BATFE Restoration of 2A rights

[Bartholomew Roberts]

As you may or may not know, the BATFE has a process to restore firearm rights to people who have been prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms. Unfortunately, Congress has not provided funds for this purpose since the Clinton administration - which means that any such request will wait indefinitely and never be processed.

Further cases through the judicial system have said that this is OK from a constitutional standpoint, even when the felony conviction was for a stupid crime in another country that is not even illegal in America.

However, today I noticed several PETA-type groups are suing the Department of Agriculture. It seems that at their behest Congress defunded the USDA inspection of horsemeat for export at the three remaining slaughterhouses in the U.S. This threatened to put the $41 million industry out of business since the law says that such meat must be inspected by the USDA.

Rather than put the industry out of business, the USDA and the three slaughterhouses reached an accord where the industry would pay the costs of the USDA inspections. Naturally this irked the PETA-types and they are now suing to stop it.

However, it does bring up a question in my mind. Would it be possible to get a restoration of rights through the current BATFE process if you funded it yourself (or had a group like NRA fund it?)

 

[M-Rex]

Personally, I do not want the NRA funding the restoration of firearms rights for felons, thank you.

 

[Geno]

Really now? I recall a 26-year standing felony recently reversed--

Just because someone has been "labeled" a "felon" does not mean that they truly were/are. One African-American gentleman was recently released from prison following a DNA test that proved HE did NOT do the rape. So, was he a "felon" because of the rape he didn't commit or because he was African-American? But, facts are facts! He IS A CONVICTED FELON, not by HIS action, but by systemic prosecution and jury conviction! He shouldn't have his rights restored?!

Dang--thought we lived in America.

Doc2005

 

[pcf]

New PETA lawsuits....didn't know that this one had come up.....

Does the BATF currently have agents or legal staff (excess manpower) that could conduct investigations and process request? The USDA already had personel in place to inspect the slaughter houses and meats, the only difference is that funding comes from a difference source.

Even if someone or a group was willing to pay to restore rights, could/would the BATF be able/willing to staff it? Even if private funding existed I don't think that the BATF would do it without a congressional edict.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Personally, I do not want the NRA funding the restoration of firearms rights for felons, thank you.

Felonies are easier to get than you might think. One example was a Texas FFL who drove over the border into Mexico. He had a loose round of ammo in the car that was discovered by the local police during a traffic stop/bribery shakedown. He was jailed in Mexico and underwent quite a bit of heartache there before being able to return to the states.

Upon returning to the states, he learns his conviction in Mexico makes him a felon here and has to surrender his FFL (livelihood) and firearms because there is no process for him to have his rights restored.

In a similar fashion, the 1994 Lautenberg bill makes anyone convicted of even misdemeanor domestic violence prohibited from owning a firearm. Guys who had gotten in a fight with their brother as a teenager in the 1950s were suddenly prohibited from hunting even though they had a clean record since then. FBI agents were forced to retire because they could no longer carry a firearm. None of these people could get their rights restored.

This isn't an automatic restoration of rights for all felons. It is just a chance to have the record reviewed.

 

[WT]

M-Rex: I agree.

 

[Crosshair]

Remember, it is not that hard to get a felony conviction. Drug laws come to mind. If you pick up a hitchhiker, get stopped by the cops, and that hitchhiker has some heroin in his backpack. YOU can be in trouble, regardless of the fact you had no idea what he had.

Doing something stupid like drag racing when you where 18 can ruin you for the rest of your life. It is not that hard to become a felon. The term has been peverted soo much that it has lost much of its meaning. Just as there is a system to get a suspended drivers lisense back, there should be a way for people who have served their time to get their rights back.

 

[beerslurpy]

We are awash in things that cause firearms disqualifications. Lifetime disqualifications.

Every state has a process for restoring rights for state given felonies, even really serious ones that would have been called felonies in the old days.

Break a federal law or fail to get your state level rights to KBA, hold public office and vote restored and you never get to have a gun again unless you move to england.

 

[sumpnz]

Bart - There was a recent SCOTUS case where a guy was convicted in Japan of gun running. After serving his (10 year??) jail sentence he was deported back here. A couple or so years later he bought a gun (not sure if through a dealer). The po-po somehow found him in possesion of said gun and charged him with felon-in-possesion or lying on the 4473 or something similar. He appealed the conviction on that charge all the way to SCOTUS where they ruled foreign convictions cannot be held against him here. That TX FFL, if he was able/willing to go through the effort should be able to use that case to get his FFL and other rights restored.

M-Rex and WT - While I understand your position I cannot agree with it. For starters, it is firmly my belief that barring felons (who are not in still jail or on probation/parole) is a violation of their rights. If they are too dangerous to be allowed to posses a gun, they are too dangerous be out of jail. Also, why should someone who, 20 years ago as a 19 year old, commited some "youthful indiscretion" and wound up with a felony conviction (even if they served little or no jail time), but has otherwise kept their nose clean be barred from defending themselves and their family with the most effective tools available?

 

[duckslayer]

So, was he a "felon" because of the rape he didn't commit or because he was African-American?

