Government

Can a Minor Offense Eliminate Your Right to Bear Arms?

The Ohio appellate court handed down a critical 2nd Amendment-bending decision over the weekend that may have given us a glimpse of how states will maneuver to infringe upon your right to bear arms.minor drug offense Ohio right bear arms marijuana gun

The defendant in the case- Paul Stone- has just been told by the appellate court that he must face felony gun possession charges after Montgomery County court initially dismissed the charges. Stone believed he legally obtained his weapon and violated no statute in its possession or use, and it seems the lower court agreed.

So why has the appellate court decided in State vs. Stone that a possible felony occurred? Because he was caught with a small amount of marijuana five years ago, and that now constitutes a legal “disability” when it comes to gun ownership in Ohio.

Back in 2006, Paul Stone was convicted of simple marijuana possession, a “minor misdemeanor” under Ohio law. There is no jail time possible for the offense. The maximum penalty is a $150 fine, plus some community service. It is not treated as a criminal record for the purposes of employment or licensing questions about an individual’s past. But in Ohio, the legislature has placed a specific limit on the 2nd amendment related to substance possession. Specifically, Ohio Rev. Code § 2923.13 prohibits gun possession by any person who “has been convicted of any offense involving the illegal possession … in any drug of abuse.”

This statute led the district attorney to file 3rd degree felony gun possession charges against Stone solely based on his minor misdemeanor possession of marijuana. The trial court of Montgomery County initially dismissed the indictment, holding  minor misdemeanor convictions weren’t enough under the law to prohibit gun ownership.

But the District Attorney’s office wanted another bite at the apple, and appealed the case. The appellate court agreed with the DA.  Here is the crux of the defendant’s Second Amendment-based defense, which the appellate court denied:

Appellee [i.e., Stone] also urges this court to affirm the trial court’s dismissal based upon the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which, pursuant to District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), 554 U.S. 570, protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm. In advancing this argument, appellee acknowledges that this right is not unconditional and points out that Heller identified various forms of reasonable restrictions a state may place upon a citizen’s ability to have a firearm. Appellee submits, however, the limited list of such restrictions does not include, nor is there obvious historical precedent for, legislation that has the effect of completely abrogating a citizen’s right to bear arms as it pertains to a misdemeanant with no criminal record.

So how did the court decide against this 2nd amendment defense? It punted, refusing even to consider the 2nd amendment question. In essence, the Ohio court has said a state legislature can pass a law that makes it a felony to possess a gun if you have been convicted of any crime at all.

The court ruled that ”a minor misdemeanor marijuana possession conviction is, as a matter of law, a disability.” Yet even the court seemed uncomfortable with this analysis, and in a nod to the seeming absurdity of the statute wrote that ”we again emphasize that appellee’s arguments would be better directed at the General Assembly than the judiciary.”

So, the Ohio appellate court takes a hyper-narrow interpretation of the law to overturn another court’s verdict, and then tells the defendant to petition the legislature to get back his 2nd Amendment Rights?

This all begs some important questions: What precedent does this set? Can a state legislature pass a law banning anyone from possessing guns after the most mundane offenses? How about a speeding ticket? Riding a bicycle without a helmet? Failure to recycle?

It would seem in the state of Ohio, the answer right now would be a resounding “yes.”

(h/t Opposing Views)

Comments (269)

1 2 3 ... 7
  • Foxjunkie
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:56am

    States are like retail stores. If you don’t like what the store is selling, shop somewhere else. The best way for Americans to deal with all this liberal BS is to move. No residents, not tax revenue. Politicians need people. I say starve these socialist.

    You may think I’m kidding. Maybe I’ve become jaded to the whole political process of hope and change. I still believe in the power of the ballot box but sometimes I feel like the cards are stacked against America. When good and reasonable people leave the neighborhood, the bottom feeders will consume themselves.

    Report Post » Foxjunkie  
    • cemerius
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:08pm

      Vote with your feet. Unfortunately our “we hate success and business” climate in our country has caused many business to vote with their feet and depart our country! Look at Boening and how they were voting to a state that was right to vote and how the union thugs are trying to stop that kind of madness?

      Report Post » cemerius  
    • VegasGuy
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:15pm

      I agree with FOXJUNKY. States should have the right to set limits provided they do not violate the Constitution. Whether or not this ruling does is subject to public debate. Furthermore, guns and pot do not mix. If you want to own guns, then don’t smoke pot.

      Report Post » VegasGuy  
    • SLEUTH
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:16pm

      the ohio legistature, are probably ‘progressive’ Dem or GOP. someone should check their background and ill bet some if not all are just as guilty one way or the other.
      never tell a doctor anything that might, just might be illegal.
      in fact the only one you can tell all is your lawyer. the lawyer is the only one, yes the only one that cant give up any of your secrets. that’s the law. a doctor, Psychologist, tax Consultant or financial Consultant etc, can be forced to testify, but not a lawyer. keep your mouth shut except to your ‘mouthpiece’ [lawyer].

