Watch Live: Second House Hearing on IRS Scandal

Watch: Rioters in London Clash With Police Over ‘Cleaver’ Terror Attack

Business

Vietnam Vet Barred From Owning a Gun Because of a Teenage Misdemeanor 45 Years Ago

Feb. 26, 2013 8:52am

This article is part of a series on Guns in America that explores the use of firearms in our country and the debate over gun control. This is an editorially independent series sponsored by Tactical Firearms Training Secrets.

–

Jefferson Wayne Schrader Barred From Owning Or Selling a Gun Because of a Fight He Got Into in 68

Jeff Schrader. (Schrader family).

A 19-year-old sailor stationed in Annapolis, Md., in 1968 was arrested for getting into a fight with an alleged member of a street gang.

Now, more than four decades later, the 64-year-old U.S. Navy veteran has been stripped of his right to own a gun.

Jefferson Wayne Schrader of Cleveland, Ga., has been fighting a losing battle in the courts since 2008 to get his name off the fed’s firearm ban list. In fact, just last month, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., upheld a lower-court ruling barring him from owning a firearm.

“It’s a depressing thing. A depressing thing,” he told TheBlaze in a phone interview, “to have the government treat you like that. It’s not, well, it’s not a good thing.”

The ban list is meant to prevent people of questionable standing, including illegal aliens, drug addicts, people dishonorably discharged from the U.S. military, and fugitives, from buying or selling guns.

And although Schrader — a certified expert with a handgun — served in Vietnam from Jan. 1, 1968, until being honorably discharged in September 1970, the U.S. government believes he is unfit to own a gun because of his teenage misdemeanor.

“Due to a conviction some forty years ago for common-law misdemeanor assault and battery for which he served no jail time, plaintiff Jefferson Wayne Schrader, now a sixty-four-year-old veteran, is, by virtue of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), barred for life from ever possessing a firearm,” U.S. Circuit Judge David Tatel wrote in the court’s January opinion.

“In rejecting plaintiffs’ constitutional claim, the district court relied on the Supreme Court’s observation in District of Columbia v. Heller … that ‘the right  secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited,’ as  well as the Court’s inclusion of ‘longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons’ within a list of  ‘presumptively lawful regulatory measures,’” Judge Tatel added.

In its ruling against Schrader, the fed appeals court cited the Gun Control Act of 1968 signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson, which makes it more difficult for questionable characters to engage in interstate commerce involving firearms.

But we’ll come back to that later.

The other gun law that led to Schrader’s odd set of circumstances is the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993. This bill laid the groundwork for the FBI’s 1998 National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

So when Schrader tried to buy a handgun in 2008, the NICS flagged his 45-year-old misdemeanor – which only now qualifies in Maryland for a sentence of two or more years in prison – and he was disqualified from making the purchasing.

Jefferson Wayne Schrader Barred From Owning Or Selling a Gun Because of a Fight He Got Into in 68

Jeff Schrader. (Courtesy Schrader family).

But here’s the weird thing: Schrader has been selling and trading guns for a long time.

“I’ve bought and sold probably, oh, a dozen … maybe 15 guns over a 42 year time period” he said. “I never had a problem with it. I was just surprised it happened at all. The ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] agent said I wasn’t allowed to have any guns.”

“But he said I could keep my black powder rifle. Thank you very much,” he added sarcastically.

TROUBLE

As mentioned in the above, it all started in 2008 when an NICS check flagged Schrader’s name for his 1968 misdemeanor.

The FBI blocked Schrader’s wife, Harriet, from buying him a shotgun for his birthday and then blocked him on two different occasions from buying a handgun.

But let’s back up for a second and revisit his 1968 misdemeanor.

As Schrader told TheBlaze, one evening in Annapolis he and his Navy buddies were attacked by a street gang while walking back to base. A few weeks later, Schrader saw one of his attackers hanging out on a street corner.

“I told the guy driving to stop and let me out,” Schrader said, “and I walked over to him and was going to tell him, ‘You need to come with me, we’re going to talk you over to the police station.’ And he said, ‘Oh, you want some more?’ and stood up.”

As official court documents show, “a dispute broke out between the two, in the course of which Schrader punched his assailant.”

Unfortunately for Schrader, he didn’t see the two police officers “sitting at the red light.”

The sailor was arrested and convicted of common-law assault and battery. He was told he could pay a $109 fine, which included court costs, or spend thirty days in the hole.

He chose the former.

Jefferson Wayne Schrader Barred From Owning Or Selling a Gun Because of a Fight He Got Into in 68

Taken recently: Jeff Schrader. (Courtesy Schrader family).

After paying the fine, Schrader went on to serve a 21-month tour of duty in Vietnam and was honorably discharged upon his return.

From that time forward, according to the complaint, he had no scrapes with the law (except for one traffic violation).

REASON FOR THE BAN

After going more than five decades without any serious trouble with the law, the 2008 background check came as a shock to Schrader.

“I don’t know why they’re coming after me,” Schrader said. “All I did was punch someone in the nose.”

So what’s the court’s reasoning?

The Gun Control Act (remember we said we’d come back to this?) specifically includes a ban on anyone convicted of a crime “punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.”

Okay, but Schrader never had to serve a prison sentence.

This is where it gets interesting. At the time of his arrest, the state of Maryland did not set any maximum sentence for common-law assault and battery convictions.

However, the DOJ reasons that because Maryland would have imprisoned Schrader for more than a year if it had the laws it has today, well, that’s good enough to keep him on the banned list.

TODAY

Two years after having his name flagged for the Annapolis fight, Schrader sued to challenge the ban and he has been fighting it ever since. Unfortunately, things haven’t gone his way.

“All I can do now is wait and see what my attorney can do,” Schrader told TheBlaze.

His lawyer, Alan Gura, a prominent civil rights attorney, says there are still a few options left.

Jefferson Wayne Schrader Barred From Owning Or Selling a Gun Because of a Fight He Got Into in 68

Alan Gura. (flickr).

“Today is our deadline for filing a petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc in the Schrader case,” Gura told TheBlaze in an email on Monday.

“Some misdemeanors are very serious and Congress can address those specifically,” he added later in a phone interview, “but to broadly disarm anyone who has ever been involved in even a minor scuffle, 45 years later, seems to be excessive.”

“We hope that the court rehears the case. We think it’s worthy of that. It raises the types of questions that courts often find they need to rehear. If the court does not decide to reconsider the case then, of course, we will consider the next step, which will be a petition to the Supreme Court.”

