Emerson

LUBBOCK, Texas (AP) - A former San Angelo doctor who challenged a federal law in a Second Amendment case was convicted Monday of firearm possession charges.

A federal jury convicted Timothy Emerson of three counts of possessing a firearm. He was charged in 1998 after buying a pistol while under a restraining order during a divorce proceeding.

U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings originally dismissed the charge against Emerson, ruling that the federal statute used to charge Emerson violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms.

A lot of people have been watching the Emerson case very closely. This is the final resolution; he has been convicted, and his appeal to the Supreme Court was not heard. The only thing left is sentencing.

The implications of this case are far-reaching. It was the best 2nd-amendment case we've seen so far, inspiring some compelling arguments in favor of an individual right to own firearms. And yet, with the refusal of the Supreme Court to hear the case, it has collapsed. The powerful arguments mean nothing.

So what does that mean to us? To "the people" who have "the right to keep and bear arms"?

It means the government is no longer willing to follow the Constitution of the United States. Congress has passed an unConstitutional law; the executive has enforced it; the Supreme Court has refused to strike it down; the jury has convicted. All this in a clear, unambiguous case.

It means that we are on our own.

A man was sentenced Friday to 2 1/2 years in prison for owning guns while under a protective order - a limitation on gun rights that an appeals court held was constitutionally acceptable. The U.S. Supreme Court last June declined to hear arguments that Timothy Emerson should have been allowed to keep his guns under the Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms." Emerson was indicted after the restraining order was issued during his divorce in 1998. He owned several rifles and a handgun at the time.Yes, this is the Emerson. Sigh.