      Report Post » SLEUTH  
    • HumbleCitizen
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:21pm

      @ Fox, on the surface, your suggesstion sounds reasonable BUT, many people can’t afford to just “pick up and go”. There is family to consider, children and jobs (hard to get now).

      Better to stay and fight against unjust laws. If this continues, even a parking ticket will be used as a convenient excuse to deprive a person their 2nd admendment rights.

      The Globalists MUST get the guns out of the American people’s hands in order to complete the goal of destroying this country. Outrageous spending, outright stealing from the people, fema camps being built, the patriot act, out of control executive orders…like a pimple coming to a head. When the guns are gone the past domino will be in place and there will be a final false flag to collapse it all.(don‘t say it won’t happen…think Germany).

      The ONLY way tot stop this is a SHELLACKING at the poles in 2012 (we have to counter all the fraudulent illegal votes that the dems will let slide). If Obama wins 2012, ( IF Obama even ALLOWS elections) he will be our last president (how many times have we heard that Obama needs to act LIKE A DICTATOR!)

      Report Post » HumbleCitizen  
    • jhaydeng
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:40pm

      Sorry, but marijuana is “Illegal”! Hard to stand up for him when he broke the law regardless!

      Report Post »  
    • drphil69
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:48pm

      Amen!

      Nobody can take away my 2nd amendment rights – “from my cold dead hands..” is the only way to get the guns away from me. And I do believe it will come to that. The sheeple are not waking up, and will not wake up until we have a failed debt sale which will cause a nearly instantaneous collapse of the dollar. I look forward to watching the useless liberal oxygen thieves starve to death and/or kill each other in the ensuing riots over food. I am prepared, are you? (P.S. – If you are a lib, do NOT get a gun, it will make it harder for the gangs of poachers to steal your food, and your lives.)

      Report Post »  
    • WitegaSchadde
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:59pm

      Humblecitzen, while I agree with your premise that many cannot just “pick up and go,” there is also a time to say that this battle is not one that can be won. Illinois is the perfect example. I lived there, had to move farther and farther from my job to keep the local governments from raping me on a yearly basis. Finally decided that this is a battle that cannot be one and moved out of the state. Still work in the state, so I take my money and go and spend it where I live. Where I live now I can open carry with my permit that took less than 4 weeks to get compared to 6 months in Illinois where I am not allowed to do so. Foxjunkie is right, make the sacrifices for your freedom.

      Report Post » WitegaSchadde  
    • arx
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 1:08pm

      Vote with your feet? Like quiting your job, pulling your family out of school, selling your house, and finding a new job is a snap. Get real.

      Vegasguy..your statement is contradictory … “States should have the right to set limits provided they do not violate the Constitution”…denying “the people the right to keep and bear arms” IS violating the constitution. Any you think it‘s ok to violate this man’s right to defend himself and his family because he was charged for smoking a doobie years back? I find that thought disgusting, and so should you.

      Bottom line…the govt effectively attempts to disarm a man for life..why? Because he got caught with a joint years ago….and the sheeple all cheer. Wussies…you are no countrymen of mine.

      When in the course of human events…

      Report Post » arx  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 1:10pm

      What do people think of Ron Paul and Barney Frank Bill to legalize Marijauna? If that law was in place, this would not be a crime used to ban guns…

      Yet, I think Marijauna is as bad as Alcohol as far as affecting the mind, and drinking and driving or smoking pot do not mix!

      Should Ron Paul be holding hands across the aisle with someone like Barney Frank?

      Is Ron Paul really a Rhino?

      Report Post »  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 1:12pm

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/23/ron-paul-barney-frank-marijuana-legislation_n_883207.html

      Report Post »  
    • nevragain
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 1:13pm

      I agree. Unfortunately when they suck the state dry they move to another also. Then they introduce wealth redistribution and hordes of lib welfare voters follow. It is going to take a revolution. If the Republicans put a RINO in the White House we will die a slow death.

      Report Post » nevragain  
    • cessna152
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 1:27pm

      @VegasGuy,

      I own guns and I am “anti-drugs”… but with all do respect, how does one affect the other? Should my freedom of speech be taken away because I cursed in public one time? Should my right to vote be taken away because I got caught drinking and driving 6 years ago? It makes no sense.

      The 2A makes it clear “Shall not be infringed”…. that’s it, period. So what does one thing have to do with the other? He gets busted for pot then he does the time for that but nobody has the right to take away your God given rights in one area because we broke the “law” in another area!

