Felon in possession of a weapon

[Wade-0]

So as a result of clicking through links from one news story to the next, I ended up on this blog posting: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/28/some-things-need-to-change/. In his post he states

Something very few people know: last year over the summer an off balance individual threatened to kill me and my family. He wasn’t very stealthy about it - he called our office number, sent me emails and even posted threats on his blog, so it wasn’t hard to determine who he was. The threats were, in the opinion of security experts we consulted, serious. The individual has a felony record and owns a gun.

He then goes on to state "And the police were helpful but couldn’t do much based on the threats until he acted."

Isn't it a felony for a felon to be in possession of a gun? I'm wondering if he's embellishing the story a bit for more sympathy, or if there is just a loophole that prevents police from jumping on something like that. Or if it's something else entirely...

 

[D94R]

Hearsay unless evidence is presented.

 

[EmGeeGeorge]

Its second hand info in a sense; prolly embelishment ...so who knows... felony record can sometimes mean had been arrested and charged with a felony but maybe not convicted.

 

[GRIZ22]

if all the threats are true and based on the nature of the threats the person needs to go sign a complaint and have all the evidence (hard copy, recordings etc) of the threats.

One of the questions that the police would have is how do you know he has a gun? There would be a need for the police to have enough probable cause for a warrant and that would include where he keeps the gun. The next would be how are the police going to catch him with it? If he goes to the range every Saturday that would be easy.

 

[Wade-0]

One of the questions that the police would have is how do you know he has a gun?

That's something I was wondering too, as it's not very clear from his story where he got that information.

 

[franconialocal]

Every state is different
Every town, district, burrough, etc. is different
All the laws are different and they way they are applied are different.

You would really need to research it for your/his local area. +1 to what Griz22 said on every aspect. You would need to start with say, a restraining order, stalking order, "no trespass" order, harassment evidence (which I think would be the most applicable here) and "build a case" with the police in your area. Save everything.......caller id's, text messages, your recieved number list, etc. to show repetition, odd hours of contact, duration of call, tape your own call and tell them they are being recorded too, personal contact, notes, etc. As far as the firearm question, I'm wondering how they knew this?

 

[Wade-0]

I thought there was also a federal law prohibiting convicted felons from possessing a gun.

 

[Oro]

Every state is different
Every town, district, burrough, etc. is different

No, there is federal law on this and it is not subject to state interpretation. It doesn't specify a felony, only:

Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year;

or misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence.

You can look this up at the ATF.ORG's faq site, or reference the law:

18 U.S.C. 922(g) and (n), 27 CFR 478.32

A state may impose a stricter policy, but not a more lenient one. Also it is worth noting that most states have pre-emption laws with regards to firearms, meaning smaller jurisdictions may not alter state law. Thus, it does NOT vary from town to town or "district" to district.

 

[franconialocal]

I should have clarified...I didn't really intend on focusing on the gun part of the law, just the other harassment issues/threats. I'm aware of this law. But you still have to PROVE that he has a gun or at least enough PC or exigency to justify a search or arrest warrant, and that part takes work. I'm just wondering how they know he has a gun....the "blog" is confusing to me.

 

[Jeff White]

The threats were, in the opinion of security experts we consulted, serious. The individual has a felony record and owns a gun.

That statement alone makes me doubt the accuracy of the entire story. Guns are not registered in most of the US. A security expert cannot check the public records and find out who owns a gun, because in most places those records don't exist. Secondly it is a violation of federal law for a convicted to possess a firearm and/or ammunition. So the chances of a convicted felon registering his gun in those few places that require it and not being caught on the spot are pretty darn slim.

I think that was added to the story to make people think the person was in danger.....hyperbole....

 

[mljdeckard]

Without corroborating evidence, like, another witness who will come forward and say "I was in his house this afternoon and he had a gun on the coffee table", it isn't enough evidence to sustain a warrant, and most police agencies aren't going to go after a felon posessing a firearm without a more significant charge attached.

 

[WOPR]

someone correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't some felons eligible to have their civil rights restored, i.e. gun rights? obviously after the proper petitions, paperwork, etc...

regardless, if he's the sort that actually intends to murder, I can't imagine that he would be disuaded from obtaining a gun by any means, legal or not.

 

[kurtmax]

Actually I'm pretty sure requiring felons to register firearms would be unconstitutional. Self-incrimination and all.

Something like that is only valid if it's taxed... and it has to be anonymous. Drug dealers, for example, actually have to get tax stamps for their drugs in many places. But the tax information cannot be shared with any law enforcement whatsoever.

 

[Cyborg]

One of the questions that the police would have is how do you know he has a gun? There would be a need for the police to have enough probable cause for a warrant and that would include where he keeps the gun.

I am reliably informed that hearsay, while not admissable in court IS usable to establish probable cause for a search warrant. Probable cause is just the set of facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that a crime has been, is being or is about to be committed. I would think that recordings of the telephone converstaions would be sufficient although it wold depend on the Judge and whether the Police want to put their donuts down long enough to go after the guy.

someone correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't some felons eligible to have their civil rights restored, i.e. gun rights?

I don't know about the feds but where I live they can possess a weapon 5 years after they have done their time and gotten out. Here is the relevant citation from the Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 46.04. UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARM. (a) A person who has been convicted of a felony commits an offense if he possesses a firearm:
(1) after conviction and before the fifth anniversary of the person's release from confinement following conviction of the felony or the person's release from supervision under community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision, whichever date is later; or
(2) after the period described by Subdivision (1), at any location other than the premises at which the person lives.

But under our law he committed a couple of arrestable misdemeanors in the phone calls themselves:

Sec. 22.07. TERRORISTIC THREAT. (a) A person commits an offense if he threatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with intent to:
(1) cause a reaction of any type to his threat by an official or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies;
(2) place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury;
Sec. 42.07. HARASSMENT. (a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, or embarrass another, he:
(1) initiates communication by telephone, in writing, or by electronic communication and in the course of the communication makes a comment, request, suggestion, or proposal that is obscene;
(2) threatens, by telephone, in writing, or by electronic communication, in a manner reasonably likely to alarm the person receiving the threat, to inflict bodily injury on the person or to commit a felony against the person, a member of his family or household, or his property;

One would THINK that alone would be enough to get him picked up but again donuts.

Remember, the police have no duty WHAT SO EVER to protect you individually. To get a search warrant or an arrest warrent requires them to be proactive. If your local force is proactive, well and good. If not, you are on your own until/unless he committs some crime against you or your family.

You definately want to keep/safeguard any threatening communications from this moke in case you have to stop him. They will be useful in the resulting civil action brought by his family/heirs.

Cyborg