You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #61: here's some wording for you [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-30-09 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #57
61. here's some wording for you
Edited on Thu Jul-30-09 11:22 AM by iverglas

This is from Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, where the provision is roughly analogous:

Serious criminality

36. (1) A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible on grounds of serious criminality for

(a) having been convicted in Canada of an offence under an Act of Parliament punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least 10 years, or of an offence under an Act of Parliament for which a term of imprisonment of more than six months has been imposed;

(b) having been convicted of an offence outside Canada that, if committed in Canada, would constitute an offence under an Act of Parliament punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least 10 years; or

(c) committing an act outside Canada that is an offence in the place where it was committed and that, if committed in Canada, would constitute an offence under an Act of Parliament punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least 10 years.

The initial onus is on the authorities to assert that the foreign offence IS equivalent to a domestic offence. And yes, I like that wording better.

(edit - that's why the immigration officer of my acquaintance approved the application for permanent residence of someone with a conviction for desertion from the US military. "Not our concern." ... Although of course desertion is an offence in Canada ... hmm. I know the issue has arisen in other instances, since I've seen materials about Swiss military law being considered in cases I wasn't involved in; not sure what happened.)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Feinstein introduces bill to keep guns out of those convicted of felonies overseas derby378  Jul-29-09 03:36 PM   #0 
  - If Feinstein is convicted of war profiteering will shel be able to keep her concealed weapon permit?  tularetom   Jul-29-09 03:45 PM   #1 
  - Why not!  divideandconquer   Jul-29-09 03:54 PM   #2 
  - Because should your rights in your home nation be dictated....  eqfan592   Jul-29-09 03:59 PM   #3 
  - Here's an interesting case to consider...  derby378   Jul-29-09 04:04 PM   #5 
     - Wow....  eqfan592   Jul-29-09 04:31 PM   #13 
     - hmm  iverglas   Jul-29-09 04:33 PM   #14 
     - A kilo of cocaine is not legal in Mexico.  AtheistCrusader   Jul-29-09 04:58 PM   #24 
     - so?  iverglas   Jul-29-09 05:09 PM   #28 
     - Nice strawman, iverglas  rd_kent   Aug-02-09 10:34 AM   #104 
     - here's a dictionary  iverglas   Aug-02-09 04:27 PM   #108 
        - Really?  rd_kent   Aug-02-09 04:47 PM   #113 
           - sad  iverglas   Aug-02-09 04:59 PM   #114 
              - Well, keep smacking yourself then  rd_kent   Aug-02-09 05:38 PM   #118 
     - It's illegal to cross into the US with a kilo of cocaine  rl6214   Aug-02-09 10:00 PM   #123 
     - After re-reading the bill as it's written...  eqfan592   Jul-29-09 04:36 PM   #16 
        - ah, if only you could see post 29  iverglas   Jul-29-09 05:14 PM   #31 
  - Because violating another nation's political laws should not deny a  Hoopla Phil   Jul-29-09 04:06 PM   #6 
  - what's that now?  iverglas   Jul-29-09 04:25 PM   #10 
     - Wow, just go ahead a make shit up. Seems to work real good for you.  Hoopla Phil   Jul-29-09 04:42 PM   #17 
     - I'll try it someday; meanwhile, you remain the master  iverglas   Jul-29-09 04:55 PM   #20 
        - Blaw blaw blaw. Isn't that how so many of your posts start? LOL  Hoopla Phil   Jul-29-09 05:15 PM   #34 
     - Armed robbery isn't a "political law"  Angleae   Jul-29-09 04:55 PM   #21 
        - gosh, no shit  iverglas   Jul-29-09 04:58 PM   #23 
           - Burden of proof  derby378   Jul-29-09 05:03 PM   #27 
              - Q. Where does it say that?  iverglas   Jul-29-09 05:13 PM   #30 
                 - "if the convicted person establishes.."  X_Digger   Jul-29-09 05:19 PM   #36 
                    - I do beg your pardon  iverglas   Jul-29-09 05:39 PM   #38 
                       - Asked and answered.  X_Digger   Jul-29-09 06:04 PM   #40 
                          - nah  iverglas   Jul-29-09 06:16 PM   #41 
                             - Where is this magic IF you keep refering to?  Statistical   Jul-29-09 10:36 PM   #49 
                                - right  iverglas   Jul-30-09 10:07 AM   #55 
                                   - Well I doubt Feinstein will listen to me but I will write my senator.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 10:14 AM   #57 