      The reason I am passionate about this, is NJ has some of the silliest gun laws in the land. If you get into a bar brawl your right to own guns is gone. Get caught with drugs…guns gone. Have charges pressed against you because you lost your temper… guns gone! What does one have to do with the other? Are we robots that don’t make mistakes? Nope, just another ploy and liberal agenda for the populace to buy into “firearm confiscation”. Pure and simple…

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • Classical Liberal
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 1:27pm

      I call ********. I’ve been all over this country and to many places across the world and none compare to upstate NY. My land is my own and I won’t be legislated off of it.

      This mentality that we should move from our families and our homes because we disagree with the states law making body is idiotic. Take it a step further and we are Dangerously close to saying we should abandon our country because we disagree with the federal government.

      This is where I draw the line. I WILL NOT BE LEGISLATED OFF OF MY LAND!

      Report Post » Classical Liberal  
    • VegasGuy
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:00pm

      @ARX & @CESSNA152,

      I am very pro-2A, but I am not a gun rights at all costs wacko. There is nothing contradictory in my post. Read it again and this time take note I said 2A rights are subject to constitutional retractions and public debate. Or do you dis’ the 1A, too?

      BTW, “shall not be infringed” does have well established constitutional limits. Would you argue felons and Islamic terrorists also have the right to bear arms in the U.S.? That is what YOU sound like.

      Report Post » VegasGuy  
    • Coyotethree
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:21pm

      @humblecitizen: Agreed, conditions are tough for a move. That said, anybody without a felonious record (those people should stay in Ohio or whereever their posse resides, please) should look at the want ads in Texas, Oklahoma, the Dakotas, the places that are still growing jobs. A possible conclusion is that it is better to eat rice and beans for a month and make the move, in order to get a life in one of the places where we boot judges who fiat from the bench.
      @foxjunkie: Amen, brother.

      Report Post » Coyotethree  
    • hud
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:23pm

      TO: Paul Jump in your car and go south, climates better and so are the gun laws in most southern states

      Report Post »  
    • Wolf
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:30pm

      Fox, your idea of ‘voting with your feet’ is BS thinking… think about it: you want to move from one state because you don’t like its politics? Take your job with you, then- and your home- don‘t be pretending it’s easy to get another, equal or better, job or that finding an equal place to live will be easy. Easy to shoot your mouth off without thinking through the problem.
      As to this person losing his Second Amendment rights due to a minor offense he already paid for- WRONG! He paid his dues, he has the Constitutional right to own and carry. No where in the Constitution is there anything about him losing his citizenship in the human race, let alone his American citizenship, and therefore his right to self defense or ability to defend his country against its enemies- which includes people who think others should lose their rights for minor infractions of communist, anti-Consitutional laws. And courts that uphold such rulings are as communist, anti-Constitutional as the people who support them.

      Report Post »  
    • JayCee
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:36pm

      Eventually moving will not be an option, at least not to another state.
      This case needs to be appealed to the US Supreme court if possible.

      Report Post »  
    • the hawk
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:44pm

      i UESD TO SMOKE POT, WHILE I WAS HIGH THE KAST THING I WANTED TO DO WAS SHOOT ANYDODY! maybe for a pizza !

      Report Post »  
    • Phoenixsoulfire
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:53pm

      @jhaydeng That isn’t the point, Yes he did break the law but he didn‘t break the law to make it illegal for him to carry his fire arm because it wasn’t a felony charge. It was a minor charge. So the courts are taking upon themselves to take up odumbo’s “Get rid of all guns from Americans so I can take over and never be elected out of office and there won’t be crap anyone can do about it” goal.

      Report Post »  
    • kreg
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:57pm

      State by state, gun by gun.
      The only item keeping us free, is our guns. As goes our guns, so goes our freedom.
      And the government knows this!

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 3:24pm

      VegasGuy…you say if you want to own guns..then don’t smoke pot..Do you drink vegasguy? They have been trying to make over-the counter drugs and supplements illegal without a prescription. How would you like your gun rights taken away because you are carrying a bottle of aspirin or maybe a multi-vitamin. Where are you going draw the line? I ….keep all of the rights we have. Don’t let them take one more right away, and let’s get back the rights we have lost.

      Report Post »  
    • Uechi
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 3:30pm

      I agree completely I believe that Ronald Reagan put it “ vote with your feet ” California is a perfect example businesses are leaving in droves for other states. Maybe someday they will wake up and relaize that their policies are destroying the state. The states can play all the games they want “ from my cold dead fingers”

      Report Post »  
    • cessna152
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 3:45pm

      @VegasGuy,

      We are on the same side so please save the attacks. If I sounded harsh I apologize in advance… I did not mean to be. Remember, criminals and nut cases will always get guns. We need to defend ourselves and when we give the government any excuse to take our guns that is not good for the honest citizen. What constitutes gun confiscation? A speeding ticket? Disorderly conduct? Bad credit?

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • silentwatcher
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 4:16pm

      if he was convicted of a felony. period. Ohio needs to be run thru the ringer and educated. Go for it dude!!

