Felons, Parolees Getting Hunting Licenses


PDA






GRB
January 29, 2006, 06:15 PM
Appearing below is interesting article that has me wondering if we will soon need to vote down legislation aimed at requiring us to have some sort of criminal history check before we buy a hunting license. While I agree that most violent felons probably should not have firearms liberties restored; I have always thought it rather ridiculous that someone convicted of, let's say a felony gambling charge, would loose firearms liberties if there were no aggravating factors. Then again, I do not think anyone convicted of a non-violent felony should lose hunting privelages. I do think it might be a good idea for violent felons not to be able to hunt with firearms, and maybe not even bows and other edged weapons for some of them but that should be a condition of their release. If they want to buy a hunting license so be it. Heck I have bought hunting and fishing licenses just to be able to catch snakes or frogs in certain states (another passion altogether), and sometimes just to help support my state's fish and game conservation efforts.

Oh well, here is the article; and check out this link (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/specials/interactives/_national/felons_firearms/index.html) here it is spelled out in case the above link does not work: hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/specials/interactives/_national/felons_firearms/index.html for an interactive map to find out how each state handles restoration of firearms liberties to previously convicted felons:

Jan 29, 1:16 PM EST
Felons, Parolees Getting Hunting Licenses (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/H/HUNTING_FELONS?SITE=1010WINS&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)
By MATT GOURAS
Associated Press Writer
HELENA, Mont. (AP) -- Hundreds of people barred from having guns because they are felons on parole or probation are still able to get hunting licenses in Montana with no questions asked, an Associated Press investigation found.
Montana may not be alone. While nearly all states ban felons from possessing guns, only a handful - including Rhode Island and Maine - keep them from receiving hunting permits, and just a few others - such as Illinois and Massachusetts - require hunters to show both a hunting license and a firearms license.
"Our license dealers have no way of checking," said Lt. Rich Mann, with the enforcement program for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. "If someone wants to play with the system and beat you at it, they will."
The AP examination of Montana hunting and corrections records shows at least 660 felons on parole or probation received tags in the past year. The findings are based on a comparison of unique first, middle and last names, along with other identifiable information, that appeared in databases of both hunters and felons.
A state probation official said the findings likely would prompt the state to consider its own records search to see if parolees are violating terms of their release.
"Obviously that's a big concern, and it makes me want to look into each of these cases," said Ron Alsbury, Montana's probation and parole bureau chief.
The licenses don't specifically require the use of firearms to hunt, and state officials note that most felons could legally hunt using other weapons, such as bows. Several people contacted by the AP said they hunted legally with bows while on probation.
However, bows are hardly the weapon of choice for some of the game for which felons were issued tags, such as birds or bison.
Jason Beaudoin of Frenchtown, on probation for a 2002 conviction for assault with a deadly weapon, got a series of hunting tags last year, but said he used only a bow and arrow.
"I know I can't own a firearm or be in possession of one. They made that very clear ... and I agree with the policy," Beaudoin said.
"There are plenty of ways people can hunt even though they are barred from using conventional weapons," added Gary S. Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association. "My guess is that there are a lot of them that are being perfectly decent citizens."
The problem is, no one knows for certain.
Some states, including Montana, check for hunting violations as a routine part of a hunting license application, but don't run spot checks to see if convicted felons are among those applying for licenses or if they plan to use firearms.
"The result in Idaho is that you could theoretically be a convicted cannibal and still have a hunting license," said Ed Mitchell, a spokesman for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game in Boise. "But if you are a convicted cannibal, you cannot legally own a bent BB gun in the state of Idaho."
With millions of hunters in the U.S. - nearly 270,000 in Montana alone - authorities in many states say it simply would be too difficult to check if felons are getting hunting tags.
North Dakota,officials make sure hunters aren't delinquent on their child support, and deny permits to those who are, but they don't check for felony convictions.
Colorado, like most states, relies on its law banning felons from possessing guns to discourage them from applying for hunting licenses. Still, every year game wardens find someone with a felony conviction hunting with a firearm and a legally obtained hunting license, said Bob Thompson, assistant chief of law enforcement for the Colorado Division of Wildlife.
Florida officials said one of their game officers was killed by a felon who was hunting with a gun.
The AP review found that roughly 8 percent of 8,732 people on parole or probation in Montana had obtained hunting licenses in the past year.
Many hunters with felony convictions had no listed phone numbers, while others did not return calls seeking comment.
In rare cases the state even gave hunting licenses to felons who didn't ask for them.
One convicted felon contacted by the AP, Larry Pettijohn, wasn't aware he held a bird hunting license. The state gave it to him for free because he qualified for it as a senior citizen who had purchased a state conservation license, the base permit for both hunters and anglers.
"All I ever do is fish," said Pettijohn, of Missoula, on parole for felony drunken driving and being a persistent felon. "I don't have a gun. Not allowed to."
One case made national news late last year when one of the hunters with a prized tag for Montana's limited and controversial bison hunt turned out to be on parole or probation for a felony. He gave up his hunting tags before the season started.
Alsbury said his agency did a spot check of its records about five years ago to see if violators had hunting tags. Officers confiscated some guns.
Alsbury said the AP investigation suggests it may be time to search again.
"With the technology we have now we should be routinely checking that," he said.
---
On the Net:
Montana felons: http://app.mt.gov/conweb/
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks: http://www.fwp.mt.gov
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

