Fifth Circuit will review if law barring felons from possessing guns is federal overreach

[Sedalia Dave]

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/4656732/fifth-circuit-will-review-law-barring-felons-possessing-guns-is-federal-overreach/#google_vignette

 

https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2026/07/21/heeding-thomas-call-full-5th-circuit-to-hear-gun-possession-ban-challenge/

[Blackwater 53393]

Subscription required for the second article.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

I have always wondered about this.   On the one hand, if you commit a crime, there should be consequences.

But on the other, the blanket lifetime ban is troubling.   Once you are released from prison, you have "paid your debt to society" and your rights are returned to you, except for the right to own and carry a gun.   It essentially amounts to perpetual punishment.  

Now, perhaps for some specific crimes, as determined by law, this might be advisable.  But at least for non-violent crimes, it seems like overkill.

Of course, this has far reaching implications beyond just gun rights.   The arguments against a lifetime prohibition on gun ownership could just as easily be applied to things like a "sex offender registry."    Of course, owning a gun is a right.   Keeping your criminal past a secret is not a right.

It's complicated.

[Lawdog]

Not unlike the lifetime ban of Pete Rose.

Did he screw up? Yep.

Does that warrant a lifetime ban?  Good question.

It is complicated.

[Blackwater 53393]

In my own opinion, violent felons, those who injure or kill victims in the commission of a crime while armed, should be prevented from owning, possessing, or using any kind of weapon from the point of conviction in perpetuity.

 

An avenue for recovery of certain rights should be available, but only after the full sentence is completed and any restitution is made.

 

Never firearms.

 

Just my opinion without any emotion or prejudice.

[Eyesa Horg]

1 hour ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

In my own opinion, violent felons, those who injure or kill victims in the commission of a crime while armed, should be prevented from owning, possessing, or using any kind of weapon from the point of conviction in perpetuity.

 

An avenue for recovery of certain rights should be available, but only after the full sentence is completed and any restitution is made.

 

Never firearms.

 

Just my opinion without any emotion or prejudice.

+1

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

2 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

In my own opinion, violent felons, those who injure or kill victims in the commission of a crime while armed, should be prevented from owning, possessing, or using any kind of weapon from the point of conviction in perpetuity.

 

An avenue for recovery of certain rights should be available, but only after the full sentence is completed and any restitution is made.

 

Never firearms.

 

Just my opinion without any emotion or prejudice.

 

This I will agree with.   Violent offenders need much more strict punishment that someone who, I don't know, lied under oath about something.

I guess whatever it is all needs to be specifically spelled out in the appropriate laws. 

[Subdeacon Joe]

Write it into the sentence. It's not that hard to do.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

31 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

Write it into the sentence. It's not that hard to do.

For you and me, perhaps, but for lawyers and Congressmen?  I am not sure that's even possible.

 

[Vail Vigilante]

On 7/24/2026 at 5:14 AM, Lawdog said:

Not unlike the lifetime ban of Pete Rose.

Did he screw up? Yep.

Does that warrant a lifetime ban?  Good question.

It is complicated.

I always thought the Rose thing was messed up.

He bet on his own team. 

But the bet was To Win.