      Report Post »  
    • arx
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 4:26pm

      continued…

      “Would you argue felons and Islamic terrorists also have the right to bear arms in the U.S.?” You’re damn right I would. Because if our penal system actually punished or disposed of more of the trash there wouldn’t be this cycle of violent offenders in and out of prison. And what ever happened to “serve your time” and then start over? It is either a free country or it’s not…you would prefer shades of gray to ensure the illusion that you are a little safer. I prefer liberty at all costs. But still you are wrong there too, because any felon who wants a gun can get one. Might as well employ another guy at BassPro.

      As far as terrorists…it‘s a flawed question because we’re talking about law abiding free men. But I will spell it out for you. If we know they are terrorists they should be dead or in Gitmo awaiting trial. If not, I just have one question for you…do you think 9-11 could have happened if the pilots and 50% of the passengers on board those flights were lawfully armed? You know the answer to that question. They wouldn’t have even tried. Imagine the billions in security we could save and the increase protection against bomb and missile threats that could be bought with just a fraction of those savings.

      Report Post » arx  
    • arx
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 4:59pm

      I’ll repost the first part of my response to Vegasman because it apparently never made it through..

      You confirmed what I said earler. You are not “pro-2A“ if you believe ”2A rights are subject to constitutional retractions and public debate.“ What are ”constitutional retractions”? Show me where that is found in the Constitution. Who decides what can be ‘retracted’? You? Your senator? 150 million moronic liberals throughout the country? Sorry buddy, but you are not thinking straight. Thinking that ‘public debate’ should carry that much weight with your God given rights is truly pathetic, and not worthy of the freedoms the forefathers bled and died for.

      “…well established constitutional limits”? Really? Where? How? The words in the Consitution are as clear as the nose on your face…”SHALL NOT…” Who established the limits? What makes those limits constitutional, if they are not found in the Constitution? The limits are established, but not well, and not consitutionally.

      I leave my weapon in my vehicle when I go into a post office, because I have a family to take care of and can’t afford time in the slammer. But every time I do I wonder if I’ll be shot because some crazy ignored your “limits” that really only apply to peaceful law abiders. The reality is your way of thinking INCREASES mass shootings and other gun violence, because most predators are cowards. Choke on that for awhile if you can face the truth.

      Report Post » arx  
    • VegasGuy
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 5:03pm

      @CESSNA152,

      No problem. I intentionally made my post a bit over the top to make the point that trying to defend possessing pot as a non-issue when it comes to the gun ownership is the wrong place to draw the line in the sand.

      As an NRA Life Member I am well aware the 2A is constantly under attack with efforts to restrict gun ownership by citizens that have never been arrested for anything in their lives. To try to make the case the pot bust was so long ago or it was such a tiny amount that it is a non-issue does pro-2A advocates more harm than good. If one of our 2A allies in Congress had defended pot use along with gun ownership that sound bite would be used by the media, Schummer and every other anti-2A zealot. “Congressman says guns and pot use are OK! Story at eleven!”

      Report Post » VegasGuy  
    • VegasGuy
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 5:34pm

      @ARX

      I meant to type “restrictions.” Constitutional restrictions. The spell checker changed my typo and I missed it.

      Your words speak for you on their own. I do not see any need to try to make my point any further.

      Report Post » VegasGuy  
    • hologram5
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 6:28pm

      @VEGASGUY:
      You have your drugs mixed up. How many people smoke pot then go out and drive 90 miles an hour or get into fights and kill people? It‘s surely not pot that’s for damn sure. there isn’t any national stats on accidents due to pot either, yes I’ve done the research and have seen the truth. There is a chemical in THC that actually PROMOTES brain growth. Sounds like you need to put down the reader’s digest and read some actual scientific journals for once…

      Report Post » hologram5  
    • hologram5
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 6:32pm

      @THE HAWK
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 2:44pm
      i UESD TO SMOKE POT, WHILE I WAS HIGH THE KAST THING I WANTED TO DO WAS SHOOT ANYDODY! maybe for a pizza !
      ——————————————————————————————-
      You’re either a liar or one of those weak willed useful tools. Pot making you want to shoot someone? Man you’re an idiot then. I pray you don’t drink either.

      Report Post » hologram5  
    • pahalik
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 7:11pm

      Vegasguy, are you serious? Maybe you should think about that comment a little more or were you drinking a little before you wrote it? Why would it be ok to have a beer and own a gun but not have a joint and own a gun? Cigarette and own a gun? Coffee and own a gun? It’s all substance use/abuse and I believe what someone chooses to ingest into their own body is their own business. I also believe they are responsible for the choices they make while under the influence of said substances. Would you take away the right of people to defend themselves who have never harmed anyone? All for choosing to use a substance which, regardless of the legality, has never harmed anyone? Strange logic you’re putting forth there. Maybe it‘s ok to take someone else’ rights as long as it’s not your rights someone wants to take.

