Categories of Prohibited People

Giffords Law Center ^ | Not Listed | Not Listed

[FtrPilot]

Federal law prohibits the purchase and possession of firearms by people who fall within certain categories, such as convicted felons, domestic abusers, and people with specific kinds of mental health histories. Although background checks have prevented over 3 million people in these categories from obtaining guns, federal law does not generally include other types of people identified by public health researchers as being at a significantly higher risk than the general population of being dangerous, including:

-Those who have been convicted of violent or gun-related misdemeanors.

-Those with a history of abusing alcohol or drugs.

-Those convicted of juvenile offenses.

-Additional people who have suffered from severe mental illness.

[FtrPilot]

Giffords Law Center is a liberal advocacy group, however, this article contains good information on current federal and state laws wrt gun ownership.

The article contains a link that covers the minimum age to purchase and possess. Also good information.

Minimum Age to Own a Gun

Federal law wrt who an FFL can sell to vs who an individual can sell to is noteworthy.

[birdsman]

Interesting. Someone with an dishonorable discharge from the military is barred from possession of firearms. How many homos were given dishonorable discharges for homosexual behavior? If a homo cant buy a firearm for this reason do the leftists fight for “his” 2nd amendment rights?

[Drew68]

nteresting. Someone with an dishonorable discharge from the military is barred from possession of firearms. How many homos were given dishonorable discharges for homosexual behavior? If a homo cant buy a firearm for this reason do the leftists fight for “his” 2nd amendment rights?

Dishonorable discharges are typically given for a crime that would be a felony in the civilian world. Prior to the repeal of DADT, gay service members were administratively separated, not dishonorably discharged.

[familyop]

"federal law does not generally include other types of people identified by public health researchers as being at a significantly higher risk than the general population of being dangerous, including:

-Those who have been convicted of violent or gun-related misdemeanors."

..."identified by public health researchers...?" Commies!

Simple assault that is not aggravated? Get convicted for being in a shoving match and lose you Second Amendment rights? Gun-related misdemeanors? Misdemeanors? The only such misdemeanor that I can recall offhand might be brandishing, and anyone who has a firearm in their hand before getting out of a car can easily be convicted of that. ...even those falsely accused by and Antifa type.

"-Those with a history of abusing alcohol or drugs."

Baloney. Look at the background check form, and stop equivocating alcohol with narcotics.

"-Those convicted of juvenile offenses."

Offenses? Which ones--violent felonies or misdemeanors?

"-Additional people who have suffered from severe mental illness."

Bull. Anyone adjudicated to be insane is a prohibited person.

What a bunch of anti-American hogwash.

[monkeyshine]

background checks have prevented over 3 million people in these categories from obtaining guns

This a BS statistic. If this were true we'd hear about millions of prosecutions of people who unlawfully attempted to buy a firearm. Otherwise ask, why haven't all these people been prosecuted?

The truth is that there were 3 million 'initial rejections' - but nearly all of them were false positives. These are people with similar names (spelled the same, or phonetic similarities). The database basically only checks names. It does not check or validate based on birthdate, drivers license or ID number etc. If your name is similar to that of a prohibited person you get a rejection. Then, you clear up the confusion and buy a gun.

The truth is there were only something like 30,000 people who were prohibited and tried to buy a gun, and only a few dozen of those people were ever prosecuted. People who are prohibited more or less know they are prohibited, and they don't buy their guns from a licensed dealer. There are a few cases where the person didn't know he/she was prohibited, like the 70+ year old man who was convicted of "domestic violence" 40 odd years ago after he got into a brawl with his brother. It was written up as domestic violence before that term became a euphemism for wife-beating, and before the law against domestic violence made you prohibited. He went to buy a gun as a gift for his wife, not realizing he was a prohibited person, and got 2 years in the clink for it.

[familyop]

What Drew68 said. And as for criminals, the left knows that they will have firearms whether legal or not. Many would be shocked at how many criminals keep weapons, many of them stolen. The more victims of violent crimes, the more bureaucrats and NGO vermin look busy, useful and worthy of ever more funding from government. Such a regime is likely to develop into a full blown communist police state.

[gundog]

Lautenburg Amendment. Misdemeanor domestic violence.

[monkeyshine]

I should add that a large percentage of the false positives are people of minority status - African Americans and Hispanics - because these groups often have similar sounding or similarly spelled names. The current regime disproportionately discriminates against minorities and it sometimes costs many thousands of dollars to clear up the confusion.

The left doesn’t care much about this kind of systemic abuse, does it?

[FtrPilot]

Thanks for your response, which I mostly agree with. The only area of disagreement would be with gun-related misdemeanors. The problem here is where a gun-related felony gets plea bargained down to a misdemeanor. In this case, the perp should be put on the prohibited list.

[familyop]

The only suggestion that I can offer is related to policy more than legislation. More drug busts. Many young crooks like the ones who committed the mass murders tend to indulge in MDMA-related drugs (example, ecstasy for controlling young women), benzodiazepines (also used to rape), hallucinogens (other than MDMA), and of course marijuana.

Busts should yield weapons fairly often and get them prohibited for reasonable durations. That may not keep all them locked up for long for first offences, but the records should make it much easier to deal with them judicially afterwards.

It’s good for victims, too. Criminals without recorded histories can be much harder on victims (stalking, violent attacks and the like). They can be very slippery and tend to accuse victims.

[SkyPilot]

-Those with a history of abusing alcohol or drugs.

Did you ever get too drunk at a party? Sorry, your Constitutional rights are null and void.

[LambSlave]

-Those with a history of abusing alcohol or drugs.