Best regards,
Glenn B

If you enjoyed reading about "Felons, Parolees Getting Hunting Licenses" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
critter
January 29, 2006, 06:31 PM
I don't care HOW MANY hunting licenses they buy! If they are convicted felons, they STILL CAN NOT own, use or handle any firearms. It's ok with me if they hunt with an atlatl.

GRB
January 29, 2006, 06:35 PM
I hope you meant that as personal opinion as opposed to what you may think is law. There are plenty of convicted felons who legally have had their firearms liberties/rights restored on both the state and federal levels. Shamefully, for our federal government, certain politicians have attempted to deny any convicted felons of restoration of firearms rights through political wrangling by making the BATFE budget devoid of funding to carry necessary investigations when someone makes such an application o the federal level. This has been in effect since 1992. Something that you may want to consider writing to your elected officials about. I plan to voice my dissatifaction with such, as I said, in my opinion, there is no reason that a convicted non-violent felon such as gambler with no aggravating factors should reasonably have firearms liberties pulled forever.

TallPine
January 29, 2006, 07:22 PM
I just don't see what the big problem is ... so what if a convicted felon buys a hunting license? The state gets the money to use for wildlife and habitat conservation. For all we know, maybe these folks don't even hunt, but just buy the license to support wildlife :p

Geez ... it is the same old thing over and over:rolleyes: You know, if they are such big bad criminals, then why are they buying a hunting license? They broke the law at least once already, so why not break the law again and just poach...? Just by purchasing the hunting license they are showing their intent to be law abiding.

Of course, my opinion is that the felon restriction is just BS anyway. Like Glenn stated, many felons are not violent to begin with. If they are really dangerous, they should be in prison. I can see the firearm (or maybe just handgun) restriction while on probation, or even as a specific part of a specific sentence for a specific person, but not as a blanket restriction as it is now.

If the "felon" is out of jail and wants a gun for evil purposes, he/she will get their hands on it anyway - maybe by breaking into my house to steal it. Otherwise, it is just an annoyance to the rest of us to go through NICS each time we buy a gun (and of course the system can suddenly be "down" for any or no reason:( ).

Also, cannot a felon legally hunt with a muzzle-loading rifle ...?

TexasRifleman
January 29, 2006, 07:25 PM
Uhhh, last time I looked you could bow hunt or Blackpowder hunt without owning a "firearm".

Also in many states folks buy combination licenses that include fishing as well as hunting.

I think saying "Felons buy hunting licenses" doesn't really give any useful information.

