Second Amendment Foundation Victory Again Shows Gun Rights Restoration IS Possible

Gun and Gavel
Second Amendment Foundation Victory Again Shows Gun Rights Restoration IS Possible
Second Amendment Foundation
Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA –-(Ammoland.com)- The Second Amendment Foundation has once again funded and won a small but significant federal court victory in a Pennsylvania case in which a federal judge ruled that a man convicted of a misdemeanor crime several years ago, but who has demonstrated that he “would present no more threat to the community” than an average law-abiding citizen, may not lose his Second Amendment rights under a federal gun control statute known as 922(g)(1).

Julio Suarez was convicted in Maryland 25 years ago of a misdemeanor for carrying a firearm without a license. Since then, he has led an exemplary life, but the conviction was enough to cost Suarez his ability to buy and keep a firearm for defense of his home and family. He’s been married for 20 years, fathered three children and has a government security clearance. He is also an elder of his local church.

Middle District Court Judge William W. Caldwell said in his 26-page opinion that Suarez “is no more dangerous than a typical law-abiding citizen and poses no continuing threat to society.”

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb said that “This case provides a building block upon which similar cases in which people are convicted of non-violent crimes might be challenged because they have lost their right to keep and bear arms as a result.”

“A person should not lose his or her constitutional rights for non-violent indiscretions that occur once in a lifetime,” added Attorney Alan Gura, who represented Suarez in this SAF-funded case.

Gottlieb explained that such cases are helping build a volume of court precedents that can be cited in future cases, thus demonstrating how SAF is “winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.”

“Under existing federal law,” Gottlieb said, “many people convicted of non-violent state-level misdemeanors have lost their Second Amendment rights because they’ve been lumped together with convicted felons due to indeterminate sentencing laws. That’s not right, and cases like this help restore some perspective and narrow some broad legislative brush strokes.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org ) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

6 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kevin

I had my gun rights restored successfully by a firm called WipeRecord. They were able to successfully and legally get me my right to own a fire arm restored in the state of Indiana and I was really impressed with these guys. Let me know if you want their info – you can google them fairly easily.

Mike

We need to be careful (as 2A supporters) not to become blinded by our ideology(as so many liberals do…). Arguing that law-breakers (whether felony or misdemeanor) should simply be allowed to “exercise their God-given rights…” ignores the fact that when one fails to accept the RESPONSIBILITY of living within the “law of the land”…one gives up the RIGHT to demand the full freedom the law is intended to protect for ALL of us. That’s why it’s called “breaking THE law” …not “breaking A law”. In this particular case the violation involved a FIREARM. It would be reasonable to say “if… Read more »

Sloblo

Nor should non-violent ‘felons’ be banned their God given right to armed self defense. White collar felonies such as embezzlement or tax evasion, although certainly requiring punishment and restitution, do not in themselves prove that such offenders are any more inclined than any law abiding citizen to present a violent danger to the public.

John

No one should lose any constitutional rights based on a misdemeanor. Nuf said!

khom

I thought only if you were a felon you can’t purchase or own a firearm? Why can’t this person purchase a firearm with only having a misdemeanor? I believe people can change and with making 1 mistake in the early ages of your life that is non-violent and not committing any felonies or any crimes after 20yrs,he’s abiding by the law.. Give him another chance to be able to protect his family..

Charles Nichols

The Second Amendment Foundation with Alan Gura as its attorney lost a similar case in which the Court of Appeals bitch slapped Alan Gura for failing to argue that the law was unconstitutional as-applied to his client. Gura had argued that the law was unconstitutional facially (as-applied to everyone) but seemingly neglected why the law was unconstitutional as it applied to his particular client in the case of Schrader v. Holder. Oops!

It looks like this time around Gura argued that the law was unconstitutional as applied to his client.

https://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org