A spokeswoman with the U.S. Department of Justice did not immediately respond to TheBlaze’s request for comment.

Here’s the full case: Schrader v. Holder, 11-cv-5352, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia:

–

Here are the other pieces in our ongoing Guns in America series (running every Tuesday) sponsored by Tactical Firearms Training Secrets:

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Schrader family. This post has been updated to more accurately reflect the laws regarding imprisonment and misdemeanors.

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Comments (344)

1 2 3 … 8
  • GrayPanther
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:01am

    First, move out of Maryland. I understand only four Republicans live there. Move to Arizona where we don’t register guns and be at peace.

    Report this comment

    GrayPanther  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:50am

      Two words;

      Ritalin…… Prozac…..

      Report this comment

      The-Monk  
    • old white guy
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:52am

      just go get a gun somewhere else and do not tell anyone. he still has the same second amendment right as everyone else.

      Report this comment

      old white guy  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:58am

      Isn’t it just so convenient that SCOTUS uses Heller when it backs up restrictions, but when people bring up “But Heller also clearly demonstrates that owning machine guns is actually the intent of the 2nd Amendment” they fall silent.

      I second the motion for him to move, if he can afford it. Not that he should have to, but reality being what it is, what choice does he have? Or buy a gun in a free state that doesn’t force “registration” and go from there.

      Report this comment

      GhostOfJefferson  
    • civilwarcometh
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:24am

      http://www.project.nsearch.com/profiles/blogs/fema-ordered-102-000-boxcars-with-shackles

      Report this comment

      civilwarcometh  
    • Tom21773
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:28am

      I’m trying as fast as I can, but this article isn’t about a Maryland problem. It goes all the way to the top of corruption at the DOJ. If the feds can’t get the guns away from the criminals and the illegals (subset of criminals), then they have no constitutional right to keep them away from honest citizens. They have no legal right to discriminate and are therefore traitors. But, we knew that.

      Report this comment

      Tom21773  
    • repairsea
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:31am

      Good answer. I agree.

      Report this comment

      repairsea  
    • coolillow
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:34am

      He was stationed in Maryland (Annapolis Naval Station) before being deployed to Vietnam. He did not live there and does NOT live there no. – Signed Jefferson’s wife.

      Report this comment

      coolillow  
    • JayCee
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:53am

      @GRAYPANTHER,

      But he could not walk into a gun store in AZ or anywhere and purchase a firearm.
      That is so wrong!

      Report this comment

      JayCee  
    • banjarmon
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 12:02pm

      THE LINES BELOW SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS IDIOTIC ROUND OF LEGISLATION TO

      A HALT ON DAY 2. REALLY””” THINK ABOUT THESE WORDS, SEE WHERE YOU LAND.

      With all this ‘gun control” I haven’t heard one politician say
      Say how they plan to take guns away from criminals, just law abiding
      Citizens!!

      Report this comment

      banjarmon  
    • SavvyCowboy
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 12:33pm

      Yes – MOVE outa Maryland (away frm the iron curtain) and out here to God’s Country where every NORMAL man owns at least ONE gun – most of us own dozens and all are NOT registered because they’ve been IN THE FAMILY for generations. Kiss THAT Ovomit!!

      Report this comment

      SavvyCowboy  
    • SovereignSoul
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:06pm

      Exactly how is a man who lives in Georgia supposed to move out of Maryland?

      Report this comment

      SovereignSoul  
    • Maji
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:14pm

      To bad “smoking dope an doing coke” can’t keep you from being president.
      Ohh… and hanging out with known communist..and..and..known terrorist(ayers)!!

      Yeah, Run for Prez
      (Warning may not work,
      Conditions dictate that you can cry “racism” as needed and
      your wife has enough azz for two people)

      Report this comment

      Maji  
    • Zipit
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:33pm

      Exactly MAJI! And after you admit to, “smokin dope and snorting blow”, your able to appoint a guy as Secretary of State, who shot himself in the foot, “in Vietnam”, and is able to walk into a store and ask; “can I get me a huntin license here?”. This guy is gettin, “swift booted”!!!!!

      Report this comment

      Zipit  
    • Edroch
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 2:00pm

      Isn’t that double jepardy? He paid his fine already and they are still punishing him.

      Report this comment

      Edroch  
    • Cemoto78
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 2:29pm

      I feel so fortunate to live in Arizona where guns are a way of life and the citizens understand it. Just as a precaution, I just got done sending all of my representatives, both federal and state, reminding them of the “shall not be infringed” section of the 2nd amendment. I was pleasantly surprised to receive numerous replies from them telling me they are supporters of the 2nd amendment and no changes will be forthcoming. Still waiting to hear from his majesty McLame though, he believes his constituents are all in Washington D.C.

      Report this comment

      Cemoto78  
    • bill d
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 2:38pm

      Disarming combat vets?
      http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2013/02/25/vets-are-the-last-line-of-defense-against-tyranny/

      Don’t know of any vets that have received any such letter and I have tried to research the statement -
      “if the veteran possesses a , receives, attempts to purchase, purchases and transports a firearm they may be fined and/or imprisoned.”

      Cannot find that in the section quoted and it may be taken out of context?
      If treated for PTSD , depression, etc., I believe those questions are asked when purchasing/registering a firearm and would prohibit the transaction.
      We know Janet already referred to returning combat vets as potential terrorists.
      Will this apply to ALL combat vets from any war or national emergency UN police action, etc.?
      How about law enforcement – especially any involved in violet situations? Especially shooting incidents?

      Report this comment

      bill d  
    • HAWKWIND
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 2:48pm

      …Hate to say it, but in this case, I’d say F the law and do what you want.

      Report this comment

      HAWKWIND  
    • HAWKWIND
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 2:51pm

      …Hate to say it, but in this case, I’d say to hell with the law and do what you want.

      Report this comment

      HAWKWIND  
    • USN Patriot
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 3:00pm

      Are not retroactive laws unconstitutional? If so arent retroactivity application of new laws illegal?

      Report this comment

      USN Patriot  
    • desertspeaks
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 3:07pm

      the stupidity of government never ceases to amaze!

      Report this comment

      desertspeaks  
    • DenverKitty
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 3:27pm

      Amen.

      Report this comment

      DenverKitty  
    • James
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 3:41pm

      Yes, get out of there and get to a Gun friendly State! But you might check with an Attorney or through the NRA so as to not break any more stupid Laws! Hope you are a NRA Member.

