Stay in psychiatric hospital not enough to prevent gun ownership - appeals court

[MechAg94]

https://www.rt.com/usa/216855-psychiatric-hospital-firearm-ban-ruling/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

A Michigan man who was once institutionalized in a psychiatric facility – but has not suffered from mental illness in nearly three decades since ‒ cannot be prevented from owning a firearm, a federal appeals court ruled.
A three-judge panel of the Sixth US Circuit Court of Appeals ‒ all of whom were appointed by Republican presidents ‒ unanimously ruled Thursday that the federal ban on gun ownership for anyone who has been “adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution” violated the Second Amendment rights of Clifford Charles Tyler, a 73-year-old Hillsdale County, Michigan man.

This was just a 3 judge panel so I have no reason to think it will stand, but it is interesting. 

This guy was committed for a short term issue when his wife drained the bank accounts and ran off with another man. 

[MillCreek]

I have always thought this requirement was disproportionate insofar as it did not contemplate that the patient can recover.  Good for the Court.

[230RN]

I have always thought this requirement was disproportionate insofar as it did not contemplate that the patient can recover.  Good for the Court.

Does the same logic apply to any other of those "lifetime" proscriptions?

[Hawkmoon]

Does the same logic apply to any other of those "lifetime" proscriptions?

You mean like a "domestic violence" conviction for using harsh words in an argument with your wife/significant other 35 years ago?

You silly person ... of COURSE the proscription will stay with you forever.

[MechAg94]

Does the same logic apply to any other of those "lifetime" proscriptions?

IMO, yes. 

One argument is that if you don't trust them with a gun, you shouldn't let them out of prison in the first place.  I mainly just think there should be a path to regaining rights.  That door should not be closed for life.