NICS Denial: My Story Part 2

[NMCCWGUY]

Hello everyone. A month or so back I started a thread found here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=601691&highlight=nics+denial


Well I have the outcome. Last week I received a phone call from the FBI asking for more documents regarding my 1993 conviction. The reason I was denied originally was because even though my record was not domestic violence, they couldn't prove it wasn't. So I had to send whatever documents I had as well as notorized affidavit stating that it was not DV. Today I received my documents from the FBI stating that my appeal has been approved and they also issued me my UPIN.

So the timeline was May 9th to August 5th. I hope this helps anyone else. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

NEW INFORMATION:
One more thing I forgot to mention. I wrote my Congressman Steve Pearce around late June and they contacted me saying they were looking into it. I just got back from the gunstore and the owner told me that his friend had put in his appeal paperwork about a week before I was denied, and still hasn't heard back. I guess our elected officials do work sometimes.

 

[JohnBT]

Hey, they work faster than Congress.

 

[NMCCWGUY]

Very true!

 

[bikemutt]

I've received letters from the FBI with respect to my appeal, those are stressful enough, I can't imagine some like: "Hello Mr. Smith, this is the FBI". I'd probably croak on the spot.

So how was it for real?

 

[SMMAssociates]

NMCCWGUY:

Congrats....

The Feds decided, some time back, that people were skating on convictions that were DV, but not worded as such, so they changed the rules. "If it smells like DV, it is." That's probably what bit you. If you were convicted of "thinking about hitting my wife's boyfriend", you now have to convince somebody it wasn't DV....

Kinda stupid, but I didn't vote for him....

Glad it worked out.

Regards,

 

[Standing Wolf]

The reason I was denied originally was because even though my record was not domestic violence, they couldn't prove it wasn't.

[sincerity] The gods be thanked we don't still have that pesky innocent until proven guilty stuff to bother with! [/sincerity]

 

[NMCCWGUY]

I've received letters from the FBI with respect to my appeal, those are stressful enough, I can't imagine some like: "Hello Mr. Smith, this is the FBI". I'd probably croak on the spot.

So how was it for real?

So how was it for real?

At first I was very concerned. But the gentlemen who called was actually quite friendly. It wasn't as bad as I thought it would be.

 

[NMCCWGUY]

NMCCWGUY:

Congrats....

The Feds decided, some time back, that people were skating on convictions that were DV, but not worded as such, so they changed the rules. "If it smells like DV, it is." That's probably what bit you. If you were convicted of "thinking about hitting my wife's boyfriend", you now have to convince somebody it wasn't DV....

Kinda stupid, but I didn't vote for him....

Glad it worked out.

Regards,

Thank goodness I held onto copies of almost every court document regarding my case. The one thing I didn't have was the original police report. That is why I had to give them an affidavit.

 

[NMCCWGUY]

bump

 

[RatDrall]

Glad you won your appeal!

Too few people will ever have their rights violated by this system, to ever gain enough political traction to streamline (read: gut) the restrictions on firearms purchases.

It's so easy to say "I don't think that those people should have guns" until you suddenly qualify as one of those people. You don't even have to qualify, as long as .gov thinks that you do. No more rights for you...

 

[DCR]

I'm glad for you that you won your appeal, but am infuriated that they made you jump through hoops and do any legwork whatsoever.

The presumption of innocence dictates that the .gov must prove ineligibility, not that you prove eligibility. I know, I know, the presumption of innocence is in the criminal realm at the trial level, BUT - we're talking about an administrative process within a law enforcement agency that also affects a fundamental right guaranteed by the 2A, and it would seem that logic dictates they again have the burden of proof, not the citizen.

I submit the FBI must bear the burden of proof in demonstrating firearms ineligibility, not the citizen...look how the .gov finally recognized that it's the IRS that bears the burden of proof to demonstrate a tax liability in tax court; the citizen no longer has to prove no liability.

Anyway, good for you - I'll go mutter to myself about this one for a while...

 

[bikemutt]

I understand the frustration others feel when it appears that "innocent until proven guilty" has been turned on it's head, burden of proof shifted to the accused, etc.

But I am curious to know how the situation should be handled were it different? For example, lets say NICS discovers prohibitive information the first time Johnny goes to buy a gun. They allow the sale to go through because he's innocent right? OK, now they contact Johnny and set up a court date so they can prove to a jury that Johnny is prohibited. Meanwhile Johnny is happily buying a few more guns because he's innocent. Johnny's day in court comes and .gov fails to convince 12 of his peers of his guilt, he is free to go, his record is cleared, .gov has to pay his lawyer fees. Justice served.

The problem with this absurd fantasy, and why it will never work this way or even close to it, is that while Johnny was truly innocent, the next ten Johnny's might not be. And they aren't going to let 10 felons keep buying guns until they can prove they are ineligible.

So somewhere along the evolutionary way, it was decided that suspending a civil right, unless the accused could prove it should be otherwise, was deemed to be the law of the land. I agree it's imperfect but it's hard for me to imagine a useful alternative with respect to guns.

 

[45_auto]

For example, lets say NICS discovers prohibitive information the first time Johnny goes to buy a gun.

Then he should be prohibited from buying a gun.

They allow the sale to go through because he's innocent right?

If he's innocent then he can buy all the guns he wants.

 

[NMCCWGUY]

Thank you all for your support. I knew I was good to go, it was just the uphill battle to convince the feds. Still felt damn good getting that letter from them!