Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
BobT

That didn't take long.

8 posts in this topic

Quote:
Washington (AP) - Twice convicted of felonies, James Francis Barton Jr. faces charges of violating a federal law barring felons from owning guns after police found seven pistols, three shotguns and five rifles at his home south of Pittsburgh.

As a defense, Barton and several other defendants in federal gun cases argue that last month's Supreme Court ruling allows them to keep loaded handguns at home for self-defense……

…..Chontos and other criminal defense lawyers say the high court's decision means federal laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of people convicted of felonies and crimes of domestic violence are unconstitutional as long as the weapons are needed for self-defense.

So far, federal judges uniformly have agreed these restrictions are unchanged by the Supreme Court's landmark interpretation of the Second Amendment….

Personally, once convicted I believe you have forfeited certain rights. You now have the task of proving to the rest of society that you deserve to be reinstated back into the mainstream of society.

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, if you read the decision by the Court, it specifically identifies the restrictions against convicted felons and the 'mentally unstable' from owning guns as being appropriate and reasonable regulations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not aware of this story other than what appears in your post.

So, from that starting point I thank you for making me wonder:

Should all convicted felons be viewed the same?

Should the task of re-proving ones self to society apply only to violent weapon use related felonies such as armed robbery or manslaughter? Should non-weapon related convicted felons of mail or bank fraud be treated differently?

When does a convicted felon successfully complete the task of deserving their reinstatement into mainstream society? How is time measured? After release? After parole completion? After death? Can it ever be?

Should a firearm related convicted felon have to protect themselves and their family from serous bodily harm or grave danger in their own homes with a lesser degree of force than a white collar convicted felon?

Maybe this will end up in front of the Supreme Court again for further clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember Martha Stewart is a convicted felon!All states differ in Mn if it wasn't a violent crime I believe 10 yrs after serving all time put down by the court.ALL rights reinstated.

A fella here in Willmar just got arrested and he was a felon in possesion of firearms his 10 years was up but he had special restrictions of a lifetime ban.He is now going to be going through the system(courts)I'm waiting because of the supreme courts decision to see what happens to him,And I believe he used that as a defence.

After conviction and all time served Prison & parole your rights are restored EXCEPT firearms.Thats the 10 yr rule of no offences violent in nature then there restored also.And it pertains to all felonious convictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the story on the Outdoor News HSOforum.

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ely men get 3 years in prison for BWCA terror

Barney Lakner, 38, and Jay Olson, 20, also were banned from the BWCA for five years in connection with the Aug. 7, 2007, shooting spree on Basswood Lake.

By LARRY OAKES, Star Tribune

Last update: August 11, 2008 - 8:54 PM

TWO HARBORS, MINN. - Concluding that two Ely men who terrorized wilderness campers caused "horrible events that went on for hours" a judge rejected pleas from their families for leniency Monday and sentenced each to three years in prison.

"You brought high-powered guns on an outing -- I have trouble visualizing it as a boat ride," District Judge Kenneth Sandvik told Barney James Lakner, 38, as he ordered the prison term and banned Lakner from the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCA) for five years.

Sandvik issued an identical sentence to Jay Andrew Olson, 20, in connection with the nighttime shooting rampage on Aug. 7, 2007, in which the pair and four friends entered the BWCA illegally in motorboats, shot guns and fireworks and terrified as many as 80 campers in the Basswood Lake area.

Given the chance to address the court, Jim Sanders, supervisor of the Superior National Forest, which manages the BWCA, said the "heinous acts of violence" hurt the wilderness area's reputation among its 200,000 annual visitors and "will be part of the Boundary Waters timeline forever."

The case drew widespread attention because of evidence that it was fueled by lingering resentment in Ely of the environmental activism that led to the creation of the BWCA.

Sanders asked Sandvik to ban the pair from the BWCA for life. But Sandvik said five years appeared to be the maximum time the law would give him authority over the defendants.

Sandvik also heard from a family that endured the threats. "I wonder when I'll ever feel comfortable in my own skin again," Marina Koller, 27, told Sandvik.

Koller, a teacher, described how she, her 64-year-old father and 11-year-old brother had to run into the woods and hide as the gun-toting men entered their campsite, swearing loudly, telling them to "get off our land" and making fun of their "freeze-dried food."

Then, she said, they crudely described how they would rape all three of them and kill her father, Emmerich Koller, with whom she traveled from Illinois for Monday's court hearing.

The sentences given to Lakner and Olson were the longest issued so far to any of the defendants -- five adults and a 16-year-old -- who came to be called the "Ely Six."

The adults all entered into plea bargains, each tailored to what Lake County Attorney Russ Conrow called their varying degrees of involvement.

Only the case involving the teenager, now 17, remains unresolved, with a pretrial hearing set for Sept. 8.

Conrow said Lakner deserved the prison term recommended by sentencing guidelines for his crimes because he was old enough to be a father to the others and had a responsibility to prevent or stop the melee. He noted that Lakner brought the two most deadly guns -- an AK-47 assault rifle and a Glock semi-automatic pistol -- as well as some of the beer the group drank that night.

He said Olson deserved prison because he called the others and organized the outing and participated more than some of the others.

Both Lakner and Olson apologized and asked for leniency. Olson said he wanted to go to college in the fall, and Lakner's mother begged the judge not to take him and his income as a delivery truck driver away from his wife and two sons.

Sandvik told the courtroom that while both men clearly had supportive family and friends -- something that might make them amenable to probation -- the nature of their crimes wouldn't allow him to depart from the sentencing guidelines, despite the better deals given to their co-defendant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but even after 10 years, unless you go back to court to prove that your worthy of having the felony conviction expunged from your record, it remains there.

I'm not 100% certain on this so if someone "In the Know" can post how this works, please do. I don't believe it just falls off your record on it's own after 10 years, regardless of the circunstances behind the conviction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you are Right LEP7MM. You can go back to court to get the conviction expunged from your records if you prove you are now a model citizen and the conviction is causing you undue stress.

A few years back it was popular for non-profits to get their clients records cleared when the affordable housing woes hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • In the end, LMIT met his karmic retribution when he got kicked in the head by a mule and came back as D2E. 
    •   Attached is what you can get with the $40 package with SlingTV. Looks like they have history but not discovery. They also have $20 and $25 packages. The only thing I watched with any regularity when I had it was ESPN so I dropped it. 
    • I'm also a moderator, and just about to shut your  garbage mouth posts down. Go get yourself an education, which you still have not provided proof of, and never will,  because there IS nothing to provide. You are nothing but an  ill-advised rabble rouser. There is no room here for your continual name calling and personal attacks/bashing.  I will warn you now to go read the rules of the site before your name-calling posts start to disappear in entirety.
    • Well said Del! There weren't issues till he decided to stick his nose in it. The mod for that thread did just fine.
    • I meant harmless in the sense they don't kill fish. With that being said, I'm sure the host fish would prefer that it not have a lamprey attached to it, but at the end of the day, the fish will live...literally. Lampreys are very common in the upper St. Croix River system. I see them attached to redhorse all the time, which makes sense, as redhorse are by far the most abundant fish in the system. If the lampreys haven't "crashed" that system after several thousand years of coexistence, I'm liking gamefishes' chances for the next several thousand years also 
    • John Podesta May Have Violated Federal Law By Not Disclosing 75,000 Stock Shares 3/26/2017 Daily Caller   John Podesta, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s 2016 national campaign chairman, may have violated federal law by failing to disclose the receipt of 75,000 shares of stock from a Kremlin-financed company when he joined the Obama White House in 2014, according to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group. Joule Unlimited Technologies — financed in part by a Russian firm —  originally awarded Podesta 100,000 shares of stock options when in 2010 he joined that board along with its Dutch-based entities: Joule Global Holdings, BV and the Stichting Joule Global Foundation. When Podesta announced his departure from the Joule board in January 2014 to become President Obama’s special counsellor, the company officially issued him 75,000 common shares of stock. The Schedule B section of the federal government’s form 278 which — requires financial disclosures for government officials — required Podesta to “report any purchase, sale or exchange by you, your spouse, or dependent children…of any property, stocks, bonds, commodity futures and other securities when the amount of the transaction exceeded $1,000.”   Podesta’s form 278 Schedule B is blank regarding his receipt of any stock from any company. Liberals and conservatives alike tell TheDCNF Podesta should have disclosed the stock. “Well Podesta should certainly have been more upfront in filling this out.  Clearly, it should have been fully disclosed,” said Craig Holman, a lobbyist for the liberal group Public Citizen which was founded by Ralph Nader.  “That’s the point of the personal financial disclosure forms, especially for anyone entering the White House,” he told TheDCNF in an interview. “If the transfer of stock took place, it had to be disclosed,” added former U.S. Attorney Joseph DiGenova in an interview. “If he didn’t, clearly it’s a violation.”   OH, MY...   And there is soo much more to this story...   Absolute criminals...   Link
    • Schumer goes off on Trump supporter at NYC restaurant, witness says Published March 27, 2017 New York Post   Witness: Schumer went off on Trump supporter at restaurant Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., caused a scene at a Manhattan restaurant when he began yelling at a wealthy and well-connected Donald Trump supporter that the POTUS is “a liar.” Schumer, the top Senate Democrat, lost his cool on Sunday night at Upper East Side restaurant Sette Mezzo, according to witnesses. He was dining with friends when he encountered Joseph A. Califano Jr. — the former U.S. secretary of health, education and welfare under President Jimmy Carter and domestic policy adviser to President Lyndon B. Johnson — and his wife, Hilary, who were having a quiet dinner. Onlookers said Schumer was incensed that Hilary — the daughter of William S. Paley, the founder and chairman of CBS — had voted for Trump, even though her husband, Joseph, is a well-known Democrat. One witness said of the restaurant rant, “They are a highly respected couple, and Schumer made a scene, yelling, ‘She voted for Trump!’ The Califanos left the restaurant, but Schumer followed them outside.” On the sidewalk, Schumer carried on with his fantastical filibuster: “ ‘How could you vote for Trump? He’s a liar!’ He kept repeating, ‘He’s a liar!’ ” Hilary confirmed the confrontation, telling Page Six, “Sen. Schumer was really rude . . . He’s our senator, and I don’t really like him. Yes, I voted for Trump. Schumer joined us outside and he told me Trump was a liar. I should have told him that Hillary Clinton was a liar, but I was so surprised I didn’t say anything.”   Sheezus....   What an unhinged lunatic a-hole....   Could you imagine if this had been paul ryan acting in this way ??   I think a knee to the groin was in order..
    • Curry is the yellow ones?
  • Our Sponsors