Posted on 07/11/2013 2:59:00 PM PDT by Altariel
Currently, according to tbe FBI, medical marijuana use disqualifies gun purchases. Is he still considered an illegal drug user because of the old conviction?
It’s very possible that the rationale behind this is more about blocking access to someone more likely to Fight Back Against Tyranny, and not pot.
This poor citizen is in need of some pro bono citizen heavy duty support. We are 3/4 of the way down that slippery slope, if this is allowed to stand.
What's next? A single isolated DUI while a teenager?
This affects pretty much 95% of the American citizenry, and is clearly an arbitrary and capricious policy. This regime seems to be really a runaway with stupid moves.
The reasonable man, if he still exists, would conclude the prohibition being applied refers to both convictions and felonies. And even these must be subject to the statute of limitations.
Did Sandy Burglar ever serve time for stealing national documents? Was he even charged and convicted?
Does he own a gun? ?
Kelly's disqualification may in fact be unjustified under current law, which bars gun sales to people convicted of felonies but not misdemeanors (except for misdemeanors involving domestic violence). Unless the feds are treating what North Carolina called a misdemeanor as a felony for some reason, Kelly's pot conviction should not be covered by that provision.
As to your other point about what constitutes a felony for pot possession I think it's quite possible that NC law has changed in the last 42 years.
Depends. Do you think that a criminal poseur pretending to be president of the U.S. is as dangerous to the Republic as a veteran with a grass citation 32 years ago?
After 40 years, if it was a felony back then and he has has a clean record since then, he should apply for a pardon. That would clear the recrd where an expugement would not do the job. In today’s political climate, he might get one for simple possession.
The article states that it was a misdemeanor.
NCIS????
I don't think that will work. I seem to recall a judge ruling that a even a dismissal after deferred adjudication still counts against you when it comes to buying a gun.
EFF this crap
Something stinks here.
Surely this is not the first gun this vet ever purchased.
Things are moving in just that direction. In California SB 755 proposes a 10 year ban for a second DUI. Remember the ultimate goal is to get everyone they can into a prohibited category, including people taking anti-depressants.
And before you say "Oh well that's just California" remember that they own this state lock stock and barrel and it is their proving ground to test this stuff and get it right before they roll it out to other states. The legislators here are so stupid that they often write laws that don't actually do what they want them to (e.g. "assault weapon" ban) but then they figure out what they did wrong and don't make the same mistakes elsewhere. Just ask the folks in CO, CT & NY.
2nd Amendment
Geolocate Dangerous Guns and Owners with the Gun Geo Marker
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3041852/posts
I know that some misdemeanors bar gun ownership based on stuff like the Lautenberg Amendment (domestic cases) and in other state matters where the possible jail time is 2 years or more (can't recall if that's in the '68 GCA or something more recent).
The weird part here is that a conviction from 42 years ago actually got uploaded into NICS. Hell, that's 1971. I suppose it *could* have happened as part of a court clerk's modernization project - scanning old files and building a digital database. More likely, IMO, is the possibility that federal money is being spread around to pay for sifting through archived files for this stuff.
It is beyond odd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.