SOMEONE is driving the market in Blackpowder hunting, it's made a heck of a comeback recently, archery as well.

You simply can't connect a felon buying a hunting license to him owning or using a firearm.

fjolnirsson
January 29, 2006, 08:31 PM
So, we're supposed to get all concerned and outraged over people who make an effort to obey existing laws, just because they are ex cons? I don't think so. Glenn and Tallpine have it right.

By the way, Glenn. Good to see you posting. Glad you stuck around.:)

People with bad intentions are not bound by any laws we pass. They make their own laws, and live as they wish to. For that matter, many ex cons have trouble finding employment due to their record. What if these men who go out of their way to obtain a license for hunting are doing so to feed their families the only way they can? So long as they aren't harming anyone with these hunting licenses, what's the trouble.

On a related note, we never know what may become a felony offense in the near future. The ownership of gold and alcohol are just two things which were at one time outlawed here in the US. Future crusades against crime have the potential to make any one of us non violent felons.

Kodiaz
January 29, 2006, 09:08 PM
The anti gun beep are losing so they have to fill the newspapers with firearms hysteria especially because it is a voting year.


I live in Fl and there are usually several papers on the newsstand. There have been a lot of front page anti gun articles this year.

gunsmith
January 29, 2006, 11:33 PM
It's ok with me if they hunt with an atlatl

at first I was going to ask, attawhat?..but I used google (evil google)

http://www.atlatl.com/

wow those are cool...is it legal to hunt withan Atlatl?

I bet it's a felony to own one in CA:neener:

Art Eatman
January 30, 2006, 12:17 AM
"With millions of hunters in the U.S. - nearly 270,000 in Montana alone - authorities in many states say it simply would be too difficult to check if felons are getting hunting tags."

Hmmm. Haven't we heard this before, somewhere?

Must have been a Slow News Day.

Art

xd9fan
January 30, 2006, 12:31 AM
this is how they can turn the rest of america against us.

Michael Courtney
January 30, 2006, 09:26 AM
Uhhh, last time I looked you could bow hunt or Blackpowder hunt without owning a "firearm".

.
.
.

You simply can't connect a felon buying a hunting license to him owning or using a firearm.

True. Many states also require a hunting license for trapping furbearers, which does not require a firearm.

Michael Courtney

Dave P
January 30, 2006, 09:46 AM
Uhhh, last time I looked you could bow hunt or Blackpowder hunt without owning a "firearm".


+1

Maxwell
January 30, 2006, 01:56 PM
Calling someone a felon is a western way of creating an untouchable cast.
Dosnt matter what they did. Once you get that mark then anyone can use it to deprive you of your ability to get a job, your property and your freedom.
The stupid question is whats more important, your constitutional rights or the states ability to continue your punishment long after youve served your time.

If they cant be trusted to own a weapon or hunt, why are they out on the street?

para.2
January 30, 2006, 02:05 PM
If they cant be trusted to own a weapon or hunt, why are they out on the street?
EXACTLY!
I have been quietly nudging my state legislators in this direction for some time. I don't know if I'm making any real progress or not, but i agree w/ the above. Lock 'em up and throw away the key if they're dangerous. Otherwise, restore their civil rights when they come out.

NukemJim
January 30, 2006, 09:33 PM
Uhhh, last time I looked you could bow hunt or Blackpowder hunt without owning a "firearm".


From my understanding that depends on state law. I looked into this in Illinois for a nephew of mine who has a felony conviction from his stupid phase when he was younger. In Illinois it is my understanding that a felon cannot use any firearm including black powder.

I understand it is legal in some states however.

As always I could be wrong. ( and would be delighted to be so about this matter, I could take my nephew shooting :)

NukemJim

GruntII
January 30, 2006, 09:53 PM
I don't care HOW MANY hunting licenses they buy! If they are convicted felons, they STILL CAN NOT own, use or handle any firearms. It's ok with me if they hunt with an atlatl.


