#49386
Profile photo of GeorgiaSaint
GeorgiaSaint
Veteran
member9

Ex post facto law. It doesn’t even need to go to the Supreme Court. It isn’t legal.

Simply not true. Ask anyone that lost their ability to hunt, hold their job as a policeman or security guard, or continue a career as a member of the military (where annual weapons qualification is a requirement). It’s called the Lautenberg Amendment. If you’re not familiar with the Lautenberg Amendment, you’re in for a big wake-up about ex post facto laws. Like everything else, what you used to know and take for granted about established law does not apply if TPTB don’t want it it to apply.

If a young married man got angry and slapped his wife one time 30 years ago, she called the police, and police verified the hand print on her face, and the contrite young man went before a judge and admitted to his mistake and submitted himself to whatever the court wanted to do to him out of contrition, and he was given probation instead of potential jail time, paid a fine, and went to some anger management classes, BACK THEN he thought it would all be over if he never repeated any such thing. And that’s what the judge and his attorney told him, in good faith. Fast forward to the Clinton administration and Senator Frank Lautenberg. If you have EVER been convicted of a misdemeanor offense involving any domestic violence (child or spouse), you can NEVER again have, borrow, use, own, or otherwise be associated with firearms. You’re a high ranking military or law enforcement official? Tough. Have people actually lost their jobs, decades later because of Lautenberg? Absolutely. Ex post facto? Not according to the courts. Fact, not fiction. Deal with it, America. Everything you ever thought you knew no longer applies.

GS
"Ye hear of wars in far countries, and you say that there will soon be great wars in far countries, but ye know not the hearts of men in your own land."