Nod to Ravenwood for the link.
Reuter's reports that the Ninth
"A federal appeals court has tossed out the armed bank robbery conviction of a Los Angeles man after finding that -- while he admitted being armed and robbing the bank -- he did not mean to show his gun to a teller while demanding money.
"The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said Tuesday in a written ruling that that Odom should have been convicted of unarmed bank robbery -- which carries a lesser prison term -- instead of armed robbery."
Does that mean that if Congress bans possession of "assault weapons" that I'm not really armed if I keep mine, so long as I don't intend for anyone to know I have it?
I want to live in the Fifth Circuit. At least the majority of Justices there have brains. There's a couple in San Francisco with reasoning ability, but they are overwhelmed by the rest.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.