RSS
Home
Breaking News: Was Pittsburgh gunman ineligible to possess firearms?
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
Today in Pittsburgh, a severely disturbed individual named Richard Poplawski took the lives of three police officers.
Almost immediately, the media reports have focused on the gunman’s use of a “high powered” rifle and his fear that the Obama Administration was going to take away his gun rights.
But wait … the Pittsburgh Post Gazette reports that Poplawski was given a dishonorable discharge from the Marine Corp. If this is true, then his concerns about the Obama Administration’s gun control plans were moot because he had already lost his right to purchase or possess firearms.
U.S. Code Title 18 § 922(g) prohibits anyone with a dishonorable discharge from possessing or purchasing firearms.
This reporter is attempting to verify if Poplawski was actually dishonorably discharged. There is often confusion between a dishonorable discharge and a discharge under less than honorable conditions. But the differences in terms of consequences is significant.
A dishonorable discharge is given only when a member of the military has committed an extremely serious offense which is the equivalent of a civilian felony and has been convicted of such at a court martial proceeding.
WTAE Channel 4 Pittsburgh is also reporting that Poplawski was the subject of a protection from abuse order. If true and the protective order is still in effect, then this too made him an illegible possessor since The Violent Crime Control Act of 1994 modified U.S. Code Title 18 § 922(g) to also make it illegal to possess or purchase a firearm while subject to such a court order.
While the anti-gun movement will use this horrible tragedy as yet another opportunity to push their radical agenda, a pattern is clearly emerging of an individual who was not a law-abiding gun owner. This is simply another example of a disturbed individual who cared little for the laws he was breaking or the lives of his fellow man.
Our thoughts and prayers go out to the families of these brave men who gave their all for their community.
Check back for updates as more information becomes available.
Check out other Gun Rights Examiners:
- Atlanta: Georgia Tech's school safety zone renders its students and employees vulnerable
- Austin: Binghamton massacre: death by government?
- Boston: Massachusetts Gun Law – time for real reform (Part II)
- Charlotte: Mexicali lie on 'assault weapons:' just the latest gun factoid
- Cleveland: Why not put confiscated firearms to good use?
- DC: Federal court's injunction against National Park gun ban repeal fails giggle test
- Denver: "Iron River" of guns into Mexico is actually just a trickle
- Los Angeles: Gun Owners and Corporate Social Responsibility, Part II.
- Milwaukee: New anti-gun ”feel good” bills now in committee in WI Capital. CORRECTION
- National: Media rushes to judgment in Pittsburgh shooting
- Seattle: Media rushed to blame 'high-powered rifle' as anti-gunners dance in blood
- St. Louis: Did IL State Rep. Dunkin lie about tabling mandatory $1 million liability insurance for gun owners?
- Wisconsin: Use and threat of lethal force
Related Articles:
Comments
.jpg)
