Federal Court Rules Illegals in U.S. Have No Gun Rights

[norahc]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4fd_1336513177

http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/11/11-8051.pdf

The 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Monday that illegals do not have 2nd Amendment rights in the U.S.

The defendant, Mr. Huitron-Guizar, was born in Mexico and brought to Wyoming at age three. In March 2011, officers executed a warrant on his home and discovered three firearms -- a 7.62x39mm rifle, a 12-gauge semi-automatic shotgun, and a Smith & Wesson semi-automatic pistol. He was arrested and charged, leading to this appeal.

What this means is the Court has determined that illegal immigrants do not have Equal Protection for all Constitutional matters and rights, which may open the floodgates for other 'protections and rights', also.

This is a Federal Appeals Court, which means the only recourse is the U.S. Supreme Court.

[raven818]

This is a Federal Appeals Court, which means the only recourse is the U.S. Supreme Court.

[Alpo]

I don't see how that can have any bearing on other rights.

Illegal aliens are, by definition, criminals, since they are breaking the law by being in the country.

Criminals are not allowed to have guns.

They are, however, still allowed to be able to invoke the 5th, not be searched without a warrant or probable cause.

So I don't think this ruling will mean that illegals can be wiretapped without a warrant, or have the cops sneak in their house when nobody's home and search it, or be given the third degree with the spotlight and rubber hose, or not get a lawyer if they "desire and cannot afford one" or not get a jury trial. Other criminals still have all those rights.

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by Alpo

Criminals are not allowed to have guns.

They are, however, still allowed to be able to invoke the 5th, not be searched without a warrant or probable cause.

So I don't think this ruling will mean that illegals can be wiretapped without a warrant, or have the cops sneak in their house when nobody's home and search it, or be given the third degree with the spotlight and rubber hose, or not get a lawyer if they "desire and cannot afford one" or not get a jury trial. Other criminals still have all those rights.

Persons convicted of some particular crimes (particularly felonies, a category that seems basically random anymore ) are prohibited by law from possessing firearms. But it's only after conviction that any rights are abridged.

After conviction, a person may forfeit other rights as well. But it is unique for a class of persons to be denied basic human rights without conviction. I do see it as a very slippery slope.

And let's not allow the Federal Government to define the basic human rights protected by the Constitution as rights granted by the Constitution. They're not special privileges of being a citizen of the United States; they are inherent rights of all people.

[dons2346]

It took a federal court to figure that out?

[jack404]

funny.. when i next get to the states i gotta stay 3 months , do another safety course and then i can apply for my NRA ( Non Resident Alien not the other NRA) permit through DHS , then i can get a state permit again i did not get back in time to renew it .. so i gotta start all over

i cant have a gun until then and thats with me doing a dozen forms checks supplying Australian police record and them checking it's legit

so why the heck should they be allowed when its plain to everyone who is not from the USA its not allowed unless you do the government double step and pay pay pay

[Curtis R]

I dont believe we are talking about basic human rights but we are talking about the rights of american citizens of wich they are not.

[Alpo]

Lots of folks seem to think it's just rights that apply to American citizens.

But if that was true, then they could arrest Jack without a warrant, hold him without bail, torture a confession out of him, try him in a star court, don't let him have a lawyer, don't let him testify, don't let him see any witnesses against him, and when he's found guilty, execute him by shoving a cattle prod up his rectum. I mean, after all, he NOT an American, so he ain't got no rights. Right?

It's not "rights of American citizens". It's "Rights of people IN America".

[Caneman]

^^^ That is not quite correct, imo... The Constitution has provisions mainly describing what the Government can/can't do... some provisions apply to any person within US jurisdiction, such as "due process" and a "speedy trial" 5th/6th ammendments... but IMO it is clear that some parts of the Constitution are only for citizens such as "the right to vote" and "the right to bear arms"...

[Alpo]

I didn't see "vote" in the Bill of Rights.

[Caneman]

the Bill of Rights is technically the first 10 ammendments to the constitution and voting is not mentioned here... but if you look at the ammendments after the BoR you see voting rights mentioned frequently by ammendments: 15, 19, and 26, among others...

