New Jersey Justice or American Legal Standard?
Constitution? You don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution!
I have written about the Lautenberg Act before but still it remains in effect. Not that I ever had any delusions of grandeur or actually believed for one moment that my writing would do what our Supreme Court Justices refuse to do, but still, I hope against hope that one day, justice will go back to being about actual justice, including a search for the truth and adherence to the Constitution.
This article presents you with a hypothetical situation that could very well happen were we not so prone to getting old and dying. It is about a law that is for all intents and purposes, good in intent, as it is meant to keep guns out of the hands of those people who are prone to abusing women. Still, the intent of the law and the actual law itself, as is so often the case, are far removed each from the other.
Your great grandfather served in World War One and during the war, received enough battlefield commissions through the excellence of his service and sacrifice to our great and proud nation, that he became an officer.
As an officer in the Armed Services during WWI he was issued a sidearm and at the end of hostilities, was allowed to bring that sidearm home with him. The war ended and thankfully, your great grandfather returned to be with your great grandmother and make a few babies so ultimately you would be here to read this.
When your great grandfather returned, he got wed and began putting together his version of the American Dream. They bought a home and ultimately, he bought a new car. Your great grandmother, being something of a liberated woman herself, learned to drive so that she could handle the home front while he was away at work.
For all intents and purposes, it was a pretty good relationship. That is, it was a pretty good relationship until one Saturday afternoon get together nearly a century past.
She decides that this is the best time to tell him that she has put a minor dent in their new car. He goes out and sees that the entire front end is smashed up and the frame is so badly bent that the car ... in those days especially ... is essentially totaled.
For some reason or another this seems to upset your great grandfather and he decides to give her a piece of his mind ... proverbially speaking of course.
During this somewhat heated exchange, one of the guests of a friend that is over for the get together ... who does not know what kind and loving people your great grandparents are, being a duly concerned citizen and feeling it is their civic duty, calls the police in order to “protect” your great grandmother from this “abusive” male.
When the Law Enforcement Agents arrive, they discover the bruise on your great grandmother’s leg ... the one she got slipping on the wet bathroom floor while she was cleaning it.
Since they are Law Enforcement Agents and not peace officers, they are required by law to arrest someone. (Such is the law today)
Your great grandfather is summarily arrested and thrown in jail. When he does go in front of the judge, he pleads guilty to a class C misdemeanor charge of disturbing the peace, goes home and laughs the matter off with your great grandmother.
Flash Forward to 1996 or somewhere past that when the Lautenberg Act has taken effect.
Your great grandfather is sitting at the kitchen table cleaning his service issue .45 ... the one he was allowed to take home as a distinguished and honorably discharged officer having done his service and made his sacrifice to this great nation. They still live in the same house but the neighborhood has gone down and there are some rather dodgy characters around so he feels it is a prudent thing to keep his firearms in serviceable condition.
Since the neighborhood has gone downhill so far though, the cops are routinely out and about.
On this particular day, they are checking out the neighbors of your great grandparents. It seems that some anonymous yet concerned citizen has reported that there is a strong chance that the neighbors are dealing drugs.
In a rare show of having a desire to do their job thoroughly though, the Law Enforcement Agents actually decide to investigate the situation before they go breaking down the door and rush in with their guns blazing.
The course of their investigation inevitably leads them to your great grandparent’s door where they only want to come in and talk.
Your great grandparents, feeling that they have nothing to hide, invite the LE Agents inside and offer them coffee or tea. They respectfully decline and seem very amicable at first.
Your great grandfather, again, feeling he has nothing to hide or concern himself with, continues cleaning his service sidearm. The LE Agents inquire about it and he tells them of his service to this nation and how he was promoted to the rank of an officer on the battlefields of Europe.
Since they are Law Enforcement Agents, and bound by oath to serve and to protect ... THE LAW (Not we the people) they run a standard check on the gun-owner.
They discover that back during the roaring twenties, your great grandfather was convicted of a Class C Misdemeanor disturbing the peace charge associated with domestic violence.
Your great grandfather is now an instant felon.
There is no judge, no jury, no trial, and no due process.
He immediately loses the right to vote and to defend himself and his family.
By simply being in possession of a single bullet ... regardless of his knowledge about it (even if your great gramma had found one laying on the ground by all the spent shall casings in that crappy neighborhood and your great grampa did not even own a weapon) he is now a convicted felon in accordance with the Lautenberg Act. Being in possession of an actual firearm was no different legally, though just as much a violation without consideration for due process.
Easy to fight though right?
I mean, how could anyone not win a case in which their right to due process had been denied?
The Lautenberg Act has been contested all the way up to the SCOTUS and nobody has ever successfully defended themselves from this unconstitutional and illegal law.
Again, you can bring in all of the lawyers and constitutional scholars you want, but when you tell me that you are unquestionably bypassing the constitutional rights and convicting someone without any type of due process, I can think of no other way to describe it besides not only unconstitutional, but an actual illegal action against the citizen in question.
Let us know what you think please!