Not nessecarily .Some states give automatic full restoral of rights for state offenses or certain state offense by statute. Michigan comes ot mind, you do nto have to apply for rights restoral for certain offenses it is granted upon completetion of your sentence. In alabama you can have the right to own a long gun restored but you have to petetion ofr this as well as other rights to be restored. Of course since 1995 when the Klintons defunded the office in the ATF that handled federal rights restoral there have been no federal rights restoral.

I've been a cop 14/15 years and I believe once you complete your debt to society all rights should be retored.In past times rights were restored automatically and so it should be . This especially true these days when there are so many no violent felonies on the books. We are either a nation where the citizens have creator endowed , constitutionally protected, rights or we don't. After the punishment is over then the rights should come back.

scout26
January 31, 2006, 01:52 PM
NukemJim,

Sorry to hear about your nephew, but unfortunately Illinois does classify blackpower guns as firearms

(430 ILCS 65/1.1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑1.1)
(Text of Section from P.A. 94‑6)
Sec. 1.1. For purposes of this Act:
"Counterfeit" means to copy or imitate, without legal authority, with intent to deceive.
"Firearm" means any device, by whatever name known, which is designed to expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosion, expansion of gas or escape of gas; excluding, however:
(1) any pneumatic gun, spring gun, paint ball gun or
B‑B gun which either expels a single globular projectile not exceeding .18 inch in diameter and which has a maximum muzzle velocity of less than 700 feet per second or breakable paint balls containing washable marking colors;

(2) any device used exclusively for signalling or
safety and required or recommended by the United States Coast Guard or the Interstate Commerce Commission;

(3) any device used exclusively for the firing of
stud cartridges, explosive rivets or similar industrial ammunition; and

(4) an antique firearm (other than a machine‑gun)
which, although designed as a weapon, the Department of State Police finds by reason of the date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a collector's item and is not likely to be used as a weapon.


You can teach him archery, but BB guns (unless .17 cal) are out also.

grizzlycreekflyfisher
December 18, 2009, 12:54 AM
About two years ago, I went online to buy a non-resident FISHING license for New Jersey, and can you believe they ask you to affirm that you are not delinquent in paying child support. Will they be checking traffic ticket records next?

As I was writing this post, I did a quick search and see this is still required, and is required for both fishing and hunting licenses.

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/fgw/child_support_info.htm

garymc
December 18, 2009, 05:42 AM
The article doesn't say in the case of the Fl game official shot by a convicted felon hunting with a gun if the felon had a hunting license. Wouldn't it be so much worse if not only did he not have a license, but wardens weren't in season? What if the gun was a shotgun and he was hunting birds and didn't have a plug? Well, seriously, I don't have much problem with felons being prohibited from having guns. But killing somebody should be serious enough that ethnicity, licenses, technical crap, should not become the focus (or distraction) of the case.

edit: How soon should this guy be able to get his gun rights back and go hunting with a gun?

Gungnir
December 18, 2009, 07:06 AM
Damn those pesky felons buying hunting licenses, next they'll be trying to buy cars, and get jobs taking away chances from people without felony convictions.

You know, sometimes I think that people are of the opinion that a Felony should be a capital offense, but in the vast majority of cases felonies are not capital offenses. Make the punishment fit the crime, if you're jailed for 5 years and released, why should your unalienable rights be alienated? If you're not safe to be released you shouldn't be released. I often think that Felony convictions having their RKBA restricted was a means to see whether the federal government could pull it off against a classification of people without a hue and cry about constitutional rights. Makes me wonder who's next?

Particularly we here should be always mindful that using your firearm in self defense might wind up leaving you with a felony conviction. If that happened, wouldn't you want to be able to own firearms? Or work as a licensed professional, for example if you were a teacher or lawyer? Or vote? I sure would.

w_houle
December 18, 2009, 07:36 AM
"The result in Idaho is that you could theoretically be a convicted cannibal and still have a hunting license,"
Sounds like it should be encouraged due to them not hunting their apparent favorite food!

