-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
Anyone been denied their Utah Permit?
- Thread starter Rogue Status
- Start date
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,824
Oh the irony of a thread on Utah permits devolving into a thread on drinking...
Boghog1
NES Member
FIFY
Ah yes, 3.2% beer and membership/sponsor to drink at bars.
Where is the fairness for someone who 21 years ago was arrested in another country for posession of less than 1/2 gram( a misdemeanor) of cocaine and is now banned from obtaining his ccw in CT. and has since lived a clean, proper life and is allowed to purchase and own rifles. But in CT after 20 years a mentally incompetent can obtain their ccw.
yanici
NES Member
FYI, there's no special training needed for a CWFL (Florida permit). They're very lenient. A DD 214 is enough proof of training for them.
Why would you think that a plastic card in their wallet with their picture on it would prevent them from doing stupid things with guns, when the plastic card in their wallet with their picture on it didn't prevent them from drinking and driving?
Sounds like you're talking about violent felons, not the ones who wrote a bad check or shot a friend with a BB gun and took a plea deal years back because a lawyer told them that would be the easiest way to make it go away.
Correct you are. I guess cja1987 doesn't know that a DUI in Mass. is considered a felony by the feds.
Sounds like your friend got nabbed in Mexico. I explained that in another post that I'm linking to below.
I have never heard of a civil case being used under Brady/Giglio, probably for the same reasons that the Supreme Court ruled the way that they did in the Small v. United States case*; since different courts have different standards, the only standards that they can rely on are the ones that they know, i.e. criminal cases. In criminal court, the burden of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt," while in most civil courts, the burden of proof is only "the preponderance of the evidence." Legally this would make it similar to comparing apples to oranges, or Glocks to 1911's.
*On a note that'll probably be interesting to gun owners, the Small case ruled that felony convictions in other countries don't apply to the "felon in possession" charges here in the US, because of lack of uniformity in the laws of countries around the world. However, this doesn't apply to felony convictions in Mexico, as evidenced in the case Bean v. United States where a US FFL holder was caught accidentally bringing 200 rounds of ammo into Mexico. Because of an international treaty, US citizens convicted of crimes in Mexico can serve their time here in the US, which then makes you a felon in the eyes of the US laws, even though the legal standards are different.![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Can you clarify what you mean? I don't see how a state level non felony is a felony at the federal level just because its from MA.
Do you mean it is the equivalent of a felony at the federal level as in you may effectively be DQ'ed from owning certain guns due to lack of LTC-A?
Just curious, I was leaving this thread alone, made my points. Some, very understandably, disagree with me. Thats fine. I'm not arguing any more
Check out the link in my sigline about felons and FID's, I explained it all there.
![[grin]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/041.gif "Grin [grin]")
Can you clarify what you mean? I don't see how a state level non felony is a felony at the federal level just because its from MA.
Do you mean it is the equivalent of a felony at the federal level as in you may effectively be DQ'ed from owning certain guns due to lack of LTC-A?
Just curious, I was leaving this thread alone, made my points. Some, very understandably, disagree with me. Thats fine. I'm not arguing any more
Look at the actual text of 18 USC 922(g). Everybody commonly uses the term "felony" as shorthand, but the law actually refers to crimes with a maximum penalty of more than one year. Offenses that states consider to be misdemeanors that have maximum sentences up to two years can be excluded, but once the maximum penalty exceeds two years, it' becomes a permanent federal disqualifier.
The only out is if the state will later allow you to possess any firearm. Since Massachusetts won't issue at LTC, thus prohibiting you from possessing handguns and some rifles and shotguns, you're screwed even with an FID. Possess one of the long guns Mass allows you to possess when they issued you the FID and you're looking at a Club Fed vacation.
Ken
Similar threads
