October 17, 2018, 05:51 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 1, 2018
Posts: 156
|
I have a family member that had 5 burglary felonies from way back (early 80s). After 20 years or so he was able to get them expunged and did with relative ease. Has never had trouble buying a firearm since. That was in Kansas.
|
October 28, 2018, 09:11 AM | #27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 11, 2013
Location: Near Heart of Texas
Posts: 870
|
Quote:
__________________
Visit my fictional blog "The dr Chronicles" about a laid-back Texan named dr - Enjoy! |
|
October 28, 2018, 12:57 PM | #28 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,820
|
Quote:
Note that it is "can access" that matters. The gun could be locked up, but if the prohibited person knows the safe combination, or the keys are on your key ring, hanging on a hook in the kitchen..., then they have access in the eyes of the law. Once you are a prohibited person, you stay a prohibited person, until and unless all the relevant levels of government formally change your status, by restoring your rights.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
October 28, 2018, 02:39 PM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: In the valley above the plain
Posts: 13,424
|
That. ^^^^
A prohibited person lives in my house. All firearms must always be locked up, or under my direct control. The only person in my house that knows the safe combinations is me. All keys to firearms storage containers must remain in my control. The prohibited person cannot be given access to the firearms, the storage containers, or my safes - in any way. Simply leaving my daily-driver keys sitting on the kitchen counter, which provide access to a handgun lock box in the house, is a criminal act on my part. Should the prohibited person access any firearms, due to my 'negligence' in leaving keys accessible, then they are committing their own criminal act. There is no 'grey area' or 'worrying about that later' when it comes to firearms and prohibited persons. Legal. Or illegal. There is nothing in between.
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe. |
October 28, 2018, 03:09 PM | #30 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Quote:
I found one example at this link but I also know that NY and other states have similar sorts of laws. Reminds of Minority Report... only sort of in reverse.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
|
October 28, 2018, 03:39 PM | #31 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
What Brian Pfleuger has posted appears to be a jury instruction on "transitory possession," which is an exemption to the ordinary rules on Felons in Possession.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
October 28, 2018, 07:45 PM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: In the valley above the plain
Posts: 13,424
|
Aye. Both good points.
The way I see it: A prohibited person possessing a firearm for self defense is a crime. A prohibited person given open access to another's firearm for self defense is a crime. A prohibited person being given instantaneous, situational, non-premeditated access to a firearm for self defense, is still a crime. ...But leeway may be granted, or charges dismissed, based on the particulars of the situation. Such was the case here in Idaho a few years back. My Google-Fu is failing, and I can't come up with a link. Short summary: Convicted felon visits friends at one of their residences. Bad(der?) guys show up and start a fight. The fight turns to gunfire. Felon grabs the resident's shotgun and kills one bad guy (resulting in the rest fleeing). Multiple charges were filed. The kill was ruled justified self defense, and the firearm possession charge was dropped. The felon walked away clean.
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe. |
October 29, 2018, 11:11 AM | #33 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 9, 2013
Posts: 14
|
Yes, there is a very wealthy man that apparently can't own firearms of any kind anymore. But his wife has them.
Can't remember the guy's name - I think it might be a billionaire who turned into a felon for whatever reason - but someone told me the wife still keeps arms. If they use them, though, yes, I am sure they will have some 'splainin' to do. |
October 31, 2018, 10:53 AM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Deleted some posts and replies dealing with SCOTUS but not directly relevant and full of politics.
Let's stay on topic.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
|