REOIV
December 18, 2009, 12:49 PM
If you are a felon that paid your debt to society and is no longer on probation or parole for a violent crime there is ZERO reason you should be kept from voting or owning firearms other than feel good nancy pants bull crap.

By making felons second class citizens it makes it easy to remove all gun rights from everyone.

Just reclassify everything as a felony.

Parking tickets
Code infractions
and on and on.

gatorjames85
December 18, 2009, 01:22 PM
If you are a felon that paid your debt to society and is no longer on probation or parole for a violent crime there is ZERO reason you should be kept from voting or owning firearms other than feel good nancy pants bull crap.
Agreed. I have a relative who was convicted of obstruction of justice (federal) for destroying some of his personal documents/computer files (that the Feds were requesting). He now can no longer go duck hunting with me unless he gets a presidential pardon. I think that is totally absurd.:fire:

mcdonl
December 18, 2009, 01:45 PM
I am not sure why, but for some reason I NEVER have ANY sympathy for ANYONE who has committed a crime. I am in my 40's and have managed to keep my nose clean, and I know people twice my age who have done the same.

I must just be insensitive but I do not care if convicted felons are not allowed to hunt in Maine.

gatorjames85
December 18, 2009, 01:57 PM
I am not sure why, but for some reason I NEVER have ANY sympathy for ANYONE who has committed a crime. I am in my 40's and have managed to keep my nose clean, and I know people twice my age who have done the same.

I must just be insensitive but I do not care if convicted felons are not allowed to hunt in Maine.
I agree that convicted felons made a choice to engage in their illegal conduct and therefore put themselves in their position. But I just don't believe that a convict who used a gun to rape someone and a convict who lied on an insurance form should get the same kind of treatment with regards to firearms.

zxcvbob
December 18, 2009, 02:22 PM
I am not sure why, but for some reason I NEVER have ANY sympathy for ANYONE who has committed a crime. I am in my 40's and have managed to keep my nose clean, and I know people twice my age who have done the same.
You've probably committed dozens of felonies and didn't even know it. I've managed to keep my nose clean for years too -- that doesn't mean I won't get railroaded someday. "Tough on crime" is just the Republican party's favorite attack on our civil rights. (The Democrats use a more direct approach.)

Back to the "muzzleloaders in Illinois" question, it looks like one of those antique Mausers advertised in the back of gun magazines would be exempt. (actually, any firearm manufactured before 1898)

mooseeyes
December 18, 2009, 03:17 PM
Felony = felon = ex-con. And that and 50 cents gets you a bad cup of coffee! Felony classification is arbitrary; e.g., driving while under the influence causing an accident where property damage is over a specified amount or there is personal injury equals a felony in many States. . .even if it is a single car accident and the only person injured is the driver. Now we have the District Attorney who decides how to charge the person. Throw the book at them, and bingo. . .we now have a convicted felon.

Can't vote, can't own a gun, can't go into Canada! The person I speak of is a friend of mine who has been clean and sober for over 20 years. A good husband, a good father, a disabled veteran. Maybe the answer is a new system of classification for anti-social behavior?

Typically, a felony is any "crime" that may (not does) result in one year or more in prison, regardless of the "crime". Remember, a felony is anything that our elected lawmakers say is a crime. To use the ever popular Latin, there is "Malum in se" (evil in fact), and "Malum prohibitum" (bad only because we say it is bad). Malum in se crimes are pretty obvious. . .the really bad acts; i.e., murder, rape, robbery, etc. Now we look at Malum prohibitum crimes, which is anything else your elected officials say is a no-no, and for which these lawmakers feel 1 year in prison is a possible appropriate penalty - ergo, a felony!

Convicted felons lose certain non-crime related rights. Why not all rights? The right to drive, the right to have a job, the right to marry, and the right to pay taxes!

Think about it. How many times have you had to answer the question: "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" Remember that pot bust while in college back in the '60s!

Then we have leadership like Bill Clinton who committed any number of felonies while in office; however, he was never charged nor convicted. Who says justice is blind?!