      Report this comment

      James  
    • Southerner01
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 3:48pm

      If he lives in GA, he just needs to buy a gun from a private owner. Check the classified ads or the online gun sales sites. Georgia does not require gun registration.

      Report this comment

      Southerner01  
    • Wolf
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 3:52pm

      Sorry, Gray- even a move to AZ won’t prevent a flag on a purchase/NCIS background check. Soon as he fills out the form, the dealer calls for a check, and if he sails through it, he can buy a weapon. If he’s flagged for any reason, even in AZ, he won’t get the gun if the seller is a dealer. Unless the dealer doesn’t care about maintaining his ATF license to sell.
      The NCIS is a feederal form, lying on it can land you in jail. Not filling it out completely can land you in jail. Even using the US Postal Service abbreviation for your state of residence is ‘incorrect filing’and can negate the form, or land you in jail. Got to watch those P’s and Q’s with the feds- they’re out to get you no matter how honest you are.

      Report this comment

      Wolf  
    • zman173rd
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 4:16pm

      Okay folks, Here’s my story. I was arrested when I was 15 for joyriding. I wasn’t driving, just one of the passengers. I enlisted on my birthday at 17 and spent 5 years in the Army. Was a combat vet with the 173rd in VietNam for two tours. That crime as a JUVENILE has followed me the same way as this guys has for 48 years. I’m trying to get the courts to expunge my records. They put me on “ignore”, drop, or lose my case and then I have to reapply. I’ll update you as the status changes. Funny (sad) that they give you weapons to kill or be killed and then you come home and can’t own or carry a a weapon that fires leatal ammunition to protect yourself. Instead you “protect” with no more than a golf club, hammer, bear spray or bear fists. Okay I haven’t lost a fist fight in 45 years but you don’t bring knuckles to a gunfight.

      Report this comment

      zman173rd  
    • boone1
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 4:18pm

      I’VE been thinking about moving to Arizona i live in Florida now and it’s like living in N.Y and Florida is realing getting to suck if i could sell my house i would be out of here like my a$$ was on fire.

      Report this comment

      boone1  
    • HAWKWIND
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 4:27pm

      @ WOLF – They seem to making it more and more difficult to be an upstanding citizen, aren’t they?
      I agree with SOUTHERN01 – buy privately. Avoid the red tape. You’re better off flying under the radar… Just my 2 cents.

      Report this comment

      HAWKWIND  
    • auhunter
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 4:44pm

      No we don’t register guns, but every hand gun purchase by federal law requires a background check, supposedly to keep criminals from buying them. Problem with that thinking is that criminals don’t buy from registered dealers, they buy out of the back of someones car. Another thing is not only have his rights to purchase been revoked, his rights of ownership under the 2nd Amendment have been revoked, based on a liberal decision of the courts. Hopefully with the Foundation behind him, he will eventually win out. I sincerely hope so as it will set a precedent that will last for ever.

      Report this comment

      auhunter  
    • skippy6
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 4:52pm

      If they can’t ban them they will just make it illegal for everyone… Soon if you have any traffic violations you will be banned from ownership…

      After going more than five decades without any serious trouble with the law, the 2008 background check came as a shock to Schrader.

      I think he has proven himself more than worthy of owning a gun…I think I would vote with my feet at this point….

      Report this comment

      skippy6  
    • RIDEMODELS
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 4:57pm

      Blah Blah Blah Blah…..Legal this and legal that…..But there was one man that could not take his gun into Colorado because he could not get a CCP…..So what is it….Is it a Federal deal or is it a state deal…..If he moves then can he get a gun somewhere else??……Florida has plenty of well armed men and women and more women than men are carrying……So just move and it will become a states issue and not a Federal according to the judges on the Colorado CCP deal. Just like the Constitution quotes, its a state issue and not a Federal.

      I am awaiting eagerly for the over paid 150k a year Pencil Pushers to lose their jobs in Washington….Yay……Over paid under educated jack holes…!!…And Mr. Marsh-mellow Balls is out telling the military men that are barely making 30k a year that their job is in jeopardy…….Come on Marsh-mellow Balls……Quit campaigning and be a man before you piss off a country of Military Men.

      Maybe we can give Marsh-mellow Balls a year off too…!!

      Report this comment

      RIDEMODELS  
    • dirigo
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 5:29pm

      I’m not surprised at all. Friends of ours who own an archery shop were sent notice from Travelers Ins. that they would not carry a policy for them any longer because they sell archery items that people could “potentially” hurt themselves with!

      Report this comment

      dirigo  
    • yougottabekidding
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 5:54pm

      I have an idea
      Go to work for Berretta, and go with them when they leave.

      Report this comment

      yougottabekidding  
    • Protoham
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 7:02pm

      I live in MD too, get out and find a better place to live. I am about to do that and take my company with me. Maybe Texas, maybe VA, not sure yet.

      Report this comment

      Protoham  
    • burdenofknowing
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 7:50pm

      H.R. 1529, the Second Chance for Ex-Offenders Act of 2009

      On March 6, Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) introduced HR 1529, the Second Chance for Ex-Offenders Act of 2009, legislation that would permit expungement of records of certain nonviolent criminal offenses. A person would be eligible to apply for expungement only if they fulfill requirements detailed in the legislation, including:
      Never being convicted of a violent offense (including an offense under state law that would be a violent offense if it were federal);
      Never being convicted of a nonviolent offense other than the one for which expungement is sought;
      Fulfilling all requirements of the sentence, including completion of any term of imprisonment or period of probation, meeting all conditions of a supervised release, and paying all fines;
      Remaining free from dependency on or abuse of alcohol or a controlled substance a minimum of one year;
      Obtaining a high school diploma or completion of a high school equivalency program;
      Completing at least one year of community service.