      Report Post » pahalik  
    • Seasoldier
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 8:11pm

      First, no one should be in possession of marijuana or any other illegal drug. Second, if you want to own a weapon you should have sense enough to stay away from marijuana and other illegal drugs. The exercise of our Constitutional rights requires responsibility on our part, and smoking pot is not being responsible. It’s certainly not responsible in relation to the possession and handling of firearms. I’ve seen enough accidental discharges and other weapons accidents, including fatal ones, to say that I don’t want anyone who is inclined to be intoxicated by drugs or alcohol to have possession of a weapon around me. Now, if this guy doesn’t like this state law, the good news for him is that he can move to another state. The bad news for the rest of us is that he may bring his marijuana and his weapon to a state near us.

      Report Post »  
    • arx
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 8:29pm

      Vegasguy, is there really a difference between restrictions and retractions?

      You‘re ’point’ was that our God given right to defend ourselves is “subject to constitutional restrictions and public debate…and constitutionally limited”. But you fail to produce any specific references, much less words from the Constitution. So your point is not made. And if you are an NRA life member, this life member says shame on you.

      You also said the following:
      “To try to make the case the pot bust…is a non-issue does pro-2A advocates more harm than good. If one of our 2A allies in Congress had defended pot use along with gun ownership that sound bite would be used by the media, Schummer and every other anti-2A zealot…”

      I’ll tell you what does 2A advocates more harm than good. It is someone who claims to stand up for a right, but doesn‘t have the backbone to stand up for others’, and is willing to throw them under the bus as long as they don’t touch your crystal tower. Maybe someday your secrets will be found out, and someone will think what YOU have done warrants taking away your right. Fear of the liberal media has forced many an otherwise good politician to toss his convictions to the wind, at freedom’s expense. I just hope that it is fear in your case, and not just some sick judgemental mentality that makes you really believe that another free man should have his right to defense taken away from him. But since your ‘point was made’ I guess we’ll never know.

      Report Post » arx  
    • mikem1969
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 8:34pm

      Well said foxjunky. Starve the lib progressives states by moving out of them and into conservative states.

      Report Post »  
    • BlueStrat
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 10:08pm

      If someone was caught and convicted of carrying/using a gun *while under the influence of drugs or alcohol*, that’s one thing. I can see a vital public safety issue in that case. The way the appellate court decided this, however, is an affront to common sense and is an abridgement of our 2nd Amendment rights.

      This is not about marijuana possession. It could have been a “disturbing the peace” charge for playing a stereo too loud. Jaywalking could be used to remove a citizens’ 2nd Amendment rights under this precedent as well.

      The idea that a citizen can only retain his Unalienable Rights as long as he never violates any law, no matter how minor, is a gross perversion of the Constitution and an attack on Freedom.

      Report Post »  
    • Concern4Constitution
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 10:18pm

      Did I read that right? The possession (no proof of actually using )charge was FIVE years ago? Did he have the gun on him then? Does that mean that eventually I can get a DUI because 5 years ago I bought a beer and yesterday I drove a car? Also the main issue is that the “hook” they hung the hat on was not the misdemeanor–it was that they classified misdemeanor possession (again no proof of actual use) as a DISABILITY. Does that mean he can’t own a gun but because he had a joint on him 5 years ago he is now qualified to collect SSDI? After all, the judge said so. What else can they determine to be a disability? I’m not sure which to be more ticked off about–infringement of the 2nd amendment, or the new easy pathway to get on the gov’t dole!

      Report Post »  
    • Curious - Really
      Posted on July 26, 2011 at 12:46am

      You are correct. Before the federal constitution trumped the state constitutions – the only option was to move. If you didn’t like the state religion . . . move. If you didn’t like the state gun laws . . . move. It wasn’t any easier to move then than it is now – before moving trucks were invented.

      Report Post »  
    • DonaldH
      Posted on July 26, 2011 at 4:18am

      As Reagan always said—vote with your feet…. But now, if you claim “states’ Rights,, you are branded a toothless, uneducated racist hillbilly neo-Nazi that still believes in slavery…..

      Report Post » DonaldH  
    • steveusmc
      Posted on July 26, 2011 at 9:24am

      Come on people,we have to have laws. Without them,well,a tax cheat could become the Secretary of Treasury. Wait a minute…….

      Report Post »  
    • Carl McPherson
      Posted on July 26, 2011 at 9:52am

      I agree completely. I left Michigan and moved to Arizona. I carry a S&W .357 Magnum on my hip everywhere I go and don’t think twice about it. It’s a tool in keeping me and my family safe as much as a home security system and a dog.
      I can’t even get into how amazing and incredible it was moving here to Arizona. I honestly feel that this is what it must feel like for someone moving from the old Communiest East Block countries to the United States.
      The freedom is staggering and motivating.