White guys have been wrongly imprisoned too(and subsequently released following DNA proof of their innocence), so I hope you aren't trying to stir a racial debate about this matter.

If they are released due to evidence showing they are innocent, I would think that would equate to an acquittal, so the conviction should be withdrawn and they are no longer a felon.

 

[Geno]

I know a teacher who--

I have a very good, Christian school teacher-friend, who while still single had an "affair" with his ex-girlfriend while she was broken up with her then-newer boyfriend. They had "relations" and when the new-boyfriend found out, she cried 'Rape!" My friend was jailed. Then, 3 days later, she gave written confession of the false statements. He was released, given his finger print card from the police, but to this day, HE CAN NOT PURCHASE A FIREARM BECAUSE IT IS IN THE SYSTEM THAT HE WAS ARRESTED FOR RAPE. Even though there was no prosecution. He was active military at the time, served his duty and about 2 years later

HONORABLY discharged.

What gives?

Edited to add for Duckslayer (this man was Anglo-American). But, the African-American man who was falsely convicted was lied about by the woman. She admitted it. How, other than racial, could THAT case have been interpreted? It isn't a matter of stirring up anything--it's a matter of stating facts.

Doc2005

 

[duckslayer]

Doc, that is really messed up and I would certainly think there is some course of action that can be taken to help him out. If he was never tried and convicted, then there is no reason he should not be able to buy firearms.

 

[armoredman]

Something wrong there - convictions are what counts. Arrests cannot - you could be arrested for murder 5 minutes from now, and then be proven innocent in a court of law. No foul.
If this info about your friend is true, he needs to get an attorney, and a copy of the record showing charges dropped or dismissed. If he was convicted, or pled guilty to a lesser charge involving no jailtime, yet still punishable by more than one year in prison, he's done. If not, someone somewhere is doing things illegally....
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.

 

[BigRobT]

Maybe we need to re-visit the Judicial system and the way laws have been changed. I recall hearing of some crimes that used to be gross misdemeanors are now felonies. I think that the politicians have pushed for tougher penalties on crimes and raised the bar to make them felonies. Personally, I think the Lautenberg Amendment is full of crap. It doesn't take much to be convicted of domestic abuse. Hell, verbal abuse can constitute a domestic abuse charge, IIR. Why can't that still fall under the assault & battery laws we already have. The same with "Hate Crimes", why can't that STILL fall under the appropriate charge we already had?? Just because a spouse, racism, homophobia or whatever the case may be is involved?? (I'm not justifying these crimes, just pointing out that there were already laws in place, why escalate them to an entirely different level??)

 

[beerslurpy]

DOC, what state is this in?

 

[Maxwell]

I think this only shows what was wrong with putting government agencies in charge of who has what constitutional rights. Instead of living how the law intended, people are left at the mercy of a beauracrat who might or might not lose track of your paperwork.

Personally, I do not want the NRA funding the restoration of firearms rights for felons, thank you.

If their rights need to be restored then its your tax dollars currently paying it.
The NRA shouldnt have to bribe officials for its members to get back whats already rightfully theirs.

If your worried about a felon getting a gun, dont let him out of jail.

 

[Geno]

Beerslurpy...

He lived in California at the time it happened; now he lives in Michigan.

Doc2005

 

[GruntII]

Personally, I do not want the NRA funding the restoration of firearms rights for felons, thank you.

Really? So you don't believe in the concept of inalienable rights? Creator endowed, constitutionally affirmed rights? After a person convicted of a crime has fully served their sentence, including any parole, probation, restititution, or public service, they should have all rights restored immediately and automatically.
If a person is so dangerous that they should forever be denied these rigths they should not be walking amongst the free citizens. In fact the concept of restriction those who were convicted of crimes rights only really grained popularity towards the very end and of the 19th and the start of the 20th century.
Beyond the issue of inalienable rights is the fact that we live in a prissy wet your pants society and we now have more ridiculous felony and even misdemeanor laws that can cost you your civil rights as to be beyond stupid and moving up to insane.
Punishment such as prison time, parole, and probation is a reason to temporarily suspend inalienable constitutional rights but once the term of punishment is up and served fully then all rights should immediately retored otherwise the the whole concepts of inalienable rights which this country was founded on is a lie.

 

[GruntII]

I have a very good, Christian school teacher-friend, who while still single had an "affair" with his ex-girlfriend while she was broken up with her then-newer boyfriend. They had "relations" and when the new-boyfriend found out, she cried 'Rape!" My friend was jailed. Then, 3 days later, she gave written confession of the false statements. He was released, given his finger print card from the police, but to this day, HE CAN NOT PURCHASE A FIREARM BECAUSE IT IS IN THE SYSTEM THAT HE WAS ARRESTED FOR RAPE. Even though there was no prosecution. He was active military at the time, served his duty and about 2 years later

HONORABLY discharged.

What gives?

Edited to add for Duckslayer (this man was Anglo-American). But, the African-American man who was falsely convicted was lied about by the woman. She admitted it. How, other than racial, could THAT case have been interpreted? It isn't a matter of stirring up anything--it's a matter of stating facts.