[Alpo]

Amendment 15 - The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment 19 - The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment 26 - The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

The Bill of Rights does not say "citizens of the United States". It says, "The People". That's everyone, citizen or not.

[Jhonny Yuma]

Why is it lib want illegal people to vote is it to get there people in so more illegal can vote so more can come in and vote over and over

[glens67]

Alpo
The phrase "People of the United States" has sometimes been understood to mean "citizens." This approach reasons that, if the political community speaking for itself in the Preamble ("We the People") includes only citizens, by negative implication it specifically excludes non-citizens in some fashion. It has also been construed to mean something like "all under the sovereign jurisdiction and authority of the United States."

Non US citizens here leaglly can apply for Firearm permits.
I think this would preclude Illegal people.

[Alpo]

I'm only going to do this once more, and then I'm going to give up, 'cause some people just don't want to hear what they don't want to hear.

First Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Second Amendment – A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.[57]

Third Amendment – No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Fourth Amendment – The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fifth Amendment – No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Sixth Amendment – In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Seventh Amendment – In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Eighth Amendment – Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Ninth Amendment – The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment – The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Nowhere. NOWHERE. NOWHERE in the Bill of Rights does it say, "People of the United States". It says, simply, "The People".

[Caneman]

Originally Posted by Alpo

Amendment 15 - The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment 19 - The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment 26 - The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

The Bill of Rights does not say "citizens of the United States". It says, "The People". That's everyone, citizen or not.

i guess you and i are having a disconnect somewhere... the BoR and later ammendments are all part of the constitution, and as you listed above clearly refer to rights of citizens only...

[bluesea112]

I can see good and bad coming from this. I'm not sure what the negative effects will be, but I'm sure the Federal govornment will be exploiding them soon enough.

[raven818]

Wow. I can't believe we're actually discussing this. Illegals have the same rights as the citizens of this country? Is that what I'm reading. Really?

[Curtis R]

So when the bill of rights of the united states was drafted it was ment for the whole world to live by?
And as far as Jack goes he comes into the states LEGALY files papers and goes by the book. So i would say thats totaly different.

[Bobitis]

Ya lost me Alpo.

"Nowhere. NOWHERE. NOWHERE in the Bill of Rights does it say, "People of the United States". It says, simply, "The People".

The 'US' Constitution is just that (Heavy on the US portion).
No other country in the world respects our Constitution, nor do we theirs. It is ours and ours alone.

You need to go back and research the original intent of the document. If ya don't, it ain't worth the paper it's written on.

According to you, anyone that has feet on the ground in the US should be accorded all the rights of the 'citizens'. That was not the intent, nor is it the way it works.

Sadly, it's the trend we are heading in. Mom and Dad swim the Rio Grande, drop off a kid, and the kid is a bonified US citizen. Kid then gets Mom and Dad citizenship.

We are in a downward spiral due to the lack of those willing to accept the document within the timeframe it was written, and the intent therefore.

As the past few years have shown us, we're doomed.

It's become a 'living' document, and soon there will be no more USA. We'll be just another stinking arm pit like most of europe.

The good news is, we won't be as bad off as those 3rd world countries. Yet...

[Jerryboy]

I've got mixed feelings on this subject. the right to keep & bear arms is a human right, not just an American one. the 2nd merely recognizes and protects that right.

if someone is brought into this country illegally either against their will or as a baby then that makes them just as much a victim of abduction as if someone smuggled me into mexico against my will. but if they come freely as an adult or a child who is old enough to know better then that makes them a criminal/juvenile.

but that still leaves the issue of: "what criminal act should prevent someone from owning a firearm?" the answer is, if you are too dangerous to have weapons, then you're too dangerous to be walking around free. once you've served your time, you are either a free man or still a criminal and should thus stay in prison. if you're in this country illegally, you are a fugitive from justice, and thus are a criminal; therefore until you obtain legal status as a Citizen or a legal alien resident you only have the rights extended to other criminals i.e. Miranda.