Quote:
Quote:
|
I would be interested in knowing WHAT FEDERAL CRIME violating a state protection order is.
|
It’s a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) which includes as a prohibited person someone who is...
|
Quote:
From the link:
Quote:
|
Section 922 of Title 18 of the United States Code prohibits those specific offenders from possessing firearms or ammunition.
|
|
The text of 922(G) doesn't prohibit mere possession.
Quote:
It shall be unlawful for any person— ...
to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
|
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922
If the person in question were already the subject of a protective order when an arm was transferred to him, that would seem to be a 922(G) violation. If he possessed "one in or affecting commerce" and subject to such an order, that would also appear to be a violation.
If the transfer were prior to the order, the possession arguably should not affect commerce (since the now prohibited person wouldn't legally be buying a replacement), and not fall within the federal prohibition.
The scope of Operation 922 looks modest. It involves a federal prosecutor riding local prosecutor's coattails were a state order has been violated. It isn't very many people charged, and the US Attorney's release doesn't detail how many charges involved firearms, but we know it was fewer than 50.