{"id":97104,"date":"2023-10-23T07:40:24","date_gmt":"2023-10-23T12:40:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=97104"},"modified":"2023-10-23T07:40:24","modified_gmt":"2023-10-23T12:40:24","slug":"97104","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=97104","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

Why Biden Wants SCOTUS To Rule Agains Rahimi<\/a><\/p>\n

I\u2019m going to start this off by saying what we almost have to say when talking about the Rahimi case, that the plaintiff in this case is not a good person. By all indications, he\u2019s a terrible human being and not someone I\u2019d want as part of my life.<\/p>\n

But, our rights don\u2019t exist only for those we approve of. They have to be protected for everyone, regardless of whether they\u2019re a good person or not.<\/p>\n

And Zachey Rahimi is such a person.<\/p>\n

Now, his case is going to the Supreme Court, and a lot of people are blatantly misrepresenting it. They\u2019re saying it\u2019s about keeping domestic abusers disarmed, all while ignoring that the case doesn\u2019t try to take on laws that rule those convicted of such offenses are prohibited from owning guns.<\/p>\n

Because Rahimi wasn\u2019t convicted of any such thing when he was charged with illegally possessing a gun. He just had a restraining order against him.<\/p>\n

Over at The Federalist,\u00a0John Lott gets into the real reason<\/a>\u00a0the Biden administration is fighting this so hard.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The administration wants Rahimi to lose this case so the court will deviate from its strict reading of the Constitution. That way, the outcome will set a precedent for lower court judges to decide on a case-by-case basis whether they like the laws legislatures have passed.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The reasoning behind protection orders is straightforward. If people subject to a civil restraining order are dangerous, prohibiting them from possessing firearms could save lives. On the other hand, if people under restraining orders are truly dangerous, are they really likely to obey such a law? Someone willing to commit a serious assault or murder is already facing a significant prison sentence, a life sentence, or the death penalty. The additional penalties for illegally obtaining a gun or violating a protective order are unlikely to provide deterrence.\u00a0Indeed, despite his protection order, Rahimi still obtained a gun and used it in a crime.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The problem is that, with a low threshold for taking away a person\u2019s guns, the possibility of making a mistake and taking away guns from innocent people is more likely. And it does not consider potential loopholes. For example, a partner who is a threat could get a judge to disarm his potential victim. Even<\/span>\u00a0peer-reviewed academic research shows<\/a>\u00a0that domestic violence protection orders do not generally affect or reduce the number of domestic gun murders or domestic murders.<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Mistakes will happen, and law-abiding people will have their guns taken away. But there is a big difference between \u201cbeyond a reasonable doubt\u201d \u2014 where the odds are 98 percent to 2 percent \u2014 that someone is dangerous and the \u201cpreponderance of the evidence\u201d \u2014 possibly 50.1 percent to 49.9 percent.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Mistakes will also happen more often in civil cases when judges make decisions without a hearing or legal representation for the accused.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I couldn\u2019t agree more.<\/p>\n

See, what we also know is that judges are far more likely to issue a restraining order and be wrong than risk the ramifications of getting it wrong in the other direction. They\u2019d have to live with the idea that they could have done something and didn\u2019t, so they\u2019re more likely to take claims far more seriously than they might otherwise.<\/p>\n

A restraining order, even for domestic violence, isn\u2019t due process. As Lott notes earlier in his piece, Rahimi didn\u2019t get a lawyer as this wasn\u2019t a criminal trial. He didn\u2019t get any of the trappings of due process, really, despite there being a judge present.<\/p>\n

Now, keep in mind that his right to keep and bear arms was taken from him in a situation where he really wasn\u2019t equipped to defend himself in court.<\/p>\n

Again, Rahimi isn\u2019t a good person, which we can clearly see by his later actions. Yet should he have been barred from his right to keep and bear arms in such circumstances?<\/p>\n

It\u2019s easy to say yes and point to his later issues, but we need to remember that this case isn\u2019t about Rahimi as a person. It\u2019s about the right he was stripped of without conviction of a crime, one that many innocent people have been stripped of in the same circumstance.<\/p>\n

The Biden administration, however,\u00a0likes<\/em>\u00a0it when people can be stripped of their gun rights so easily. They want to create an environment where anyone can be disarmed over what amounts to \u201che said\/she said\u201d evidence.<\/p>\n

The sooner we get used to our gun rights being second-class rights, the better for the Biden administration and anti-gun administrations yet to come.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Why Biden Wants SCOTUS To Rule Agains Rahimi I\u2019m going to start this off by saying what we almost have to say when talking about the Rahimi case, that the plaintiff in this case is not a good person. By all indications, he\u2019s a terrible human being and not someone I\u2019d want as part of … Continue reading “”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23,50,24,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-97104","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-courts","category-goobermint","category-rights","category-rkba"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97104","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=97104"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97104\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":97105,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97104\/revisions\/97105"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=97104"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=97104"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=97104"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}