Go Back  British Expats > Living & Moving Abroad > USA > The Trailer Park
Reload this Page >

Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

View Poll Results: Does an unlawfully present person have the right to keep and bear arms?
Yes.
8
28.57%
No.
20
71.43%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Old Mar 4th 2018, 7:24 pm
  #46  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,577
anotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by morpeth
But are those restrictions applied to gun shows ?

It would seem to me having a license to own firearms combined with more extensive background checks might be an improvement though certainly would need other measures to somewhat reduce the problem- I lived in 3 states in America, the more restrictive the gun laws didn't correlate to less gun violence in fact as Chicago and Baltimore have shown quite the opposite.
NFA laws apply at gun shows, yes.
anotherlimey is offline  
Old Mar 8th 2018, 7:58 pm
  #47  
BE Enthusiast
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Location: The People's Republic of Evanstion, IL
Posts: 332
dave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond reputedave2702 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by plasticbag_uk
How many people have actually read the second amendment ? I have not but my very knowledgeable stepson informs me that it states that members of a militia have the right to bear arms, not the average citizen, however that average citizen may own a hunting rifle. No person who is not a member of a militia has the given right to own a semi automatic weapon.
The law has been widely miss conceived over many years.

Just saying what I have been informed and not looking for an argument
Your Stepson should take a look at the Supreme Court Verdict of "District of Columbia v. Heller"

That verdict largely broke the link between Militia and Individual's Right

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distri...mbia_v._Heller
dave2702 is offline  
Old Mar 15th 2018, 4:40 am
  #48  
BE Enthusiast
 
jeepster's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 429
jeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond reputejeepster has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by plasticbag_uk
How many people have actually read the second amendment ? I have not but my very knowledgeable stepson informs me that it states that members of a militia have the right to bear arms, not the average citizen, however that average citizen may own a hunting rifle. No person who is not a member of a militia has the given right to own a semi automatic weapon.
The law has been widely miss conceived over many years.

Just saying what I have been informed and not looking for an argument
If your stepson is going to parse every word of an Amendment than he needs to read the Federalist Papers and find out what the Founders intended.

They intended for an armed citizenry who would be able to resist a corrupted government. The Second Amendment is not about self defense or hunting.

Actually the more pressing question is it who or whom?
jeepster is offline  
Old Mar 16th 2018, 1:04 am
  #49  
Grumpy Know-it-all
Thread Starter
 
Steve_'s Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 8,928
Steve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by Guindalf
Not at all thought provoking. If someone is here unlawfully, they automatically have none of the rights of a citizen or even a legal alien!
As I pointed out in my initial post, they do. US vs Verdugo-Urquidez established that anyone with "substantial ties" to the US has full constitutional rights.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a few years ago that a person unlawfully present found with a .22 cartridge had Second Amendment rights, but that his possession was still unlawful as the prohibition was long-standing.

As a naturalized citizen who happened to pick up his CCL this morning, I don't see where this is even a question!


ETA: The 'Right to Bear Arms' is in th Constitution, a document that does not apply to anyone outside the law in this way!
You don't have to be a citizen to get a permit, in fact it's been ruled in multiple jurisdictions that such a requirement violates the 14th Amendment equal protection clause. e.g. Fotoudis v City and County of Honolulu

The question that is unresolved is whether a court will overturn the prohibition on people unlawfully present owning guns, they clearly have a 2nd Amendment right, that much is established.
Steve_ is offline  
Old Mar 16th 2018, 1:18 am
  #50  
Grumpy Know-it-all
Thread Starter
 
Steve_'s Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 8,928
Steve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by mrken30
Unfortunately just because something is legal at a federal level does not make it legal at the State level. As I stated, Washington, even a green card holder will spend time in jail for owning a gun. The feds only get involved crossing from State to State. I assume you did not cross at the Washington border.

Also because something is illegal, it does not prevent people breaking the law either willingly or through ignorance.
It doesn't apply to LPRs, only people in a non-immigrant classification. This law exists because of Canada. It's a very strange law, Canadians for example can go hunting in Washington or go to a target shooting competition, but you can't just show up at a shooting range and practice. Has to be a formal organized competition that you signed up to compete in.

Friend of mine who lives in White Rock shoots in the US and he was unaware of this restriction until CBP denied him entry one day. Competitions yes, practice no. Enforcement is very spotty but it is on the books.