Maybe these "lawyers" should re-read the law; how could they miss this?

[FtrPilot]

My rationale for posting the link is that it contains the existing federal and state gun laws. I stated that Giffords Law Center is liberal. I should have also stated that I don't agree with their recommendations. My bad.

Thanks for highlighting this BS recommendation.

[apillar]

Everybody is part of the “category of prohibited people” barred from possessing cocaine, heroin and meth. Yet how well has that worked out? The fact is that anybody who wants a gun will get a get a gun “prohibited list”, “universal background checks” or whatever other law is passed. Economics 101, you have enough cash, you will get whatever good or service you want, legal or illegal.

[SkyPilot]

"-Those with a history of abusing alcohol or drugs." ............Baloney. Look at the background check form, and stop equivocating alcohol with narcotics.

The articles own footnote (#24) contradicts what the site's lawyers have written in the article.

The footnote states:

24.A federal regulation issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) defines “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” and states “An inference of current use may be drawn from evidence of a recent use or possession of a controlled substance or a pattern of use or possession that reasonably covers the present time, e.g., a conviction for use or possession of a controlled substance within the past year; multiple arrests for such offenses within the past 5 years if the most recent arrest occurred within the past year; or persons found through a drug test to use a controlled substance unlawfully, provided that the test was administered within the past year.” 27 C.F.R. § 478.11. ⤴︎

Alcohol is NOT a "controlled substance."

The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA) breaks down what is a controlled substance:

Schedule I – These substances have no accepted medical use, are unsafe, and hold a high potential for abuse. Examples include heroin, LSD, marijuana, peyote, and ecstasy.

Schedule II – These narcotics and stimulants have a high potential for abuse and engender severe psychological or physical dependence. Examples include Dilaudid, hydrocodone, methadone, Demerol, OxyContin, Percocet, morphine, opium, codeine, amphetamine (Dexedrine, Adderall), and methamphetamine

Schedule III – These are substances that have less potential for abuse but can still lead to moderate or low physical dependence and high psychological dependence. They include Tylenol with Codeine, Suboxone, ketamine, and anabolic steroids.

Schedule IV – These ubstances have a lower potential for abuse than Schedule III drugs, and include Xanax, Soma, Klonopin, Valium, Ativan, Versed, Restoril, and Halcion. Schedule V – These are primarily preparations that contain limited quantities of narcotics, including cough syrups that contain codeine.

What the liberals are doing is attempting to open the door so wide that almost ANYONE can be barred from owning firearms.

Did your wife ever say you drank too much during a party? Well, your an "alcoholic", that's a "controlled substance", and your 2nd Amendment rights are junked.

Did you ever take a sleeping pill? Sorry, give me your guns.

Did you ever talk to a counselor? For anything? You're "mentally ill."

Pretty soon, this country will adopt the Chinese Social Credit Score model.

Did you tweet the "wrong thing?" Did you state "racist views?" Did your read that article supporting "white nationalism?" Are you a "religious extremist?" Have you ever posted "hateful thoughts?"

A SWAT team is headed to your house. Good luck.

[Spktyr]

That first one - go check the Lautenberg Amendment. Convicted of domestic violence or any misdeameanor carrying a sentence of six months and one day or more and you lose your RKBA permanently.

[familyop]

In his speech during the twilight of American freedoms, our President said, “That is why I have called for ‘Red Flag’ laws, also known as Extreme Risk Protection Orders.”

That’s a communist song, and it’s very fitting for the occasion.

From the Marxism and Music Archive

https://www.marxists.org/subject/art/music/lyrics/en/red-flag.htm

The Red Flag

Jim Connel
1889

The people’s flag is deepest red,
It shrouded oft our martyred dead,
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold,
Their hearts’ blood dyed its ev’ry fold.

Then raise the scarlet standard high.
Within its shade we’ll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We’ll keep the red flag flying here.

Look ‘round, the Frenchman loves its blaze,
The sturdy German chants its praise,
In Moscow’s vaults its hymns are sung
Chicago swells the surging throng.

Then raise the scarlet standard high.
Within its shade we’ll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We’ll keep the red flag flying here.

It waved above our infant might,
When all ahead seemed dark as night;
It witnessed many a deed and vow,
We must not change its colour now.

Then raise the scarlet standard high.
Within its shade we’ll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We’ll keep the red flag flying here.

It well recalls the triumphs past,
It gives the hope of peace at last;
The banner bright, the symbol plain,
Of human right and human gain.

Then raise the scarlet standard high.
Within its shade we’ll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We’ll keep the red flag flying here.

It suits today the weak and base,
Whose minds are fixed on pelf and place
To cringe before the rich man’s frown,
And haul the sacred emblem down.

Then raise the scarlet standard high.
Within its shade we’ll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We’ll keep the red flag flying here.

With heads uncovered swear we all
To bear it onward till we fall;
Come dungeons dark or gallows grim,
This song shall be our parting hymn.

Then raise the scarlet standard high.
Within its shade we’ll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We’ll keep the red flag flying here.

[yldstrk]

I believe everyone should be entitled to defend themselves. The problem with the mentally ill is not them owning guns, it’s there is no access to treatment for the mental illness.

[mewzilla]

For the imminent threats, however, there is recourse. Judicial commitment. No waiting there. But people have to be willing to report an imminent threat, and the state has to be willing to investigate, then commit if necessary.

[familyop]

I reckon that we can come up with a clear, concise song to answer to that.

Don’t hoist that red flag, Mr. President,

Don’t be a one-term resident!

[To be continued.]

—familyop