Plus, with the federal laws and the laws of each State and the District of Columbia we have 52 different and conflicting sets of laws. Often bragging about keeping one's nose clean is merely pure luck, not living in the wrong State, or not getting caught. :confused:

CoRoMo
December 18, 2009, 04:30 PM
I am not sure why, but for some reason I NEVER have ANY sympathy for ANYONE who has committed a crime. I am in my 40's and have managed to keep my nose clean, and I know people twice my age who have done the same.

Hopefully you and the ones you love will never find yourselves caught doing something you always thought was perfectly legal, just to find out it is a felony. Hopefully you and your loved ones never make a mistake or have an accident that is defined by the law as a felony.

Don't make a mistake on your taxes, don't posses a lobster of less than legal length, watch out for the turtles that the kids might bring home as pets, etc. and know every last, little state law from every state you ever plan to breathe air in. You just might find yourself inadvertently committing a felony. If you or a loved one gets caught doing so, maybe then, sympathy will well up inside you for what they are about to endure, for the remainder of their life.

zxcvbob
December 18, 2009, 09:08 PM
watch out for the turtles that the kids might bring home as pets, etc. and know every last, little state law from every state you ever plan to breathe air in.And Heaven help you if they ever find an eagle feather.

RP88
December 18, 2009, 09:14 PM
I don't see the big deal. Most places allow bow hunting - and bows are not firearms last time I checked. If they aren't buying guns, then what exactly is wrong with the practice of issuing them hunting licenses other than what we feel about the law governing the part about hunting rifles and convicted felons?

ChefKristian
December 18, 2009, 09:15 PM
Hopefully you and the ones you love will never find yourselves caught doing something you always thought was perfectly legal, just to find out it is a felony. Hopefully you and your loved ones never make a mistake or have an accident that is defined by the law as a felony.

Don't make a mistake on your taxes, don't posses a lobster of less than legal length, watch out for the turtles that the kids might bring home as pets, etc. and know every last, little state law from every state you ever plan to breathe air in. You just might find yourself inadvertently committing a felony. If you or a loved one gets caught doing so, maybe then, sympathy will well up inside you for what they are about to endure, for the remainder of their life.

+1,000,000

People make mistakes in their life... People pay for their mistakes...Even if the severity and nature of the crime they have been convicted of is non-violent...They lose job opportunities, can't rent a house in a decent neighborhood...All of this occurs AFTER the debt to society has been paid.

Many of our LAWMAKERS have been guilty of one crime or another since the history of the United States of America... Lest we all forget that our founding fathers were criminals as well? Not murderers, rapists, or anything like that... but criminals none the less...

There is a terrible stigma with the use of the word Felony, and most people erroneously refer to felons as if they killed, raped, molested, kidnapped, robbed, assaulted, and maimed...

As for violent offenders (especially ones with weapon offenses) that have been released, I absolutely agree that certain rights should never be restored. Especially with repeat offenders...

alsaqr
December 18, 2009, 09:22 PM
For years the NRA has quietly pushed for the reinstatement of 2nd Amendment rights for convicted felons. I have been an NRA member for over 50 years and I totally disagree with the NRA on this one: Have repeatedly told them so. I have zero sympathy for convicted felons and that includes third offense drunk drivers. I know a guy who went to prison for 18 months for third offense drunk driving. He got out, drove a heavy truck drunk and killed a 10 year old girl. The guy had another felony conviction for fraud. He is now serving life as a habitual criminal.

