The Internet seems to be connecting to a parallel universe--one that is similar to ours, but clearly not quite the same. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has just ruled that unlicensed gun possession is a victimless crime. From the May 5, 2009 Boston Globe:
The Supreme Judicial Court yesterday ruled that illegal gun possession is a "passive and victimless crime" and that those charged with having illicit firearms cannot be held without bail as a danger to society.Now, it might well be the case that D.A. Sutter is only going after gang members and other criminals who have unlicensed guns. But even assuming this, the right to bail, except for capital crimes, or flight risk, is a constitutional right. The mere presumption that because someone is charged with possession of an unlicensed firearm that they are therefore unusually dangerous, is absurd.
In a 4-to-1 ruling, the state's highest court rejected the law enforcement strategy of Bristol District Attorney C. Samuel Sutter to cut down on gun violence by seeking pretrial detention for every person charged with illegal gun possession in his jurisdiction, which includes New Bedford.
Writing for the majority, Justice Francis X. Spina said a law known as 58A does not include illegal gun possession on the list of criminal charges that qualify for a dangerousness hearing.The court also rejected Sutter's argument that a catch-all phrase included in the statute gave him the legal authority to demand dangerousness hearings for dozens of criminal defendants in the past several years."While we are cognizant that unlicensed possessors of firearms may use firearms unlawfully, unlicensed possession of a firearm itself is a regulatory crime," Spina wrote. "It is passive and victimless."
Oh well, I'm sure that the weird wormhole in the time-space continuum that is allowing us to see into the parallel universe where the Massachusetts high court isn't filled with lunatic liberals will close in the next few hours.
No comments:
Post a Comment