It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Noose tightening around 2nd Amendment? Long gun purchase denied because of 30-year-old misdemeanor.

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:56 AM
link   
I have a friend who owns several guns. He is an avid hunder and outdoorsman. He is a clean-living, law-abiding citizen who purchased a handgun last year, the only one he has purchased for many years, and he went through the federal background check just fine.

He recently went to purchase a small-caliber gun for plinking, and was denied. DENIED. Why? Because of a 30+ year old misdemeanor.

What?? When did this happen? Since when is a misdemeanor, especially an ancient misdemeanor grounds for denial? Does anyone have a similar experience? There is absolutely no reason this person should have been denied, but he was.

I don't like this one bit. Is this a recent development that was snuck past us while we were all talking about the oil spill?




posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:36 AM
link   
There is a guy that used to live in my town that can not buy a gun in Calif because he was tried in absentia in Mexico on some trumped up charge.

The US government will not extradite him because they know the charge is bogus but the state still holds it over him if he tries to buy a gun.

When he retired he moved to Texas and now has a gun collection but his lawyer has warned him if he returns to Calif with a weapon he could be arrested under state law for being felon with a firearm.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:42 AM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 


Tell him to get it expunged then it won't come up. But yeah it is BS for a misdemeanor he needs to contest it with the ATF.

Tell him to buy one private sale I don't know what state you're in but many states don't require any paper work for privates sales. Find your local want ads and start looking.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:42 AM
link   
The only misdemeanor that I can think of that would prevent the purchase of a firearm and that would be domestic violence.

We can thank Bill Clinton for that one.

If he only has a misdemeanor, how can he be considered a felon?

This is the best reason I can think of to stay the hell out of California.

[edit on 2010/6/9 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

The only misdemeanor that I can think of that would prevent the purchase of a firearm and that would be domestic violence.

We can thank Bill Clinton for that one.

If he only has a misdemeanor, how can he be considered a felon?

This is the best reason I can think of to stay the hell out of California.

[edit on 2010/6/9 by GradyPhilpott]


California is turning into a latrine. Sadly for us artists, it is the only place to go to get work. They have such backward ass laws it ain't even funny.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 06:11 AM
link   
There is no law that states you can't buy a firearm due to a misdemeanor. This is a case of where he was refused the sale simply on the whim of the dealer. Tell your friend to shop at another store, I bet he won't have the same problem again.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
There is no law that states you can't buy a firearm due to a misdemeanor. This is a case of where he was refused the sale simply on the whim of the dealer. Tell your friend to shop at another store, I bet he won't have the same problem again.


100% wrong.

A misdemeanor conviction for domestic violence will prevent you from purchasing a gun.

It even asks on the 4473 if you have a conviction for misdemeanor DV.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   
I agree with a poster above me...

If you can't buy from a store, go private.
Guns are everywhere and if you can't find one, you're not looking hard enough.

If you are a criminal, then yes, you shouldn't be allowed to buy a gun.
That's what the background check is for.
Only violent criminals or felons shouldn't be permitted to own them.

Violent criminal.

Big difference between that and a misdemeanor.
Unless its drug related.


Hmm...





posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 06:47 AM
link   
This is now being enforced and shared by law enforcement. It has been the Federal law since 1996. Look closely at section (g)(1).

If you have ever been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.

You could have received probation for a misdemeanor. Because the crime held a possibility of a year or more in jail You are Federaly no longer alowed to buy, own, posses any firearm or amunition. This is a felony charge.



Lautenberg Amendment — 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—

Text(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

(2) who is a fugitive from justice;

(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

(4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution;

(5) who, being an alien—

(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or

(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26)));

(6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;

(8) who is subject to a court order that—

(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate;

(B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and

(C)

(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or

(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or

(9) who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,

to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.


I know this for a fact. I am currently fighting this in court for my husband.

[edit on 9-6-2010 by VAPatriot2]



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by brainwrek
 


The form 4473 also asks "have you been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year."


This is an old law they are now enforcing. Be very careful. Many, many people are going to get burned on this. By filling out the 4473 and having an old misdemeanor you can be charged with a felony. Game over.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by VAPatriot2
reply to post by brainwrek
 


The form 4473 also asks "have you been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year."


This is an old law they are now enforcing. Be very careful. Many, many people are going to get burned on this. By filling out the 4473 and having an old misdemeanor you can be charged with a felony. Game over.


Any crime punishable by more than one year in prison is not a misdemeanor.

With misdemeanors, the ceiling for prison time is usually the one year mark.