Within three years of their release from prison over 65 percent of convicted felons will re-offend.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0933722.html


Within three years of their release, 67% of former prisoners are rearrested and 52% are re-incarcerated,


This one is from Washington state where the recidivism rate is 61.5 percent.

http://www.sgc.wa.gov/PUBS/Recidivism/Adult_Recidivism_CY04.pdf

cassandrasdaddy
December 18, 2009, 09:29 PM
so if we have a million offenders you are comfy punishing 400000 of them because the other 600000 behave poorly? what a fascinating legal change

rmodel65
December 19, 2009, 03:01 AM
felons who have served their time and are out of prison have the RTKBA

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Chuck Warner
December 19, 2009, 03:41 AM
EXACTLY!
I have been quietly nudging my state legislators in this direction for some time. I don't know if I'm making any real progress or not, but i agree w/ the above. Lock 'em up and throw away the key if they're dangerous. Otherwise, restore their civil rights when they come out.
New Mexico allows non violent felons to own or possess firearms legaly after ten years

ChefKristian
December 19, 2009, 12:23 PM
New Mexico allows non violent felons to own or possess firearms legaly after ten years

Texas as well... But I think it has to be after probation and not jail time. Not sure though.

cassandrasdaddy
December 19, 2009, 12:31 PM
virginia has a rights restoration process. if after release someone wants rights restored they have to do a minimal amout of work to make that happen. seems reasonable. if you aren't willing to work for something you usually don't appreciate it

Gungnir
December 19, 2009, 08:50 PM
Now here's something interesting that I saw on another thread...

First, they sent a letter saying that ALL 14 inch shoestrings were considered NFA items.

OMG does that mean that everyone who owned a 14 inch shoestring from 1996 was a felon? Say for instance at that time some local law enforcement officer had some probable cause for another offense (that turned a blank) and knew that and then arrested you and asked your shoestring length (and measured) you'd be guilty of illegal possession of an NFA controlled weapon without a tax stamp, and since it was an NFA controlled weapon probably a bunch of other stuff too (concealed carrying, etc. etc.). Here's a link http://www.jpfo.org/common-sense/cs55.htm.

Just goes to prove the law's an ass and you can break it without realizing it. So all the holier than thou's who are saying "I'm x and never committed a felony..." just think if you owned a pair of 14" shoe laces from 1996 you are guilty by law of owning an NFA controlled machinegun without registration. Now owning an NFA controlled machine gun is a felony and you can be imprisoned for 10 years, and obviously you can also lose your rights to vote, own firearms etc.

glockman19
December 19, 2009, 09:07 PM
Hasn't anyone heard of BOW hunting?

SteveCase
December 19, 2009, 09:17 PM
I find that its fine that they dont do background checks, if they can't own firearms then they cant hunt with them, but I don't see a problem with them owning bows, crossbows or what another person wrote an attalatal or whatever. Im from mass and ive never had to show and FID or anything else. all that was needed was hunter safety and drivers license. And just because you've commited a crime doesnt mean you shouldn't be allowed to hunt, there are plenty of other ways to hunt besides a gun.

41magsnub
December 19, 2009, 09:35 PM
I'm with the total non-issue folks. If they are doing something with the hunting license that does not violate the restrictions they are under good for them.

ants
December 19, 2009, 11:15 PM
Lucky that's not a felony. :p Just kidding, don't let Congress hear that. :(


Let's not forget that felony conviction is not the only transgression that leads to disability. There are at least 8 others. Drug use. Treason. Illegal alien. Terrorist. All these other people lose their right to keep and bear arms by committing their violations of the law.

shotgunjoel
December 19, 2009, 11:55 PM
Umm... bow hunting. I know of a guy from about 30 minutes from here who got a pardon a year ago from Bush so that he could own a gun to go hunting again. It was some white collar charge, but in Illinois it barred him from possession.

Lou McGopher
December 20, 2009, 12:12 AM
Altering a license plate (like putting a fake registration sticker on it) is a felony.
Improperly discarding something 500 lbs or more can get you a conviction for felony littering.

You can get felonies for doing all sorts of non-violent, and even harmless, things.

DeepSouth
December 20, 2009, 12:49 AM
Uhhh, last time I looked you could bow hunt or Blackpowder hunt without owning a "firearm".

Winner!!

Art Eatman
December 20, 2009, 08:19 AM
Enuf wandering and philosophising.

If you enjoyed reading about "Felons, Parolees Getting Hunting Licenses" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!