NJ Supremes bicker about RKBA and self defense uses

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

NJ Supremes bicker about RKBA and self defense uses

Post by bignflnut »

This gets into the weeds in a hurry.
Montalvo was acquitted of “possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose” (Count One, in the discussion below) but convicted of “unlawful possession of a weapon” (Count Two). At trial, the judge included a self-defense instruction as to the unlawful-purpose charge but didn’t give it as to the unlawful-possession charge.

“During deliberations, the jury sent the trial judge a note asking, ‘Second charge, unlawful possession of a weapon, is self[-]defense considered a lawful use?.'”
After one stops shaking one's head (remember that American society is becoming less, not more, educated)....what follows is the basis of the appeal, and the nut of the argument...

We're down to this in America? If we're in the home, and we sometimes use a tool for other things...ok?
And if a jury instruction is or isn't proper should decide the merit of the case?
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
catfish86
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 2571
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:44 pm

Re: NJ Supremes bicker about RKBA and self defense uses

Post by catfish86 »

A lot of scary stuff in the weeds of this case. First, the Second Amendment is clearly not confined to the home. If that was the case, the 2nd A would say something like "the right to keep and bear arms in the home" but it does not and where does the tyrant find the authority to think that? Even further to argue that one cannot wield a machete when answering an angry knock shows the depths of the rabbit hole NJ is in.
God,
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can
and the Wisdom to know the difference.

Carrying a gun is a right, not a crime.

Gun control is racist.
Post Reply