                                      - here's some wording for you  iverglas   Jul-30-09 11:10 AM   #61 
  - Because thats not a choice at all.  rd_kent   Aug-02-09 10:32 AM   #103 
     - you're absolutely right  iverglas   Aug-02-09 04:33 PM   #109 
        - I will tell you what, iver, here's a compromise  rd_kent   Aug-03-09 02:16 PM   #125 
  - Looks good on it's face BUT, how many D.U. members could/would  Hoopla Phil   Jul-29-09 04:04 PM   #4 
  - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   Jul-29-09 04:34 PM   #15 
  - As noted, the conviction would have to be for something also illegal in the U.S.  Euromutt   Jul-31-09 05:26 AM   #82 
  - once again, lovely to see all the good sense here  iverglas   Jul-29-09 04:18 PM   #7 
  - And how about you address the points people ACTUALLY raised?  TheWraith   Jul-29-09 04:23 PM   #8 
  - how about you address what I already said?  iverglas   Jul-29-09 04:25 PM   #11 
  - Probably cause posting flame bait is much easier for a lawyer. Try to anger  Hoopla Phil   Jul-29-09 04:49 PM   #19 
     - "Try to anger your opponent into saying something stupid."  iverglas   Jul-29-09 04:59 PM   #25 
        - Odd, it was about the same time you entered. . .  Hoopla Phil   Jul-29-09 05:14 PM   #32 
  - For starters, remember those two journalists kidnapped by North Korean soldiers?  derby378   Jul-29-09 04:24 PM   #9 
  - for starters, why don't you try reading what you posted?  iverglas   Jul-29-09 04:29 PM   #12 
     - No snarkiness is warranted - it's all a matter of burden of proof  derby378   Jul-29-09 04:47 PM   #18 
        - that's twice now  iverglas   Jul-29-09 05:15 PM   #33 
           - WTF? How else could it be interperted?  Statistical   Jul-30-09 10:30 AM   #60 
              - what I'm not getting  iverglas   Jul-30-09 11:12 AM   #62 
                 - That would be upon govt agencies to comply with the law.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 11:24 AM   #65 
  - I'm on board in the case of felonies  AtheistCrusader   Jul-29-09 05:01 PM   #26 
  - I guess being from Canada you don't quite understand the FUNDAMENTALS of our system  rd_kent   Aug-02-09 10:49 AM   #105 
     - you guess wrong  iverglas   Aug-02-09 04:19 PM   #107 
        - Im confused now  rd_kent   Aug-02-09 04:43 PM   #112 
           - I wouldn't know  iverglas   Aug-02-09 05:07 PM   #115 
              - If you dont know, then why are you weiging in on the subject  rd_kent   Aug-02-09 05:34 PM   #117 
                 - sorry you failed to understand a single thing  iverglas   Aug-02-09 06:54 PM   #120 
                    - No, I think its you who failed to understand  rd_kent   Aug-03-09 12:07 AM   #124 
  - I oppose this bill.  gorfle   Jul-29-09 04:56 PM   #22 
  - because you think you can just keep pretending it doesn't say what it says  iverglas   Jul-29-09 05:16 PM   #35 
     - It is possible to be charged with a crime in foreign country that is also a crime in the US and ...  Statistical   Jul-29-09 10:15 PM   #47 
        - sigh  iverglas   Jul-30-09 10:06 AM   #54 
           - Let me help you with the highlighting you started 6 words too late.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 10:21 AM   #58 
              - thanks all the same, but I was addressing what you actually said  iverglas   Jul-30-09 11:16 AM   #63 
                 - The persons entering stuff into the NICS is not above the law.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 11:38 AM   #67 
                    - and I don't doubt for a second that you are 100% sincere  iverglas   Jul-30-09 12:09 PM   #69 
                       - I think the language issue we are in agreement with  Statistical   Jul-30-09 12:25 PM   #72 
                          - hand-wringing  iverglas   Jul-30-09 12:41 PM   #76 
                             - Not would but could.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 12:50 PM   #78 
                                - nope  iverglas   Jul-30-09 12:53 PM   #79 
                                   - It "could" be tweaked in committe.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 12:56 PM   #81 
  - I don't think this is a bad idea. n/t  Raskolnik   Jul-29-09 05:10 PM   #29 
  - Given that we would be....  eqfan592   Jul-29-09 05:30 PM   #37 
  - look! over here! evidence!  iverglas   Jul-29-09 05:43 PM   #39 
     - I get the nagging feeling that one way or another, this already exists  AtheistCrusader   Jul-29-09 07:04 PM   #42 
        - I would feel better about it...  eqfan592   Jul-29-09 07:06 PM   #43 
           - I imagine the process would be the same as a US felon getting voting rights restored.  AtheistCrusader   Jul-29-09 07:15 PM   #44 