      Until this gets passed, us non-violent federaly convicted felons are f #### d

      Report this comment

      burdenofknowing  
    • dublinthewagons
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 7:58pm

      When the president can arm Mexican drug lords, libya, Egyptian, and sworn enamies of the country machine guns and illegal weapons, be damn£d if e or scotus has the right to determine the intent of a law abiding citizen, and deny them the right of self protection under the second amendment.
      Buy one and defend yourself against ANYONE that tries to take it. PERIOD

      Report this comment

      dublinthewagons  
    • jarnkm
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 8:08pm

      GP, IT GAVE ME AN OPENING TO REPLY BUT NOT TO COMMENT ON THE ARTICLE, THIS TIME!
      However, I would definitely like to move to Arizona… sorta like the way “Sheriff Joe” handles things out there!! Also his expertness to accurately uncover the truths behind our well ‘controlled’ Red President! As far as this article, the above 21 pages from the Jan., 2013 Case shows that the government apparently has no idea of what OUR Constitution and , in effect, could really care less. It seem that, had he been imprisoned for 2 or so years, they might could come up with something! However, given what they are planning to do, they have to do as they have always done in the past … set up a case for a “example” to go by. I.e., make an example and say: “This is the way we do it and this is what we will do with ALL similar cases, no matter the Law or the Constitution”!! After all, this is the way it was in Germany and in Russia, yet we refuse to see it coming in America!!!!

      Report this comment

      jarnkm  
    • 1947
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 8:25pm

      At present “How Many Vet’s have rec’ed a letter like this?”

      Report this comment

      1947  
    • Chuck Stein
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 8:49pm

      If he “served in Vietnam from Jan. 1, 1968, until being honorably discharged in September 1970″ then HOW was he in a street fight in Maryland in 1968?

      Report this comment

      Chuck Stein  
    • LameLiberals
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:10pm

      This incident took place WHILE HE WAS ACTIVE DUTY. The military did NOT kick him out AND allowed him to carry a weapon. He was much later honorable discharged. If he could carry a weapon IN THE MILITARY -how do they justify denying him a weapon 40 years after the fact??

      The feds are looking for any way to disarm a vet. Just wait until the new vets are refused a gun when ObamaCare allows their PTSD medical records to be read by the feds.

      Report this comment

      LameLiberals  
    • TheirMom
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:49pm

      We still have to go through the background check in Arizona, IF you’re buying from a dealer. Which is why all of my firearms are bought from private parties.

      Report this comment

      TheirMom  
    • muffythetuffy
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:53pm

      FEDERAL COURTS NO LONGER USE COMMON LAW

      CASE LAW is what judges now practice in their courts. Constitutional Amendments can only be repealed but what an renegade Congress has done is to void Amendments by passing laws which is illegal. We live in a nation without the Rule of Law and this is how it became a bedlem and so dangerous.. l

      Report this comment

      muffythetuffy  
    • TXBadOneToo
      Posted on February 27, 2013 at 12:56am

      I’m personally shocked (although in this day and age under Eric Holder I shouldn’t be) that the DOJ can make the implications of a misdemeanor offense retro-active.. Since when do the implications of tax laws et al go retro?

      This is just the DOJ trying to push the law to further minimize our 2nd Amendment rights..

      Report this comment

      TXBadOneToo  
    • TexasKnight
      Posted on February 27, 2013 at 5:24am

      First time in my life, I would be a straw purchaser.
      Since it has made to many headlines, and they might come after me, the simple solution is for his wife to own a gun. I am sure that any salesmen would sell it to her with his help picking out the perfect weapon for her.

      Report this comment

      TexasKnight  
    • naughtycal
      Posted on February 27, 2013 at 8:03am

      The law can’t change it sentencing once it is handed down. If a judge told him he was sentenced to 1 month and jail and then increased it after sentencing do to new statutes in the law .
      That’s double jeopardy sentence for the same crime twice.
      Since his original sentence did not include revoking his 2cd amendment the courts can’t take another bite after the fact. jeopardy total applies

      Report this comment

      naughtycal  
    • myeyeofthestorm
      Posted on March 3, 2013 at 4:53pm

      He lives in GA. Maryland is in the process of passing more oppressive gun laws now. There are more than two Republicans in MD. There are many constitutional conservatives in MD. Apparently people are leaving here in droves since MOM has driven up the taxes so much.

      Report this comment

      myeyeofthestorm  
  • VanGrungy
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:58am

    How come Canada has a Pardon system and the USA does not?

    Report this comment

    VanGrungy  
    • objectivetruth
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:14am

      Because we are the Bastion of communism, rather than freedom. which is what we were founded on.By marginilization fear and walling off we can take the rights away from people a step at a time.its a ploy that the soviets swore to use.Its worked outstandingly to has it not.Its another way for the fraidy cat power brokers to maintain their illusion of safety as well.It also gives the inefficient and lazy fat cats an excuse that they are doing something.Every time I think of my ancestors who fought for freedom [all the way back to pre revolution]just so these mental midget moral morons can overlord against the citizens makes me sick

      Report this comment

      objectivetruth  
    • Dano.50
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:39am

      Canada may have a pardon system but…

      Our gun laws are so strict about the only way you can buy a handgun is if you belong to a gun club, and have you got hoops to jump through for that.

      To have a rifle, and even just to buy ammunition, you MUST pass a training course to obtain an F.A.C. card. “Firearms Acquisition Certificate.” And that’s besides the background checks.

      A friend, having done all that a decades ago, about ten years ago purchased a rifle. The police called his home to ask his wife if he’d ever beaten her.

      And GOD help you if you shoot an intruder in your house, or on your property, for ANY REASON whatsoever. Over ten years ago, an old farmer shot at the car of some gas thieves. They escaped, the only damage was to the car, and guess who went to jail.

      For handguns, if you load them anywhere other than the shooting range, or a licensed competition, you are going to jail for a long, long time. That means no loading it at home either.

      In terms of gun ownership up here, a pardon don’t mean squat, and for those who haven’t heard yet, in Australia, (Mid 90′s gun restriction and registrations enacted) apparently politicians are now claiming hunting is too dangerous and the population should not be allowed rifles.

      Report this comment

      Dano.50  
    • lildrummerboy
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 2:24pm

      we do have a pardon system, but its only for illegals and its called amnesty

      Report this comment

      lildrummerboy  
    • mareseb
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 3:26pm

      Pardons are only for outgoing presidents to issue to individuals of their choice in the US.. as far as I know?

      Report this comment

      mareseb  
    • Toms
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 5:28pm

      Oh, yes we have one. I do not know what would be required to get a pardon for this offense in Maryland. But I know that it is not guaranteed nor is it free. I also know that to remove the record from the federal data base is not guaranteed and it is anything but free. I also have a comment about the Court’s decision. One of the reasons his plea was rejected was failure to avail himself of several other defenses. But, the Court saw fit to argue the Government’s case for them.