      Report Post » Carl McPherson  
    • TerryCSA
      Posted on July 26, 2011 at 2:48pm

      I agree. Nothing speaks louder than a mass exodus. That is what I am preparing to do in my state. I’m leaving Nazi NC for Tenn. There are too many places to hang ones hat than stay where your rights are violated on a daily basis.

      Report Post »  
  • loggs14
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:55am

    This is unfortunate, but the Ohio supreme court OR the legislature will fix this. Obviously they are violating his rights. Even federal law purchase applications shows he is eligble to own the firearm. This is what happens when you have lefist prosecuters… If this had been a felony drug charge this article would never happened anyway. SO, time to fix this, I think some letter will go out from me today telling the legislator to fix it.

    This is why the bare minimum of laws should be written and reviewed thoroughly… instead of making laws to make laws….

    Then again after seeing what the nut-job cop did in Canton the other day I am going to be questioning our Ohio police forces until they purge the bad apples. I know good ones and many if not most are, but in Toledo they are still letting cops with DUIs on the force… I know some that brag about writting text message jokes all day on government phones… jez…. They have showed me the porn photo’s they send each other everyday ALL day… I mean tons of things they brag about doing that are questionable if not illegal.

    What happened to moral, ethics, and common sense in this society? Oh that is right UNIONS happened………

    Report Post »  
    • freedomweiner
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:00pm

      Dream Act passed last friday by Executive ORDER !!!! Norway ?? Winehouse ??? ETC.

      http://www.teapartytribune.com/2011/06/23/dream-act-obama-passes-amnesty-by-executive-order/

      Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 9:33pm

      if this was true, then why when you go by a gun don’t they ask you if you have ever talked to a police officer. instead of ‘have you been convicted of a felony’ then they do a background check for an hour. how do you get a gun after a background check, then goto court and they say you can’t have one? how is that even logic? why did the DA not bring up the fact that he obtained the gun legally? via background check, etc…

      Report Post »  
    • Concern4Constitution
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 10:29pm

      I’ll join you in the letter writing, but as I pointed out above, the devil is in the details–they avoided all the issues and classified the misdemeanor as a “disability” They had better be specific in quantifying what disability means, or they’ve just created a pathway for a whole bunch of people to qualify for SSDI

      Report Post »  
  • texasfarmer
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:54am

    This guy is a real threat to society. Right. I know there is more that the DA needs to do than screw with this man. They just don’t want you armed.
    All from Ohio, the same state that brought you Kucinich.

    Report Post » texasfarmer  
    • dscon
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:09pm

      and how about that nice police officer from Canton that just had to threaten
      a us citizen with death for carrying a ccw permit and gun!
      ohio is way cool eh?

      Report Post »  
  • J.C. McGlynn
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:53am

    On a form 4473 it lists “Any felony which carries a 1 year or more sentence” is a denial of purchase. A misdemeanor is excluded. So his purchase and “Right to Own” is legal.

    Report Post » J.C. McGlynn  
    • AmericanDogMan
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:44pm

      He has to have his rights restored! It’s any drug offense period, and any state offense where you could have been sentenced by more than two years; no matter the classification; misdemeanor or felony! Alot of people fall under this category and don’t realize it! Reckless driving and certain speeding fines may make you ineligible in certain states! It’s not just felonies! And if they change the sentence guidelines years after your case has been resolved you can still fall into the category retroactively!

      I.M.H.O. we can’t pick and choose when rights apply, if they are out of jail or better yet never been to jail; then they should have all their rights restored after their sentence is completed! If we think they are safe enough to be on the streets; well…

      Point being It’s not hard to make people with unpaid parking tickets and fail to recycle tickets next! It’s easy to demonize state by state! You can‘t let states or any other gov’t take your rights away! again just my Humble Opinion!

      Specific section:
      form 4473 ques. 12 c
      c. Have you been convicted in any court of a felony, or any other crime, for which the judge could have imprisoned you for more
      than one year, even if you received a shorter sentence including probation?

      Report Post »  
  • Uncurable wound
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:52am

    From my cold dead hand…

    Report Post »  
    • BufordTJustice
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:02pm

      Yeah I hear that a lot but who is standing up for the guns being taken now? At what point will the gun owners say enough is enough? Where is the demand from the gun owners to stop legislating away our gun rights? My point is there is no organized group of gun owners saying NO! Everyone accepts each infringement that comes along. Who is rallying around this man and saying (in large numbers) no you don’t to the ruling? When they come for your guns no one will be showing up armed in numbers to say no you don’t to the government. You will be alone and have no choice but to give up your gun. Don’t get me wrong I am a gun owner and get furious at this kind of legislation but reality is there is no organized gun owners standing up and saying no? Sad but the libs know this.

      Report Post »  
  • last frontier
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:51am

    The communist will use any excuse to try and disarm America.

    Report Post » last frontier  
  • Mr. Oshawott
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:50am

    Another day, another attempt of the progressives trying to disarm the public by interfering with the Second Amendment.

    Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
  • babylonvi
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:49am

    Next excuse to part you from your firearms will be ‘Failure to ’Pay Parking Fine’.

    Report Post » babylonvi  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:54am

      Sounds to me like Ohioians will soon be abolishing their Justice system all together if they wish to remain free. The law is over reaching to say the least and it’s a text book example of why Constitutional law should supercede case law in every court in the country.

      Report Post »  
  • robinakilt
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:48am

    Progressives no matter what you do with the law you will never take my guns! My second amendment right is to protect me from an every growing and intrusive government. The founders knew that they had to pick up arms in order to become free from the King, they tried diplomacy for years and it did not work. The founders saw the potential of how man will twist and lie to gain power over other men so the second amendment was put in place. Only idiots or liars think it is in there for hunting, it is in there for the average everyday man to protect himself from an oppressive and corrupt government that is grabbing power and control.

    Report Post » robinakilt  
  • yanki161
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:48am

    Normally I’d agree with the “move to Texas” argument. But this is a terrible development and with 35 to 50 percent of US residents owning guns, we can’t all move to Texas. (We could tip over like Guam. ha ha) We have to stand and fight! I’m standing in NJ (also known as the People’s Republic of NJ.) We have to fight for our rights in each of these fascist states.

    Report Post » yanki161  
  • Soldier_FORTHERECORD
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:44am

    Is it just me… or would allowing this to stand establish precedent for any state to deny ANY right, including life?

    Report Post »  
    • DrFrost
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:48am

      I agree. It seems if you’ve ever been convicted of anything… including a speeding ticket, your state can pass laws to take away any constitutional right based on that.

      Utterly ridiculous.

      Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:51am

      Okay I guess that means that he can’t vote either because the statute that denies gun onwership to felons is based on the same statute that denies felons voting rights. It looking like the democrats will be losing 2/3 of their Ohio voters if this goes through.

      Report Post »  
    • Armed Patriot
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:52am

      What dont they understand in the words… “the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

      Report Post » Armed Patriot  
    • the_ancient
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:56am

      That preceedent was actually set a long time ago.,.

      There are a number of post sentence — sentences that have been passed for the “public good” everything from Sex Offender to new Robber Lists, Felony Residency Rules, etc etc

      I am against all of these exta-sentance lifetime punishment laws..

      Report Post » the_ancient  
  • hechafteth
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:42am

    If a dope smoker can’t have a gun, then anyone convicted of an alcohol offense shouldn’t either. For that matter, neither should a bible-thumper, homosexual, Tea Party member, non-Caucasian, welfare recipient, Jew, or Freemason.

    Just cops, no one else. Zeig Heil!!!

    Report Post » hechafteth  
    • David286 - FL
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:59am

      Unfortunately that’s how the anti-gun left thinks…Only the government should have guns. The rest of us should have to rely on them for protection. Free people own guns…slaves don’t.

      Report Post » David286 - FL  
    • BuckeyeWithA45
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 5:00pm

      all i can say as an ohioan is.

      Come get em, but please send your unmarried, childless men first as I have no desire to make widows or orphans.

      Report Post » BuckeyeWithA45  
  • ChipK
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:41am

    then barry should be removed from the presidency as he is a former coke head.

    Report Post »  
    • Caniac Steve
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:48am

      he was removed from his us senate seat too ya know…he lost it becasue he was elected by the people..to be president…see i knew we had to be careful for what we, the people asked for huh ? and the guy needs to appeal this to the ohio state supreme court too !!

      Report Post » Caniac Steve  
    • chips1
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:00pm

      Former? I don’t think so!!!

      Report Post »  
    • argoman
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 3:41pm

      way more dangerous to have a handgun than a little red button that can nuke the whole world. NOT!

      Report Post » argoman  
  • affinnity
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:40am

    Here’s a thought: If you live in Ohio don’t tell the government you have guns and buy your ammo on the street or in another state.

    Also, did you know that guns aren’t the only way to defend yourself? You can buy very effective weapons at a hardware store or sporting goods store.

    Report Post » affinnity  
  • SquidVetOhio
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:39am

    I live in Montgomery County (Dayton) Ohio. So glad to see at least my county court got it right. We have a fairly conservative Supreme Court. This will be overturned. Lesson to be learned though:
    Nothing good comes from smoking pot!

    Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
    • Pattondog
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 12:19pm

      Absolutely zero correlation between the utilization cannabis and gun ownership. what about booze or cigarettes then. if you have a dui or emphysema from smokes then it should be equally applied to owing a means of mechanical protection via guns and ammo. The jist of their argument is to demonstrate irresponsibility of trust right, so what about other actions not tied to specific substances, where do you draw the line.
      Or is it that they are drawing the line for you? Shut up, be happy! Now everything will be done for you.

