In re-reading the relevant post, it's not clear that this guy was convicted. He may have been charged but his case was CWOF.
Nor is it clear to me. We'll have to wait for him to respond.
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 May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
In re-reading the relevant post, it's not clear that this guy was convicted. He may have been charged but his case was CWOF.
Or dont drink and driveThere's a lesson here. Never live in MA.
So let me get this straight. Since this dude got a DUI in 1995 in MA, he can now no longer own any firearms in any state forever? That just cant be right.
True. The funny part of this is that Massachusetts is actually on our side in this issue. The FLRB can restore someone's 2A rights as far as state law goes, but not under federal law. I know for a fact that the state isn't any happier about this than we are.So let me get this straight. Since this dude got a DUI in 1995 in MA, he can now no longer own any firearms in any state forever? That just cant be right.
Seems to me like this should be a pretty easy win...
Ms Steed needs some jail time after a tattoo artist puts "dirty cop" in block letters on her forehead.
True. The funny part of this is that Massachusetts is actually on our side in this issue. The FLRB can restore someone's 2A rights as far as state law goes, but not under federal law. I know for a fact that the state isn't any happier about this than we are.
On the other hand a potential 2 1/2 year sentence for a first OUI offense is a little excessive - especially when it is never imposed and most first time offenders get there driver's license back in 6-12 months.
Seems to me the best way for the state to address this would be to adjust the penalty to less than 2 years for first offense. Since no one serves a day in jail anyway the 2.5 year max is a joke.
Not that I'm advocating drinking and driving - but a lifetime ban constitutes curel and unusual punishment in my mind. Especially considering we let DUI offenders who have killed people get off with probation!
A Massachusetts OUI (MGL 90-24) conviction on or after 5/26/94 is a Federal prohibitor, as it is a misdemeanor carrying a potential penalty in excess of two years incarceration (18 USC 921(a)(20)(B)).
Just gonna point out that it doesn't take you actually drinking for a cop to charge you with it.
Is that alcohol I smell sir?....
Hell, plenty of diabetics with low sugar have been mistaken for drunk drivers.
Nor does it take actual driving to get a DUI. Sitting behind the wheel with the key in the ignition, in the off position, is enough for a DUI.
At one time driving with Ted Kennedy constituted a OUI.
what if the actual offense occurred before that magic cutoff date?
i.e. busted for dwi in february 94 but the courts don't wrap things up until september of 94?
The sentencing that applies is generally that of the date of the crime, so an offense prior to the cutoff date would not be subject to the new increased penalty.
As to reducing it below two years - all you have to do is find a bunch of legislators who are willing to go on record as being soft of DUI.
Putting the key in the door constitutes DUI in MA.
Not true. You have to prove operation in Mass. Keys on the ignition with the vehicle on would be proof. Not the above.Nor does it take actual driving to get a DUI. Sitting behind the wheel with the key in the ignition, in the off position, is enough for a DUI.
In the speakers panel. They recommend you are a PP if more than 2 OUI in a five year period. So no the look back could be 20 years. For a crime that by statue doesn't make u a PP. I hope this doesn't make it in.
Sbr
In MA you are a prohibited person if you are convicted of a first DUI.
Correct and that will NOT change (Federally PP) even if MA gun laws change. It would require a change in "Melanie's Law" to lower the sentence for OUI and that will never happen in MA . . . that's a political "third rail" disaster to even suggest lowering the sentence (that is never given out anyway)!
what if the actual offense occurred before that magic cutoff date?
i.e. busted for dwi in february 94 but the courts don't wrap things up until september of 94?
The verdict had to be rendered by May 27 1994, IIRC. Anything after that is felony land.
Is it the date of the verdict that is relevant or the date of the offense?