              - but c'mon  iverglas   Jul-29-09 07:41 PM   #45 
              - Of course not.  AtheistCrusader   Jul-30-09 01:08 AM   #51 
                 - That isn't what the bill proposes.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 01:31 AM   #53 
                    - What?  AtheistCrusader   Jul-30-09 12:18 PM   # 
                       - So violation of due process until you appeal (assumming you have time & money) is ok?  Statistical   Jul-30-09 12:29 PM   #73 
                       - The bone of contention is the burden of proof  Euromutt   Aug-02-09 05:51 PM   #119 
              - Why would you imagine that?  Statistical   Jul-29-09 10:17 PM   #48 
                 - No, but there are some circumstances where a felon can get firearms rights restored too.  AtheistCrusader   Jul-30-09 01:04 AM   #50 
                    - Restoring firearms right is FAR FAR FAR more difficult than voting rights.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 01:28 AM   #52 
                       - In some jurisdictions, perhaps, but not all.  AtheistCrusader   Jul-30-09 12:15 PM   #70 
  - Feinenstein reminds me of Charlie. nt  Tejas   Jul-29-09 09:17 PM   #46 
  - So a woman from Iran who was convicted of drinking a beer in a bar would be barred from owning a gun  slackmaster   Jul-30-09 10:12 AM   #56 
  - Of course iverglass will tell you said person could appeal it so that makes it ok.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 10:23 AM   #59 
  - so you really think that your authorities are going to enter an Iranian conviction for drinking beer  iverglas   Jul-30-09 11:17 AM   #64 
     - How isn't the point. The fact that it can is.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 11:29 AM   #66 
        - any evidence needed for something to get entered in NICS?  iverglas   Jul-30-09 12:07 PM   #68 
           - Not the same issue. There will be evidence. A conviction in a foreign court.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 12:18 PM   #71 
              - "There will be evidence. A conviction in a foreign court."  iverglas   Jul-30-09 12:34 PM   #74 
                 - That sounds about right....  Statistical   Jul-30-09 12:41 PM   #75 
                    - yes  iverglas   Jul-30-09 12:48 PM   #77 
                       - Well I should mark my calender because we are closer on an issue than we have ever been before.  Statistical   Jul-30-09 12:54 PM   #80 
  - Yeah, like those dangerous felons  JonQ   Jul-31-09 11:50 AM   #83 
  - I think any law barring foreign-convicted felons needs to be more comprehensive  derby378   Jul-31-09 01:41 PM   #84 
  - especially if they read as badly as you do  iverglas   Jul-31-09 01:55 PM   #85 
  - Several issues  JonQ   Jul-31-09 02:24 PM   #86 
     - "issues"  iverglas   Jul-31-09 04:31 PM   #89 
        - Yes, for some reason you believe  JonQ   Jul-31-09 09:12 PM   #92 
           - evidently, for some reason YOU believe ...  iverglas   Aug-01-09 10:22 PM   #97 
              - My mistake, in fact you believe that the world consists of the US  JonQ   Aug-01-09 10:43 PM   #100 
                 - listen, you are sadly ignorant  iverglas   Aug-01-09 10:46 PM   #101 
                    - I fear you are beyond enlightenment  JonQ   Aug-02-09 10:58 AM   #106 
                       - "victimized"?  iverglas   Aug-02-09 04:36 PM   #111 
                          - It bores you  JonQ   Aug-02-09 05:33 PM   #116 
                             - do you imagine  iverglas   Aug-02-09 06:55 PM   #121 
                                - Um, we don't interact anywhere else  JonQ   Aug-02-09 09:26 PM   #122 
  - I thought that "any court" included foreign courts -- I seem to remember some case...  aikoaiko   Jul-31-09 02:40 PM   #88 
  - This would be a good idea  rd_kent   Jul-31-09 02:27 PM   #87 
  - how about those of us who have gone you several better?  iverglas   Jul-31-09 04:38 PM   #90 
     - Im not arguing that our system is better than another.  rd_kent   Aug-01-09 11:34 AM   #93 
     - yes, and I'm still asking  iverglas   Aug-01-09 10:13 PM   #95 
        - But thats extradition, which is due process  rd_kent   Aug-02-09 10:29 AM   #102 
           - read the thread, please  iverglas   Aug-02-09 04:34 PM   #110 
     - I didn't realize canada was the only other country in the world  JonQ   Aug-01-09 05:02 PM   #94 
        - how absolutely fascinating!  iverglas   Aug-01-09 10:18 PM   #96 
           - So the fact that some countries  JonQ   Aug-01-09 10:40 PM   #99 
  - So basically the poor immigrant trying to escape a tryannical country  Endangered Specie   Jul-31-09 08:47 PM   #91 
     - so basically you  iverglas   Aug-01-09 10:23 PM   #98 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC