4473 and the 5th Amendment

[JohnKSa]

1. Lying on the 4473 is a crime with a significant penalty. If you can't fill it out truthfully then don't fill it out--that's where your right to not incriminate yourself comes into play. I can't really put into words how bad an idea it is to voluntarily commit a crime where part of the actual crime is the intentional creation of a permanent record of the crime, in front of a witness licensed by the federal government and tasked with maintaining that record under penalty of law.

2. Playing games with the law with your own freedom and money at stake is an impressively bad idea. If you enjoy playing games with the law, get the education, pass the test and if you are any good at it you will get paid to do it with someone else's freedom and money on the line.

Ok, the rest of the questions. Here's the actual line from the law in question:

"...an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802))"

This does not reference anything other than Controlled Substances (legally defined term) so comments about uncontrolled substances like caffeine are completely inapplicable.

The terms "unlawful user" and "addicted to" are very simple and very clear.

The question on the 4473 is very clear.

I've found that often when people are trying to confuse the issue (either intentionally or otherwise), they start by trying to redefine things from the very beginning. That's the case here.

The question is not confusing or complicated. The problem is when people try to alter the question and then answer their strawman version of the question.

The best way to clarify things is to strip the manufactured complexities away from the true issue.

So, let's look at some things the question on the 4473 does NOT ask.

It does not ask: "Have you ever been caught unlawfully using controlled substances?" It doesn't ask that because the answer is not relevant.

It does not ask: "Do you think it's likely you will be caught unlawfully using controlled substances?" Also irrelevant.

It does not ask: "How long has it been since you were convicted or acquitted of unlawfully using a controlled substance?" Because that's not relevant to whether or not you are currently in violation of the law and that's the point of the question.

It does not ask: "Have you ever been convicted or acquitted of unlawfully using a controlled substance?" That's not relevant to the real issue of whether you are currently in violation of the law.

It does not ask: "How long has it been since you last unlawfully used a controlled substance?" How long it's been is not relevant--what's relevant is whether or not you are currently a prohibited person.

I'm not going to list all the questions that aren't asked on the 4473, but it's a useful exercise. Instead of looking at the question and thinking: "What are all the possible interpretations of the question that might introduce ambiguity and confusion?" it's more valuable to look at the the question as it stands and then think about why it is the way it is and why it's not worded differently than it is.

[dogtown tom]

JohnKSa.....................

What he said.

[langenc]

I didnt read many posts but where does this come from?? Found about 5-6 post

"But, but .. muh Constitooshunal rights! I got a right to have a gun!"

Have right to 'keep and bear" but owning?? I guess you cant "keep anmd bear" if you cant own..

Poor Hunter and the "BIG GUY."

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by langenc

I didnt read many posts but where does this come from?? Found about 5-6 post

"But, but .. muh Constitooshunal rights! I got a right to have a gun!"

Have right to 'keep and bear" but owning?? I guess you cant "keep anmd bear" if you cant own..

When you voluntarily choose to violate certain laws, you voluntarily waive a number of constitutional rights.

Illegally using controlled substances is a crime that automatically makes you prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition. It's a very simple calculation: If you want to own firearms -- legally -- don't do drugs.

What's the old saying? "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time." The "time" for firearms prohibition resulting from a felony conviction is the rest of your life.

You didn't quote the rest of my post that you cited above:

Yes, you do. You also have a right to NOT use recreational (or [maybe] medicinal) substances that are illegal under federal law. Take your pick. Life is all about the choices we make. If you choose to use illegal chemical substances, then you voluntarily waive your right to have a gun. I don't want to open the argument over whether or not that's the way it should be, but that's the way it is. As an instructor I once had used to say, "What is, is. It is your resistance to what is that causes your unhappiness."

[44 AMP]

The OP was a question about the 4473 and the 5th Amendment protection from self incrimination.

We've danced around "prohibited person" a bit, and there seems to be two different points of view, one being you become a prohibited person the moment you do something that puts you in that category, and the other being you aren't, until you get caught, or admit to it.

I don't think either one really applies much to the OP. We have established what both the 4473 and the 5th Amendment SAY....

And since no one is compelled to fill out a 4473, doing so is voluntary, and therefore the 5th Amendment protections do not apply.

Do we have anything else of merit to the OP to discuss??