      Report this comment

      Toms  
  • piper60
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:55am

    An honest lawyer, if he/she can be found, should step up and help this guy. He’s good enough to fight in Vietnam, but he cannot own a gun because 45 years ago he punched somebody in the face??????Really?????What country is this again?

    Report this comment

    piper60  
    • coolillow
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:38am

      Alan Gura is the best attorney- and along with The Second Amendment Foundation, have fought valiantly for Mr. Schrader’s rights. Signed- The Veteran’s wife.

      Report this comment

      coolillow  
    • Myron_J_Poltroonian
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 4:22pm

      My Dear “The Veteran’s wife.”,
      Now we better understand the politician’s weasel words whenever they say, “We don’t want to take away guns from ‘Law Abiding Americans”. To paraphrase (the words, not the intent) Bill Clinton: “It all depends on what the meaning of ‘Law Abiding’ is”.

      Report this comment

      Myron_J_Poltroonian  
    • RIDEMODELS
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 5:03pm

      We got a Nation full of Big Bad PUNK Lawyers……Every Lawyer in this country has nothing but Marsh-Mellow Balls……..A nation of PUNK Sissy Momma Boy Lawyers….!!

      PUNKS…!!

      Report this comment

      RIDEMODELS  
  • BLAZE-READER1
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:52am

    All they need to do is pass a law that makes parking illegally (or similar) a felony and retroactive, then they can take the rest of the guns away.

    Report this comment

    BLAZE-READER1  
    • Ollie123
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:04am

      from my cold dead hands, stand up and fight! ******** with their illegal laws, They are the one that need to be punished for infringment on the 2nd amendment!

      Report this comment

      Ollie123  
    • Cavallo
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:11am

      We live in a Fascist state. How’s that freedom you laid your life on the line working out for you, Mr Schrader? They don’t care what you sacrificed for it. They’re done with you. Now someone tell me how free we all are so I can laugh at them.

      USA RIP

      Report this comment

      Cavallo  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:12am

      Hell why stop there might as well add in speeding tickets and any other law the anti-constitution anti-freedom BS collectivists can think of. With the way this country is being destroyed it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if the filthy pigs tried it.

      Report this comment

      progressiveslayer  
    • netmail
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:33am

      And of course, your CAR too.

      Report this comment

      netmail  
    • Max Power 1
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 12:30pm

      @ Progressiveslayer. In PA they already do decline you for unpaid parking tickets, DUI & many other minor infractions. It used to be you could only be declined for a felony conviction. In PA they decline you for ANYTHING that could carry a 1 year max sentence, & there is no time limit, making it even worse than MD. They will decline you if you stole a pack of gum 40 years ago when you were 9. The NRA caved on this to get rid of the waiting period. They got away with this even though PA has more guns & hunters & shooters than any other state. If they can do it here they can do it anywhere.
      One thing I’m not clear on. If you are prohibited in one state, are you prohibited in all states? In PA the background check goes to the state police, which have the PICS check. The feds have the NICS. Do you actually have to pass both checks?

      Report this comment

      Max Power 1  
    • WarMunger_Al
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:03pm

      he wasn’t charged with a felony, it was a misdemeanor, same as a traffic ticket.

      Report this comment

      WarMunger_Al  
    • helmuit_7
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:24pm

      Conjures up visions of Barry Obama toking on a joint as a younger commie to me. Now maybe he didn’t get busted for it, but we have visual proof, as well as him admitting to it. Should he (King Barry) by this type of rule, be allowed to even handle a gun? Camp David is still in Maryland…
      Why stop there? Why not disallow his presidency, or are we going to start talking about what “is is” again?
      Give the dude his gun and Maryland, get your state back together and in line with The Constitution. We can’t all run away from the state. Some of us must take a stand where we are. If we die doing it, at least we tried.

      Report this comment

      helmuit_7  
    • helmuit_7
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:39pm

      http://www.stardem.com/news/general_assembly/article_10fff8d8-70dd-11e2-bc18-0019bb2963f4.html

      http://www.ammoland.com/2013/02/maryland-senate-committee-limits-public-testimony-at-second-amendment-hearing/#axzz2M222fsK0

      Report this comment

      helmuit_7  
  • GuruMeditation
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:50am

    Excessive! Good luck Mr. Schrader.

    Report this comment

    GuruMeditation  
    • Cadcamtrainer
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:16am

      Mr. Schrader, thank you or your service Sir. It is unfortunate that you spent a part of your life fighting communism and comeback and live this part of your life in a communist country. Believe me, I grew up in a communist country and I know what I am talking about. The writing is on the waff folks!

      Report this comment

      Cadcamtrainer  
    • coolillow
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:36am

      Jefferson says: Thank you! -signed his wife.

      Report this comment

      coolillow  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:34pm

      Hi Coolillow,

      Wow !! A member here since Sept 2010. I thank both of you and send my best wishes.

      Report this comment

      The-Monk  
    • oudbob
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 2:03pm

      In 1968, they gave me a rifle and sent me to Vietnam to shoot Communists. When I returned in 1969 I was not allowed to shoot them anymore, even tho they were all around me. Still can’t figure it out. Where is the sense in that?

      Report this comment

      oudbob  
  • perry1980
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:43am

    What a crock. Come on Lawyers out there, help this man.

    Report this comment

    perry1980  
    • tj1961
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:56am

      Can a record in MD be expunged?

      Report this comment

      tj1961  
    • coolillow
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:22am

      Mr. Schrader has the BEST lawyer, Alan Gura, working on his case- in concert with The Second Amendment Foundation.
      He does not live in Maryland, he was stationed there- before being deployed to Vietnam.
      When he and his Navy friends were assaulted by the street gang, they were overtaken- 3 to 1.
      Their arms were held behind their backs and they were beaten with ball bats and chains.
      Several of the men ended up in the hospital.

      Signed- Jefferson Schrader’s WIFE- who knows all the details of the case. I will endeavor to respond to comments as time permits. Thank you all for reading the story, sharing it and for your thoughtful comments (for the most part!) ;-)

      Report this comment

      coolillow  
    • RIDEMODELS
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 5:02pm

      The country is ran by the BOSS lawyer and he be telling all the other PUNK lawyers out there what to do……..We got a nation of PUNK lawyers that cannot do anything unless the president says so…!!

      And all the commercials I see on TV are Big Bad lawyers wanting to take on the Evil Insurance……Lawyers are nothing but Sniveling cowards.

      We got a nation full of PUNK Marsh-mellow Ball Lawyers…..Plain and simple……Marsh-Mellow Ball PUNKS…!!

