• ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    But had he been charged with a felony for shooting at people before this incident even took place, he wouldn’t have had his rights anymore already.

    Basically I mean if he shot at people and got charged with a felony and got his guns taken as a result,

    and then beat his GF and got a DV charge banning him from possessing the guns he was already banned from owning,

    and then he sues on the grounds of the DV conviction banning him from having guns,

    even if he wins, he is still barred from having guns because of the previous felony banning him from having guns, which would be separate from the DV.

    Also even if he’s awaiting trial on felony charges, he is still not legally allowed to possess a gun.

    Unless you mean the police or prosecution violated his rights (like the right to counsel) during the original trial for shooting at people non-DV related, and so that case was dismissed, which is a possible explanation for why he got off without a felony for shooting at people. Could be, and that’s another reason to add to the list for “why they shouldn’t violate people’s rights during trial,” because if so that let this dickhead go free.