[Metal god]

I thought the idea of being acquitted of any felony resulting in double jeopardy applying . Would then absolve you from the self incriminating Part of filling out the form because you cannot be tried a second time for the crime you were Acquitted for . Therefore if you robbed that bank and we’re acquitted of said crime , you would have to admit that you rob the bank on the 4473 .

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Metal god

I thought the idea of being acquitted of any felony resulting in double jeopardy applying . Would then absolve you from the self incriminating Part of filling out the form because you cannot be tried a second time for the crime you were Acquitted for . Therefore if you robbed that bank and we’re acquitted of said crime , you would have to admit that you rob the bank on the 4473 .

No. Because the questions on the 4473 about other felony crimes asks specifically if you have been convicted or if you are under indictment. If you have been tried and acquitted, you are still a bank robber but you can lawfully answer "No" to those questions.

b. Are you under indictment or information in any court for a felony, or any other crime for which the judge could imprison you for more than one year, or are you a current member of the military who has been charged with violation(s) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and whose charge(s) have been referred to a general court-martial?
c. Have you ever been convicted in any court, including a military court, of a felony, or any other crime for which the judge could have imprisoned you for more than one year, even if you received a shorter sentence including probation?

The question about drugs and marijuana doesn't ask if you have been convicted. It asks if you are using or are addicted to illegal substances. Indictment or conviction don't enter into that question.

e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.

[JohnKSa]

I thought the idea of being acquitted of any felony resulting in double jeopardy applying .

For crimes other than unlawful drug use or being addicted to drugs, the questions ask about convictions, current indictments and about being a fugitive from justice.

If you have been acquitted of a particular crime then you have not been convicted of that particular crime, you are not under current indictment for it nor are you a fugitive from justice for that crime.

Just answer the questions as asked. Don't try to complicate them by making up different questions and trying to answer those.

There is no question on the 4473 about acquittals, therefore there is no need to consider acquittals when answering any of the questions.

On the other hand, if you have robbed a bank and have not been tried for it, then you are a fugitive from justice for that crime and would need to answer that question with a "Yes" if you CHOOSE to fill out a 4473.

As far as an acquittal goes (as applicable to the drug situation), it means you won't be prosecuted for the specific crime(s) that you were tried for. It does not give you a blanket of innocence for that type of crime for the rest of your life.

So, for example, an acquittal on drug charges doesn't give one carte blanche to use drugs from then on without fear of prosecution nor does it give one the right to answer the question about being an unlawful user with a lie if one is currently an unlawful user.

Again, just answer the question as asked. Don't alter it or complicate it in your mind and then try to answer the altered question.

1. The drug question doesn't ask about past behavior, it asks about current behavior.
2. The drug question doesn't ask about past acquittals, it asks about the current situation.

...you would have to admit that you rob the bank on the 4473

Filling out a 4473 is voluntary because the government does not force you to buy guns. The government couldn't force a person to fill one out if that person didn't want to--depending on the circumstances, that could be forcing a person to self-incriminate. But if one CHOOSES to buy a gun from a dealer and therefore also CHOOSES to fill out a 4473, that person must answer the questions correctly to avoid committing a crime.

Just as you can not be forced to testify at your trial, but if you do choose to do so, you are not allowed to lie under penalty of perjury.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Metal god

I thought the idea of being acquitted of any felony resulting in double jeopardy applying . Would then absolve you from the self incriminating Part of filling out the form because you cannot be tried a second time for the crime you were Acquitted for . Therefore if you robbed that bank and we’re acquitted of said crime , you would have to admit that you rob the bank on the 4473 .

You have generally demonstrated a poor understanding of law. What you believe is true is not necessarily true in real life in the real world. And your beliefs do not change what is true in real life in the real world.

As has been said here many times before, to understand the law, one needs to actually study it (whether formally or informally). Much in the law is non-intuitive or will make sense only when one has sufficient background knowledge. You can't expect to be able to figure out what the law is or how it works just by trying to "reason it out." One needs to do the research, study cases, and do the reading.

I'm just goin going to "cut to the chase." None of that is true, and we need to stop trying to go down that rabbit hole.

1. Double jeopardy has nothing to do with this.
   
   
2. Having to fill out a 4473 to obtain a gun doesn't raise serious self-incrimination issues.

[Metal god]

Thanks guys I appreciate all your help . I have a much better understanding now .