Doc2005

Doc your friend needs to get a copy of the results of the investigation and submit them to the NICs correction people if NICs is what is holding him up. Otherwise unless it is a state law there is not federal law or regulation that should keep him from purchasing a firearm or possessing it.

 

[Geno]

It's the county sheriff office--

Every time he goes to the county police, they refuse to give him the Permit to Purchase Pistol card. They tell him that he has to have it removed from the system and that THEN they will issue. Ergo, he never even gets to the point of trying a NICS. He doesn't talk about it much--in fact, only once in the about 12 years that I have known him.

What's worse--he's a teacher. With Michigan's new "sex offender" laws changed at "ANY criminal act or accusation", he'll will now be out of a job within 2 more years. When he was MERELY accused!

Doc2005

 

[M-Rex]

Just because someone has been "labeled" a "felon" does not mean that they truly were/are. One African-American gentleman was recently released from prison following a DNA test that proved HE did NOT do the rape. So, was he a "felon" because of the rape he didn't commit or because he was African-American? But, facts are facts! He IS A CONVICTED FELON, not by HIS action, but by systemic prosecution and jury conviction! He shouldn't have his rights restored?!

Dang--thought we lived in America.

Doc2005

Well...if a DNA test 'proved' he didn't do the rape and he was released, then he isn't a convicted felon anymore, now is he?

Pay more attention.

 

[M-Rex]

Felonies are easier to get than you might think. One example was a Texas FFL who drove over the border into Mexico. He had a loose round of ammo in the car that was discovered by the local police during a traffic stop/bribery shakedown. He was jailed in Mexico and underwent quite a bit of heartache there before being able to return to the states.

Upon returning to the states, he learns his conviction in Mexico makes him a felon here and has to surrender his FFL (livelihood) and firearms because there is no process for him to have his rights restored.

In a similar fashion, the 1994 Lautenberg bill makes anyone convicted of even misdemeanor domestic violence prohibited from owning a firearm. Guys who had gotten in a fight with their brother as a teenager in the 1950s were suddenly prohibited from hunting even though they had a clean record since then. FBI agents were forced to retire because they could no longer carry a firearm. None of these people could get their rights restored.

Yep...and all those examples have been hashed out and resolved.

This isn't an automatic restoration of rights for all felons. It is just a chance to have the record reviewed.

Yes, yes...thank you. I have no doubt that all the 'anti-guh-mint' posters on this board are going to start vomiting forth all the 'but-what-if's' and assorted examples of the 'system always puttin' down the man' and all the innocent folks who go to prison.

Big deal.

I don't want the NRA fronting the bill to get felons (read that as criminals for those of you who need to catch up) back the ability to have firearms.

 

[M-Rex]

Really? So you don't believe in the concept of inalienable rights? Creator endowed, constitutionally affirmed rights? After a person convicted of a crime has fully served their sentence, including any parole, probation, restititution, or public service, they should have all rights restored immediately and automatically.

At which time he/she/it will go out and victimize more regular folks. Nice move. It's called R E C I D I V I S M. That means the big mean criminal hurts other people even after he's been "convicted of a crime has fully served their sentence, including any parole, probation, restititution, or public service."

If a person is so dangerous that they should forever be denied these rigths they should not be walking amongst the free citizens. In fact the concept of restriction those who were convicted of crimes rights only really grained popularity towards the very end and of the 19th and the start of the 20th century.
Beyond the issue of inalienable rights is the fact that we live in a prissy wet your pants society and we now have more ridiculous felony and even misdemeanor laws that can cost you your civil rights as to be beyond stupid and moving up to insane.
Punishment such as prison time, parole, and probation is a reason to temporarily suspend inalienable constitutional rights but once the term of punishment is up and served fully then all rights should immediately retored otherwise the the whole concepts of inalienable rights which this country was founded on is a lie.

I could almost hear music playing in the background.

So what? Go vote.

 

[Geno]

M Rex--you sound like my kindergarden teacher--"Pay more attention!"

I did pay attention, but thank-you for your concern regarding my apparent cognitive lapse. I never realized you cared so much about your fellow THR members' cognitive well-being. Gee--that's just swell.

The fact is, despite his conviction being set aside, he (the first example) WAS convicted. Despite the fact that my friend (the second example) was never even prosecuted, he can not purchase a firearm.

Thanks for caring--I feel all warm and fuzzy!

Doc2005

 

[oldfart]

I do not have the right to restrict any person's ability to defend himself. Since I can't do it, I cannot confer that right on another.
I believe that any person who has the money to buy it, should be able to buy any gun he/she wants with absolutely no paperwork other than a receipt. Once they buy it, they can carry it in their pocket, purse or holster anywhere they want so long as the owner of the property they are visiting is comfortable with the gun.
If someone is so dangerous they cannot be trusted with a gun they should be kept away from society and their personal protection provided by society. Recidivism is frequently caused by bad people, the kind that should never get out of prison. A primary contributing cause is stupid legislators, idiotic judges and blissninny organizations that have entirely too much power over those stupid legislators and idiotic judges.
No person can rely on the government for protection. No free person should have to. No sane person does.