General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMan convicted of domestic violence can't possess a gun: Supremes
When it comes to domestic violence, even pushing or grabbing can be sufficient to bar federal gun possession, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded in a unanimous ruling issued Wednesday morning.
The ruling could have significant implications in interpreting which state domestic violence laws bar gun possession. For women in particular, domestic violence is one of the biggest risks associated with gun ownership. A Violence Policy Center review of 2011 FBI crime data found that 94 percent of female homicide victims were murdered by a male they knew, and 61 percent of those killers were a spouse or intimate acquaintance. Female intimate partners were more likely to be killed by a gun than any other weapon.
Because of this relationship between gun ownership and intimate violence, federal law bars those convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence offense from possessing a gun. But state crimes dubbed domestic violence come with different definitions in different states. And James Alvin Castleman seized on these differences to convince a federal court that he was not guilty of illegal gun possession because his guilty plea for a Tennessee domestic violence offense did not qualify under federal law.
The Supreme Court disagreed with Castleman Wednesday, holding that the crime of intentionally or knowingly causing bodily injury to the mother of his child was a crime that involved physical force, and that Castleman was therefore barred from possessing a gun.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/03/26/3419173/man-convicted-of-domestic-violence-cant-possess-a-gun-supreme-court-rules/#
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)pipoman
(16,038 posts)common sense gun laws do actually exist. ..
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)The ruling stymied what was something of a legal "end around" the law. Good.