I'm sure there was a logical reason for it at some point. As for the alien firearm permits that were mentioned (for people who are non-immigrants but resident in Washington), good luck trying to get one.

This is the official blurb which if you live in Washington or BC is worth having a quick read through: WA State Licensing (DOL) Official Site: How to get your license - Alien Firearms License

Read the "related laws" bit.
Steve_ is offline  
Old Mar 16th 2018, 1:18 am
  #51  
Account Closed
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
scrubbedexpat099 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by Steve_
As I pointed out in my initial post, they do. US vs Verdugo-Urquidez established that anyone with "substantial ties" to the US has full constitutional rights.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a few years ago that a person unlawfully present found with a .22 cartridge had Second Amendment rights, but that his possession was still unlawful as the prohibition was long-standing.



You don't have to be a citizen to get a permit, in fact it's been ruled in multiple jurisdictions that such a requirement violates the 14th Amendment equal protection clause. e.g. Fotoudis v City and County of Honolulu

The question that is unresolved is whether a court will overturn the prohibition on people unlawfully present owning guns, they clearly have a 2nd Amendment right, that much is established.
That could cause a bit of a dilemma to the usual suspects.
scrubbedexpat099 is offline  
Old Mar 16th 2018, 2:21 am
  #52  
BE Forum Addict
 
zzrmark's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Location: Lauren's Co. SC by way of Palmetto, Florida
Posts: 3,265
zzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by Steve_

The question that is unresolved is whether a court will overturn the prohibition on people unlawfully present owning guns, they clearly have a 2nd Amendment right, that much is established.
What about veterans with a dishonourable discharge, do they not have 2nd Amendment rights? Or those who have spent more than a year in jail, heck, some of them go on to lead very productive lives but can't even vote.
zzrmark is offline  
Old Mar 19th 2018, 11:09 pm
  #53  
Grumpy Know-it-all
Thread Starter
 
Steve_'s Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 8,928
Steve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

A dishonourable discharge is considered the equivalent of a felony, so that's a criminal prohibition.

A person unlawfully present hasn't broken any criminal laws necessarily, may only be civil.

This is why it's an interesting question. Clearly they have substantial ties, they haven't committed any criminal acts - so is the prohibition on their owning firearms constitutional? 7th circuit fudged it, I think sooner or later a court is going to rule that it's unconstitutional to ban them from owning firearms and then you're going to see total weirdness ensue because right-wingers tend to be for the RKBA but against illegal immigration. And left-wingers tend to be against guns but for an amnesty.

This issue ties them together.
Steve_ is offline  
Old Mar 20th 2018, 10:43 pm
  #54  
BE Forum Addict
 
zzrmark's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Location: Lauren's Co. SC by way of Palmetto, Florida
Posts: 3,265
zzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by Steve_
A dishonourable discharge is considered the equivalent of a felony, so that's a criminal prohibition.

A person unlawfully present hasn't broken any criminal laws necessarily, may only be civil.

This is why it's an interesting question. Clearly they have substantial ties, they haven't committed any criminal acts - so is the prohibition on their owning firearms constitutional? 7th circuit fudged it, I think sooner or later a court is going to rule that it's unconstitutional to ban them from owning firearms and then you're going to see total weirdness ensue because right-wingers tend to be for the RKBA but against illegal immigration. And left-wingers tend to be against guns but for an amnesty.

This issue ties them together.
With the drive from this, and the last, administration to remove illegals it could well be a moot point if the courts don't get a move on, 11.1 million and falling...
zzrmark is offline  
Old Mar 21st 2018, 12:21 am
  #55  
Grumpy Know-it-all
Thread Starter
 
Steve_'s Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 8,928
Steve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond reputeSteve_ has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

ICE is only aware of about 3 million people who are out-of-status so I think it will be a very cold day in Hell before the number drops to a de minimus level.
Steve_ is offline  
Old Mar 21st 2018, 11:18 am
  #56  
BE Forum Addict
 
zzrmark's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Location: Lauren's Co. SC by way of Palmetto, Florida
Posts: 3,265
zzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Do people unlawfully present have a right to keep and bear arms?

Originally Posted by Steve_
ICE is only aware of about 3 million people who are out-of-status so I think it will be a very cold day in Hell before the number drops to a de minimus level.
I can't t find ICE figures, mine came from Pew research backed up to some degree by DHS ( whose latest report, 2014, put the number at 11.3-11.8 million).
zzrmark is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.