      Report this comment

      RIDEMODELS  
    • SAS2008
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 5:19pm

      Yes a criminal record can be expunged in Maryland. You and find more info here:
      http://www.courts.state.md.us/expungement/

      Expungement would the simplest and most cost effective way to get his rights back. Don’t know if he has tried that or not.

      Report this comment

      SAS2008  
  • progressiveslayer
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:36am

    Okay play within the illegal system the progs have set up and get his misdemeanor conviction expunged,since it was petty BS crime of punching a guy in the face it should be easy to do.

    Report this comment

    progressiveslayer  
    • Cavallo
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:17am

      I think that was one of his efforts. It sounds like they said, no, screw you. Wonderful country they have created for us. Think of all the men who died in vain to give us this current state of affairs. The Taliban and other assorted cave men are far less dangerous than our own government is to the former citizens, now subjects, of the Forced States of Amerika.

      Report this comment

      Cavallo  
    • objectivetruth
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:20am

      You are right it should be.Our forefathers never intended a permanent lifetime punishment for any crime but treason.All other crimes had a statue.Even certain heinous ones.
      In reality all it is is a lifetime punishment.He may or may not be eligible for expungement or pardon.Its a he@@ of alot more difficult and expensive to do that than any of you realize.If he is even eligible.

      Report this comment

      objectivetruth  
    • battles
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:47am

      Maybe, but the legal system is full of liberals and they will vote for confiscation. And remember where the legal system is located – Maryland. One of the most communist minded states in the nation.

      Report this comment

      battles  
    • WarMunger_Al
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:08pm

      The basis of this decision hinges on the claim that the 2nd amendment is not unlimited, but they can not point to anywhere in the constitution that allows them to limit it. ” Shall not be infringed” how can that be interpreted to “may limit” ???

      Report this comment

      WarMunger_Al  
  • Longing for Change
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:36am

    The government is disarming veterans at an alarming rate. America should be very concerned about this. Unfortunately, most of the people surrounding me have been programmed to think veterans can not be trusted. Even though we trusted them to protect and defend our freedom. If the government can disarm the Veterans, they can disarm the public in general. As a disabled veteran, I am aware of many who will not surrender their weapons!! Including me!

    Report this comment

    Longing for Change  
    • Tigress1
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:55am

      EXCELLENT point!

      Report this comment

      Tigress1  
    • Cavallo
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:18am

      What freedom?

      Report this comment

      Cavallo  
    • objectivetruth
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:30am

      I’d trust a ranting and raving veteran over a alledgedly sane law maker any day.I’m so sorry you are surrounded by human garbage like that.We trust you to defend the country you should be trusted with weapons at home.The people who don’t think so are Brain Dead and Fraidy cats.They have been so brainwashed they think the only thing marines and soldiers are trained on how to do is kill.There narrow minded Bs makes my head want to explode.Here recently a regular poster stated he wasn’t so sure a buddie of his, who had suffered a brain injury and alledgedly had tantrums should have a gun.This is another type of ignorance that needs to be corrected as well.Simply because someone is frustrated and rightfully so doesn’t equate with them killing someone.Most brain injury survivors have some frustration.How in the minds of the fraidy cats this equates with being willing to murder someone is beyond me.

      Report this comment

      objectivetruth  
    • mareseb
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 3:53pm

      Veterans have been used as guinea pigs for all the pharmaceutical companies……I heard that vets still have no choice but to take umpteen shots that the military dishes out? I know this was the case when my late hubby was a veteran of the Korean war (he did not serve in combat) and later when I accompanied him to an overseas assignment…more shots required! Now I am anti-vaccination of any kind. I think some of those vaccines have caused returning vets serious health problems. Many vaccines have ingredients that are neuro-toxins, so when the vets begin having a problem with depression or some other issue, they immediately put them on psychotropic drugs, which makes them even worse. I see this as a concerted effort to render the returning vets mentally disabled and therefore restricted from owning firearms.
      The global elites have planned it all out.

      Report this comment

      mareseb  
    • Chuck Troupe
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:06pm

      Feeyuck any one person, or any group of persons who advocate disarming veterans, but most especially feeyuck the federal government.

      Report this comment

      Chuck Troupe  
    • Shey
      Posted on February 27, 2013 at 11:00am

      @Longing For Change; I would trust you ANY day of the week or any other vet for that matter to have my 6 and 12 before I would the Government, This is an effed up situation!

      Report this comment

      Shey  
  • Tigress1
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:34am

    He’s the wrong skin color. If he was black and convicted of a FELONY the liberals would be screaming “We live in a second chance society!” HA!

    http://www.abc24.com/news/local/story/Arrest-of-Shelter-Employee-Tarnishes-Memphis/-8wNaKLeZEiAFMnsPheRvg.cspx

    Report this comment

    Tigress1  
    • another pucker
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:55am

      Disgusting! Not only 2nd chance but a government job! Kinda like the TSA and every other government job.

      XOXOXO

      Report this comment

      another pucker  
    • thegreatcarnac
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:57pm

      True!

      Report this comment

      thegreatcarnac  
    • RIDEMODELS
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 5:08pm

      We got a nation of Marsh-Mellow Ball PUNK Lawyers………I did not like lawyers before…….But now every time I see one of those PUNKS on TV talking big and bad about suing insurance companies……I see nothing but Marsh-Mellow Ball PUNKS..!!!

      I always knew Lawyers were nothing more than PUNKS…!!

      Report this comment

      RIDEMODELS  
    • RIDEMODELS
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 6:34pm

      It is OK for a woman to fight on the front lines with a gun…….But for a woman to want a gun here to protect herself from a society that the Democrats create…Bars/Night Clubs…….a woman is too stupid to own a gun in this country…..What a bunch of Marsh-Mellow Ball Lawyers we have……..A bunch of sissy wimpy Lawyers…….Mark Levin is the only true LAWYER in this country……the rest are just a Bunch of Sissies..!!

      Mark Levin is the only TRUE Lawyer of Freedom….and anyone with a Brain will join him cause he is the New Free America…!!!….The Tide is Changing……Too many Ambulance Chasing Sissies..!!

      Report this comment

      RIDEMODELS  
  • RLJMAH
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:28am

    Personally, I would stop trying to fight city hall. They have marked him, they will use him as an example, and he will go broke trying to win. Just go to the local street corner, find yourself a gang member, and buy your self some illegal weaponry. Or have someone else buy some weapons for you. Don’t ever register them, and you’ll be fine.

