Lawyer who was pardoned for pointing a gun at Black Lives Matter protesters in St. Louis is suing to

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

get his firearms back.



Mark McClosky, the St. Louis lawyer who was photographed last summer pointing guns at Black Lives Matter protesters marching down his private street, filed a lawsuit Wednesday to get his weapons back.

McClosky and his wife, Patricia McCloskey, both pleaded guilty in June to misdemeanor charges and agreed to surrender their weapons.

But Missouri's Republican Gov. Mike Parson pardoned the couple on August 3. That prompted Mark McClosky to argue in his lawsuit that he was absolved "of all wrongdoing," and therefore his firearms should be returned.

"There is no just basis or right for the State of Missouri to possess the above-referenced firearms or to retain the above-referenced funds," the lawsuit argued, demanding that two guns be returned to the couple, along with nearly $900 in fines they paid.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawyer-pardoned-pointing-gun-black-191436873.html

[Kittycatkat]

1. You can only be pardoned if you committed the crime in the first place.

Being pardoned does change the fabric of time, it just stops the wheels of justice.

[TreasonousBastard]

4. That's my understanding-- you can only be "pardoned" if you actually did the crime...

a pardon doesn't erase anything, just kinda forgives you for what you did.

This lawyer should know that.

[GregariousGroundhog]

8. Pardons need not be applied to crimes actually committed

Say for the sake of argument that John kidnaps a federal judge named Jerry, transports Jerry across state lines, kills him, and then disposes of the body. Then say that Jake is charged and falsely convicted of the kidnapping and murder, but DNA evidence later proves that John as the true perpetrator. The President is perfectly capable of pardoning John, even though he did not commit the crime.

The only requirement is that a pardon cannot be issued for future conduct. There are some questions among legal scholar about how specific a pardon must be. For example, Ford pardoned Nixon of all crimes previously committed without specifying what crimes they might be and Carter pardoned all draft dodgers without specifying who the draft dodgers were; some legal scholars think the Supreme Court might strike down such pardons as being overly broad if the issue were ever brought to them.

[former9thward]

10. President Carter and Ford pardoned thousands of draft dodgers who fled to Canada.

Most of them had never been charged with anything let alone tried.

[localroger]

7. Yep, that's what bit sherriff Joe Arpaio in the ass after TFG pardoned him

He was informed on national TV that accepting a pardon is also effectively a confession. He was unthrilled.

[MyOwnPeace]

2. Say what!?!

Is it really so that if you're 'pardoned' you get back all that you owed based on your conviction?
He/they get their weapons back? Fines?

Well, at least there's no 'dignity' to be returned.........

[TreasonousBastard]

5. Not really. He's going for a long shot.

[melm00se]

9. According to the BATF

the Form 4473 states

EXCEPTION: A person is not prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm if that person: (1) has been convicted of any Federal or State offense pertaining antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses; (2) has been convicted of a State misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment of two years or less; or (3) following conviction of a felony or other crime for which the judge could have imprisoned the person for more than one year, or a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, has received pardon, an expungement or set aside of the conviction, or has lost and regained civil rights (the right to vote, sit on a jury, and hold public office) in the jurisdiction in a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim. The term includes all misdemeanors that which the conviction occurred, AND the law of the convicting jurisdiction does not prohibit the person from receiving or possessing firearms. Person subject to any of these exceptions, or who received relief from disabilities under 18 U.S.C. 925(c), defined parties. (See Exception to 21.b. - 21.l.) A person who has been convicted of should answer “no” to the applicable question.

This may create an issue for the locality if they withhold the firearms which could be actionable by this chucklehead.

Just because this issue involves firearms, it does not give the government carte blanche to take action that is outside the law.

Remember, rights, like the 2nd amendment, are designed to restrain government actions not the actions of the individual.

[Johonny]

3. the state should smelt it and pour it into a black lives matters trophy mold, and then return it

[marble falls]

6. He and she were guilty and pardoned. The guns were used in a crime and they weren't pardoned.