[Dillinger]

You know, it probably should have dawned on before today, because God knows I have had a special place in my, let's just say "heart", for Sarah Brady and her minions....

But has anyone ever done any research on whether John Hinckley Jr was even a law abiding gun owner?!?

He was NOT a resident of DC, where he shot Reagan and company - so since he had the weapon concealed, I am going to say the guy did not have a permit.

He had a 13 count Federal Indictment - did ANY of those charges include weapons violations?!

Because if they DID - I would say we need to start pointing out to everyone that will listen that the very foundation of Sarah's little personal crusade is based on a house of cards since someone who should NOT have had a weapon legally was the one who commited said crime.

We have any law students around here or someone who can pull and understand the 13 count Federal Indictment against Hinckley??

Anyone??

[LegatoRedrivers]

Originally Posted by Dillinger

But has anyone ever done any research on whether John Hinckley Jr was even a law abiding gun owner?!?

He was NOT a resident of DC, where he shot Reagan and company - so since he had the weapon concealed, I am going to say the guy did not have a permit.

He had a 13 count Federal Indictment - did ANY of those charges include weapons violations?!

Anyone??

No need to understand the Indictment: Ripped from the headlines of the day:



Closest I could find to a list of charges...not to mention photobucket kept returning with a network error...

Original article here:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1350&dat=19810824&id=UScxAAAAIBAJ&s jid=pAIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6844,3954052

[CA357]

Bingo!

.....

[LegatoRedrivers]

I would also like to point out that while he could legally buy a handgun at the time, the laws on the books now in any state would be more than enough to prevent him getting one today. He had a known history of psychological problems, and previous arrests for firearms charges. And of course, if he's willing to break the law in to carry a handgun, why wouldn't he be willing to break the law to acquire said handgun?

I think they've done enough.

Sorry. I know I'm preachin' to the choir, here.

[Dillinger]

Well, first off, Thank You to Legato. I appreciate the quick work.

I think I might have typed without thinking fast enough in clarity of my question.

I was sure that he was not allowed to carry a firearm in D.C. - but what I was wondering was if the 13 FEDERAL charges did indeed include a FEDERAL firearms violation.

Having him guilty of carrying illegally, but being able to obtain a weapon legally somewhere else does not help our cause, it hurts it.

Now, if because of his prior mental instabilities, as you have pointed out in relation to today's laws, would have PREVENTED him from legally obtaining a firearm, and thus having one, traveling across state lines with it and then going about his course of action would have constituted a Federal offense.

I believe, though I am not sure, but crossing state lines today with the intent to commit a crime with a weapon is a federal crime, but I don't know about back in 1986.

I do find it a bit of a stretch for an entire watchdog program hell bent on stripping the Rights of all citizens to grow from an act of one person that was clearly a criminal.

Does that mean we can start a political arm to outlaw anything that creates a blaze because of the Chicago Fire?!

[alsaqr]

OMG, Hinckley was born in Ardmore, OK. The air in that area is known to cause dementia.
Looks like the goal is to release Hinckley to the street in a few years. They will declare him cured. Wonder if he will obsess over Jodie Foster and try to impress her again?

I was sure that he was not allowed to carry a firearm in D.C. - but what I was wondering was if the 13 FEDERAL charges did indeed include a FEDERAL firearms violation.

According to this article, he was not charged with a federal firearms violation:

http://www.scfirearms.org/2ndamend/twelve.txt

Following the purchase of the two handguns, multiple purchase
forms were filed by the dealer with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms (BATF) giving BATF the opportunity to run a check on
Hinckley, but that agency would have found no felony convictions or
adjudication of mental incompetency. Hinckley had been arrested
on October 9, 1980, in Nashville, Tennessee, for attempting to
pass through airport security with handguns in his suitcase.
Hinckley was charged with and convicted of a misdemeanor only, paid
a small fine, and forfeited the handguns. Hinckley was checked by
law enforcement through the National Crime Information Center
(NCIC) and found to be without a criminal history. Information of
that arrest and misdemeanor conviction would still have confirmed
his eligibility as a non-felon Texan.
Hinckley, while charged for weapons possession violations
after the attack, was not charged with any violations of the
federal firearms laws restricting who can purchase pistols.

On June 17, 2009, a Federal judge ruled that Hinckley would be given the ability to visit his mother for nine days at a time, rather than six, spend more time outside of the hospital, and even have a driver's license. This was done over the objections of the prosecutors who said that he was still a danger to others and had unhealthy and inappropriate thoughts about women. Records show that he has had sexual relations with two women, one who was married for a long time and another who has bipolar disorder. Hinckley recorded a song titled "Ballad of an Outlaw", which the prosecutors claim is "reflecting suicide and lawlessness."[17]