    Report this comment

    RLJMAH  
    • Rand2016
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:31am

      It’s sad that someone trying to follow the law by submitting to background checks and registration is treated like a felon by a retroactive law. So our government gives automatic weapons to drug dealers that kill hundreds, but prevent an Honorably Discharged veteran from acquiring weapons guaranteed to him by the Constitution he fought to protect? WTF is going on in Maryland.

      Report this comment

      Rand2016  
    • objectivetruth
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:39am

      Yes and ironically Ex Post Facto laws are unconstitutional from the get go.Have been since the crafting of the constitution and even before that in certain areas.Its high time some of you constitutional lawyers speak up.Step to the plate while you still have time.Its running out.

      Report this comment

      objectivetruth  
  • Grand design
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:27am

    Wasn’t the Gun Control Act of 1968 taken word for word from Hitler’s Nazi Party laws prior to WW ll? It was for the registration of all firearms in Germany! After that, the Nazi’s confiscated said firearms! Now it makes perfect sense!

    Report this comment

    Grand design  
    • objectivetruth
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:35am

      Precisely.The brady bill was in its own way even worse.They wanted to disarm the targets of terror cells and criminals as well.They then had the unmitigating ba@@s to claim these same targets wanted it that way.BS BS BS.They used and abused domestic violence and rape ___________ as a sheild.Anytime you disarm someone you are __________ them.

      Report this comment

      objectivetruth  
    • WarMunger_Al
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 1:11pm

      Gun control act has no constitutional basis, that is why they have to use the commerce clause to justify it. Fact is, no American should comply with any level of un control law. We compromised in the past, but they have proven they do not honor their word and they always try to take more.

      Report this comment

      WarMunger_Al  
    • burdenofknowing
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 8:42pm

      YES IT WAS

      Startling evidence suggests that the Gun Control Act of 1968
      was lifted, almost in its entirety, from Nazi legislation. There is a book titled

      “Gun Control” Gateway to Tyranny

      theburdenofknowing

      Report this comment

      burdenofknowing  
  • VetMike
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:24am

    The Liberals (and you can bet the Judge is one) will do anything to deny someone a gun. They cannot deny the right but SCOTUS gave them enough wiggle room in Heiler to open up opportunities like this. The “crime” wasn’t even a class three felony then. This is consistent with the Liberals plan to disarm America and force us into socialism. Disarm everyone with military training first then move on to the rest.

    “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security”

    MOLON LABE

    Report this comment

    VetMike  
  • deven8703
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:22am

    Can’t you go to a judge and get your record expunged? Seems like that would be the better way to go about this case. Either way, it seems that this is a clear case of ex post facto, a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. The constitution strictly forbids this.

    Report this comment

    deven8703  
    • guns-an-bibles
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:32am

      If criminals are the only ones who can get guns I say give this thug an AK-47. Liberal logic (or lack there-of) suggests law abiding citizens should be limited, sooo… go across the border and pick out what you want from the fast and furious market, come back and you are legal again… right?

      Report this comment

      guns-an-bibles  
    • cemerius
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:33am

      Your comment is well presented and thought out BUT you major flaw in reasoning is…..they DO NOT care about the US Constitution when there are such factors as pior cases to cherry pick from.

      Report this comment

      cemerius  
    • coolillow
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:44am

      Expunging the record is not in the cards. Neither is a pardon from the Governor of Maryland. We tried that route. This is why Attorney Alan Gura and The Second Amendment Foundation took this route. Thank you for the suggestion. – signed Jefferson’s wife.

      Report this comment

      coolillow  
    • coolillow
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:47am

      Your suggestion is appreciated. But that was not an option. This is the reason Attorney Gura and The Second Amendment Foundation had to take this route. But thank you for your comment- signed The Veteran (Jefferson’s) wife.

      Report this comment

      coolillow  
    • SAS2008
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 5:20pm

      I agree expungement would be the most straightforward way to get his rights back.

      Report this comment

      SAS2008  
  • MCON29
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:22am

    Look at how many attorneys the Government has arguing in favor of keeping his rights stripped. These guys will come at you with the full force of the tax payers money.

    Report this comment

    MCON29  
  • The_Cabrito_Goat
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:21am

    I parked the wrong way on one side of the street once.

    Should I be worried?

    Report this comment

    The_Cabrito_Goat  
    • another pucker
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:33am

      Maybe! But most people don’t know there is a wrong side of the street for parking. None of us would have a thing to worry about if we were ILLEGAL! We could get paid cash and off the books at our jobs, show that we make little money to the A(i)RS, claim 50 dependents that don’t actually live with us (that’s $1,000 for each one), plus the earned income credit, then apply and GET snap, gov. housing, and every other HANDOUT, that is given to BEGGARS! And since they are not going after the real lawbreakers guns SAFE!

      XOXOXO

      Report this comment

      another pucker  
  • another pucker
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:17am

    Friken fraken friken friken fraken friken frak!
    They all need to go even the judges! I am so disgusted at what has been going on in this country right under our noses and that so many in this country then and even today think “That’ll never happen here!” Who the hell are these people to think that they can retro actively impose this sentence on anyone. That is my question “Does the law specifically state that this will be applied retro-actively”? The judges that made this decision should be sanctioned by whatever group holds judges accountably and removed from the bench. Oh yea, there probably isn’t anyone who holds these judges accountable. Back to the friken fraken friken fraken!

    XOXOXO

    Report this comment

    another pucker  
  • chips1
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:14am

    We are ALL on that list. They will get around to us eventually.

    Report this comment

    chips1  
    • mikem1969
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:32am

      My thing is, at some point in time in our younger years we have all had fights, so with that being the case, every cop, every fbi agent, cia agent, secret service agent, armed security guard and so on should not be allowed to use a gun at all. Oh, but wait, the law is above the law.

      Report this comment

      mikem1969  
  • ares338
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:11am

    First of all move from that piece of crap state (I know you shouldn’t have to) and move to a more gun friendly place. Buy a gun from and individual and screw the goobermint!

    Report this comment

    ares338  
    • Fubared
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:21am

      Maryland/the peeps repub of, is all you need to know. Maryland sucks.

      Report this comment

      Fubared  
    • coolillow
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:41am

      The Veteran does NOT live in Maryland. He was stationed at Annapolis in 1968 in 1968 – before he was sent to Vietnam. He lives in another (gun friendly) state. But it does not matter. – Signed The Veteran’s Wife.

