the court. If someone committed a drive-by two years ago, I don't want to run across that person carrying a gun afield today. I don't think a fistfight after school should disqualify someone from owning a gun...but a drive-by? Anyone stupid enough to take part in such a thing, juvenile OR adult, should have their gun rights stripped completely. Any kind of second offense involving a firearm justifies a life sentence in my book. I don't want MY rights restricted because some court decided to give someone a third chance, and they finally managed to kill a few people with their stupidity and impulsiveness. I believe we all have a right to gun ownership...right until its proven we cannot handle that responsibility, regardless of age.
 
Last edited:
I agree with the court

Drive-by shootings should be enough to take away his gun rights forever! A 10 year-old should know how serious a drive-by shooting is, let alone a teen of whatever age.
 
violent felony, at any age should stop you from owning a gun.

The only reason this guy was out of jail was do to his age. IMO if your old enough to commit a violent felony, your old enough to be tried and treated as a adult.
 
He was convicted of a drive by in 04, and again for possessing a firearm only three years later?
I have to agree with them.
 
One of the Washington snipers was just a teenager too. I wouldn't want him to ever own a gun again whether he paid his debt to society or not.
As much as I don't like anyone being denied the right to own a gun there are those that have demonstrated they can't stay on the right side of the law.
 
The Minnesota Court of Appeals says a man convicted of a violent crime when he was a juvenile doesn't have a Second Amendment right to possess a firearm.

Ryan Turnbull was convicted in Swift County in 2007 after a conservation officer saw him carrying a gun during hunting season in 2006. He had been found delinquent in juvenile court in 2004 of felony drive-by shooting and other charges.
Click to expand...


The guy did a felony drive-by shooting as a punk. He should never, ever be allowed to own a gun.
 
"This guy has already paid his debt to society."

You do not know that. He could be on parole or probation or still owe court costs and fines, etc. For all we know he still owes for some or all of the damage he did during the drive by.

Serving your time in jail or prison isn't the same thing as fully paying your debt.

John
 
It was a drive by, and he was carrying 3 years after the fact. It is definitely right for this guy to not carry. Maybe in the future sometime, but not now.

That being said, we definitely do not know all the details that would help us decide.

I guess it is possible he was shooting at crows from a car or something stupid like that. We just don't know, but it sounds like right now that he is not the nicest of guys, and is not the kind of guy I want carrying near me.
 
"Ryan Turnbull was convicted in Swift County in 2007 after a conservation officer saw him carrying a gun during hunting season in 2006."

So how did this kid get a hunting license??? Or was he hunting illegally too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Gun Rights Victory: Supreme Court Reverses Appeals Court Acceptance Of Masachusetts Gun Restrictions
Replies
2
Views
367
Aim1
A
U
  • Locked
2nd Amendment Case goes to US Supreme Court
Replies
1
Views
485
Car Knocker
C
LiveLife
  • Locked
Laura Ingraham predicts 2A Sanctuary Movement destined for the US Supreme Court
2
Replies
48
Views
2K
fireside44
F
P
  • Locked
Federal Judge Restores Non-Violent Offender’s Gun Rights Following Landmark Case
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
theotherwaldo
theotherwaldo
fearless leader
  • Locked
More on the Supreme Court decision
Replies
4
Views
656
gbran
G
Back
Top