      Report Post »  
  • waking_giant
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:37am

    If you have ever sought counseling by a medical professional for any reason, then you might have your second amendment rights taken away from you someday. Something to think about once all of our medical records are digitized and accessible to any bureaucrat.

    Report Post »  
  • rabblechat
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:36am

    This just goes to show how thin the line between law abiding citizen and “criminal” is for all of us.
    I hear people everyday say that they are not bothered by laws like the patriot act because they are not criminals and have nothing to hide…

    This case shows just how easy law abiding citizens can be turned into criminals.

    One other though why is it the second amendment is the only “right” subject to so many conditions?
    can you imagine if all the strings attached to the right to bear arms were applied to the freedom of speech?

    Report Post » rabblechat  
    • Dale
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:52am

      I forget the book, I believe it was featured on Judge (Cousin) Andrew’s program, but it says that every person breaks three (federal?) laws every day.

      Report Post » Dale  
  • UlyssesP
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:33am

    Any idiots registered for a medical marijuana license are just asking to be rounded up when the feds decide. If this story is not indication of something…think again after your Mexican dirt dope wears off.

    Report Post » UlyssesP  
  • MONICNE
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:28am

    This needs to go all the way to the SCOTUS. Imagine how many lives would have been spared at the Texas rollerskating rink Saturday if citizens there were allowed to carry sidearms. The 2nd amendment is the Boss law. Imagine what would have happened in the old west if Tombstone Sheriff Earp had outlawed open carry within the city limits.

    Report Post » MONICNE  
    • 59 Fender Pro
      Posted on July 26, 2011 at 9:50pm

      Earp had that shootout over disarming the same people he had the shootout with. Tombstone had a city ordinance that disallowed the carrying of firearms for anybody except for law enforcement.

      Report Post » 59 Fender Pro  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:26am

    This shows how far and fast the progressive socialists will move and are prepared; they seek at the federal levels, the states, the counties, and city levels to slowly and irreversably change the laws and constitution of the land — one precident set anywhere, and the door is then opened to oppression by the governments on a massive scale.

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • MONICNE
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:43am

      I agree it is a very bad thing to have localities pushing laws on residents and visitors. States need to let the federal government take over and then every village and city will be the same and you will not need to check the internet when you visit Aunt Millie in North Dakota or Cousin Al in New Jersey.

      Report Post » MONICNE  
  • jdog777
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:26am

    The conservative leadership of Ohio must step in.

    Report Post »  
  • PrfctlyFrank
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:23am

    Shoot, I don’t have any guns, honest.. Not a one.. Nope, all my guns are gone, probably stolen or lost in the woods or something.. No guns here cops, move along.. This is going to come to a fight.. The courts are complicit with the politicians and they are going to attempt to take our guns.. It’s what they do..

    Report Post » PrfctlyFrank  
    • loriann12
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:39am

      Next thing you know they‘ll say stupid people don’t have a right to own a gun……if you drink you can’t own a gun, etc.

      Report Post »  
  • randy
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:23am

    Keep pushing the people… while giving guns to Mexico and terrorists washington.
    Real smart!

    Report Post » randy  
    • knockered
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:32am

      They want our guns so when it‘s time to stand against them we’ll be as they are in the arab nations defenseless. Good luck with that. The people of America should not and will not give up their right to bare arms. just saying

      Report Post »  
  • IntheKnowOG
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:22am

    That’s why we can move from state to state. Don’t like the rules, move to Texas.

    Report Post » IntheKnowOG  
    • ronnied59
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:30am

      your papers please…

      Report Post »  
    • escape_from_socialism
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:36am

      yes..this is why I’m moving from NJ to PA.

      Report Post »  
    • countrysideflair
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:37am

      I’d move to Texas if not for a few minor issues:
      -To damn hot
      -High likelihood of Tornadoes
      -Huge influx of illegal aliens
      -Borders on a drug war zone
      -Every single critter is aggressive and poisonous.

      Report Post » countrysideflair  
    • They SMEAR what they FEAR
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:46am

      @COUNTRYSIDEFLAIR
      You know in Texas you can apply your 2nd Amendment rights to 3 of those ‘minor issues’!

      Report Post » They SMEAR what they FEAR  
    • the_ancient
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:51am

      Texas is not really all that great…..

      Sure it is better than IL, CA, NJ, and the other deep blue states, but is it not the end all be all of freedom that people make it out to be

      Report Post » the_ancient  
  • RightPolitically
    Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:20am

    If laws are written to infringe upon the right to bear arms, those laws MUST HAVE actual merit and not be “back-door” designed for the purpose of infringement. This seems to be what the leftist court decision is trying to do…….IT IS WRONG!

    Report Post » RightPolitically  
    • sWampy
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 11:27am

      In 46 years, I have never known a liberal to be right about anything.

      Report Post »  
    • Run Silent
      Posted on July 25, 2011 at 3:05pm

      When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

      Report Post » Run Silent  
1 2 3 ... 7

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