      Report this comment

      coolillow  
  • OBAMANATIONOFDESOLATION
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:10am

    We are free men living in a free country, by permit only.

    Report this comment

    OBAMANATIONOFDESOLATION  
  • Uechi
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:09am

    Easy solution if it was me buy one on the black market. I refused to be disarmed by Marxists

    Report this comment

    Uechi  
  • progressiveslayer
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:09am

    This government is vile indeed,here we have a man who fought in Vietnam and is being denied a right that government didn’t give him in the first place because of a fight when he was a kid? What I really want to say would never be allowed. The 1968 gun control act the progs are using to deny him his God given right is unconstitutional,in fact all gun laws are unconstitutional and if we don’t go on the offensive with the progs bent on eliminating this right they won’t stop until they’ve gotten rid of all our rights.

    They actually believe we can’t fend for ourselves that’s why we have the welfare state,we have the police state to ensure the government never loses power and control over us.

    Report this comment

    progressiveslayer  
  • Melva Flicker
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:05am

    is there any way one can check to see if there name is on this list?

    Report this comment

    Melva Flicker  
  • mrunner
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:02am

    Wrong, just WRONG! This guy punches some dirtbag ObamaZombie in training then goes off and risks his life for our country. Our Government is just plain SICK right now and we need to perform some radical surgery to get it well again!

    Report this comment

    mrunner  
    • zorro
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:10am

      I’m all for changing the law. But I’m getting pretty sick and tired of The Blaze constantly putting out ‘woe-is-me” veteran stories. Being a veteran doesn’t_give_you_the_right_to_break_the_freaking_law! Enough. The fact this man is a veteran is irellevant. Let’s stop with these damn labels.

      Report this comment

      zorro  
    • chips1
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:18am

      “Zorro! The Gay Blade!”

      Report this comment

      chips1  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:32am

      Zorro Yeah just ignore the fact that all gun laws created since the second amendment are unconstitutional. The government didn’t give that man any rights so they can’t take them away either.

      Report this comment

      progressiveslayer  
    • zorro
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:48am

      Who said to ignore that, slayer? I’m saying to ignore the fact he is a veteran. Does it really matter? If you were not a veteran and committed that “crime” 45 years ago, would it be OK that you were now banned from owning a gun? No. Therefore, let’s fight the fact this law is BS.

      Report this comment

      zorro  
    • mrunner
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:48am

      @Zorro- Sorry- I do have tons of respect for our veterans and do feel it is very relevant. Most veterans I know personally are patriots and have a love of country. That being said, they- to a man- are very concerned about the government overreach and Marxist direction of the current administration. Since these patriots are trained in combat and have taken an oath to uphold the constitution against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC- I feel it is appropriate to point out that the progressives are scared as hell of them and will do their best to villify and disarm them…

      Report this comment

      mrunner  
    • DZ-015
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:52am

      Zorro: The fact this man served in Vietnam and was honorably discharged is very relevant to the case. His service began, the conviction for the fistfight occurred, and the law used to disarm him was passed in 1968. The State of Maryland did not codify the crime he was convicted of as punishable by confinement for two years until afterwards. Why is this not considered ex post facto with respect to the Brady Bill’s prohibition on firearm possession?

      Report this comment

      DZ-015  
    • zorro
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:53am

      Sorry guys. You all are missing the point. Maybe you don’t know slimy veterans but I do. And being a “veteran” of any war doesn’t give you any special priviledges. For the record, I’m a veteran, too. But if any of you, veteran or not, were stuck in the exact same situation this man is, I’d think it was BS as well. If you want to point out that the government is going out of their way to disarm this individual due to the fact he is a veteran, that’s one thing. But don’t tell me that this is an injustice BECAUSE he is a veteran. This is an injustice, PERIOD.

      Report this comment

      zorro  
    • hard.right
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 11:20am

      Zorro is right folks. Respect veterans, thank them for what they did. They deserve our praise. But that has zero to do w/ this issue. If the average citizen had this happen to them, it’s equally bad. The 2A was meant for all of us, not veterans. John McCain is a veteran and he’s pretty much a puke, evil, whack job. The sooner he ceases to exist on this planet the better. I could care less that he’s a veteran. He did his job, thanks for that, now shut the **** up. Being a veteran doesn’t mean jack when it comes to your rights, you don’t get ‘extra’ consideration. Sorry.

      Report this comment

      hard.right  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 2:14pm

      Zorro You’re not getting my meaning so I’ll clarify,I agree no American should be denied their right to bear arms,I’m a vet as well and I don’t place any special credence on this man simply because he’s a vet I do it because he’s an American and the law is BS since congress doesn’t even have the authority to create any law that would infringe on an Americans right to own a firearm.

      Report this comment

      progressiveslayer  
  • skyguy51
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:00am

    With the current bunch of wanna be Bolsheviks running the government this doesn’t surprise me. They will just make up the rules as they go.

    Report this comment

    skyguy51  
  • naughtycal
    Posted on February 26, 2013 at 8:57am

    Statute of limitations ring a bell. And of course there’s also double jeporady as he is being punished again for the same crime.

    Report this comment

    naughtycal  
    • termyt
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:08am

      There’s no limitations on a conviction. Had he not been convicted of the crime, he could not be charged with it now. As for double jeopardy, same thing. He’s been convicted, so (according to the feds) this is part of that conviction, not a new conviction.

      However, we have let criminals walk because their crime wasn’t illegal or the punishment was much less severe when they committed it compared to when they were prosecuted and convicted. Here we have a man whose crime was punishable by a fine or 30 days being punished as if he committed it today with today’s punishment.

      Report this comment

      termyt  
    • naughtycal
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 9:57am

      TERMYT,
      The law can’t change it sentencing once it is handed down. If a judge told him he was sentenced to 1 month and jail and then increased it after sentencing do to new statutes in the law .
      That’s double jeopardy sentence for the same crime twice.
      Since his original sentence did not include revoking his 2cd amendment the courts can’t take another bite after the fact. jeopardy total applies

      Report this comment

      naughtycal  
    • objectivetruth
      Posted on February 26, 2013 at 10:49am

      Its illegal and double jeopardy.The law is illegal as its ex post facto.It violate one of the most basic tenaments of the founding constitution.

      Report this comment

      objectivetruth  
1 2 3 … 8

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love