With the exception of a domestic violence conviction, one can still buy firearms with a misdemeanor on their record.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by brainwrek
 


Not true. Older drug laws are a good example. Conspiracy to distribute CDS held a 5 year possible term. It was still a misdemeanor. This was in 1996 in Maryland.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   
I am 100% positive. I have been living this nightmare for a year and a half now. The only remody is expungement or a pardon.


This is why we are now seeing this happen.

The NICS Improvement Act of 2007 (H.R.297)
The measure would amend the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 to require the head of each federal agency that has records relating to persons for whom receipt of a firearm would violate federal or state law to provide that information to the Attorney General for inclusion into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). In addition, it would require the agency, upon being made aware that the basis under which a record was made available no longer applies, to correct the record and notify the Attorney General and the the Secretary of Homeland Security. It would also have to make available to the Attorney General records relevant to a determination that a person is disqualified from possessing or receiving a firearm and information about a change in such person's status for removal from NICS, where appropriate.[1]

The bill would also direct the Attorney General to make grants to states and Indian tribal governments to[2]:

Establish or upgrade information and identification technologies for firearms eligibility determinations
Improve the automation and transmittal to federal and state record repositories of criminal history dispositions, records relevant to determining whether a person has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, court orders, and mental health adjudications or commitments.[3]

[edit on 9-6-2010 by VAPatriot2] typo

[edit on 9-6-2010 by VAPatriot2]



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 


Wow, It's a shame this is getting buried by all the oil threads. There is vital information listed here. Every American should know what is going on. Ignorance of the law is no defence.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Yes, this should be top of the page stuff. Not sure how you get it there, but this is serious. He was able to buy a gun before but now he isn't?

The misdemeanor in question was either a D&D or disturbing the peace in 1964 when he was a kid. 1964!!!!!!!! He might have gotten a couple traffic tickets since then. It is utter BS.

I have been able to purchase also, and I have a misdemeanor on my record from 10 years ago or so, not for domestic violence. Does this mean I will be denied also? I am going to try when I get the cabbage for a little carry heater.

The anti-gun agenda is still very much in play and people need to know about this.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Wow, it is amazing that the 2nd amendment is becoming smaller. I wonder how long it will be before a speeding ticket (the normal one not the high speed) keeps one from obtaining a firearm?

This is new to me thank you OP and fellow posters for providing the information you have. I will do some more looking into this and let others know about it as well. Scary stuff.

Raist



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I'd have to agree that it was either the whim of the dealer, or a domestic violence conviction, even one 30 years old.

I have 2 possession charges and carrying a weapon charge (all misdemeanors). I've never had a problem legally purchasing a firearm.

But I don't agree with the law saying felons shouldn't be allowed firearms. Barring a violent felony I don't see the need for the law. Someone being a felon shouldn't in turn make the safety of their family less of a priority. I could agree with restrictions, but I believe barring a violent felony that a felon should be atleast allowed to keep a weapon at home for safety reasons.

Also any crime in which you're charged as a juvenile, felony or not does not show up count against your adult record. I have a felony on my juvenile record, it in no way stopped me from legally purchasing pistols, shotguns, and semiautomatic rifles.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   
If they think you're such a danger you cannot buy a gun why dont they just lock you up?

That's what I dont get about this whole "ex-offender" nonsense. The system doesnt trust you and expects you will kill so they dont want you to have a gun but they let you walk around free. But the stupidity doesnt stop there. Apparently they just dont think you should have that gun because clearly you legitimately own at least one other and they havent knocked your door down to take it from you.

It doesnt make any sense.

Why do we have to suffer under such absolute law that is in reality anything but absolute. They murder people in their own homes because of wrong addresses and clerical errors. They dont deserve any confidence or faith from any of us.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   
I just had an epiphany.

The person I am speaking of lives in Arizona.

It could be some kind of retaliatory action by the feds for the immigration law.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 


If there is an old conviction that held a year or more prison time. It is just a matter of time.

The states have begun to give up information required by the NICS Improvement Act of 2007. Once that info is in NICS you get denied. You have suddenly committed a felony by filling out the form 4473. Look closely at the form. It asks this question.

Most people that had a old misdemeanor conviction have on idea if the charge held a possibility of over a year in jail.

My husband could buy firearms no problem until Feb. 08. Apparently Maryland has given information to NICS and now he is suddenly an "ineligible person". He was threatened with arrest for committing a felony by filling out the form 4473. He had passed the NICS in Nov. 07 with no problem.



This is serious.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join