No. John is quite explicit. The verb “exomev” ("to have"), in "we have no sin," is present tense indicative plural. John includes himself, and puts it in the present tense. John has sin, I have sin, you have sin. John is saying this is our condition, and even his condition, right now. Then, as if anticipating the objections of the self-righteous, he doubles down and says if you think you don't have sin, right now, you are lying to yourself.
So for you to conclude this passage speaks of past sin, you are required to invent meaning that is just not present in this text. Sorry. You need to double check the logic that led you to your conclusion. There is probably an error if you look closely.
You also referred to those who believe in Christ's deity as dummies. Illuminate me. What is the difference between a dummy and a fool? Because if you are calling us fools (aka dummies), then how do you square your proposed sinlessness with direct disobedience to an explicit command of Christ regarding name-calling?:
Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Peace,
SR
Because I am not mad and still call you guys very gullible dummies! : ) Have a good one!