New Guy with questionable past

[alignguy]

Hey Guys, I am new to the forum and was wondering if I did the correct thing today. I got myself in a fair amount of trouble when I was younger and I am afraid that I may of screwed up Second amendment rights for ever. I sent a email to the Chief of Police in my town asking about weather or not I am disqualified federally from owning a firearm. He was extremely helpful to the point he offered to save me the money on running a CORI on myself to get dates on particular convictions by doing it himself for me for Monday. I have a OUI that was prior to 1994 that should not be a problem, but I do have a incarceration for a possession with intent to distribute among 2 lessor charges back 20 years ago that I served 1 year for. I am guessing that will kill me in the water there. I am wondering if doing this by myself instead of checking with a lawyer could of been the wrong thing or it wouldn't of mattered anyway?? I guess that I would have a second question to follow that up.....my wife has a spotless record and would not have a problem getting a FID or LTC , but would that be a problem in the eyes of the law?? I would guess that it would be best to leave it alone. I am interested in protection of my home first and foremost as it seems like there is more and more crime in the news everyday. The other quick question would be once a federal decision is made final, is there any way to reverse it? Thanks for your interest and time, Dennis

 

[joehaus]

Nothing is impossible. However if the crime you where convicted of carried the possibility of a sentence over a year then that is a federal disqualifier.

There also may or may not be another disqualifier for drug offenses.

 

[In God We Trust]

If you were convicted of posession with intent to distribute, you are probably screwed. Even if it was 20 years ago. Good luck.

 

[ARV]

Nothing is impossible. However if the crime you where convicted of carried the possibility of a sentence over a year then that is a federal disqualifier.

There also may or may not be another disqualifier for drug offenses.

Thought it was over 2? (thus the DUI disqualifyer in the PRM because its 2 1/2 possible.)

Hopefully LenS chimes in, hes better with these things that I could ever hope to be.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Nothing is impossible. However if the crime you where convicted of carried the possibility of a sentence over a year then that is a federal disqualifier.

There also may or may not be another disqualifier for drug offenses.

'

Close.

It is a federal disqualifier if:

1. It is classified as a felony and is not a felony involving anti-trust violation or restraint of trade.

OR

2. It is a misdemeanor that bears a possible sentence in excess of two years.

OR

3. Any misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

While felony generally means "max > 1 year", there are some states that have some > 1 year crimes classified as misdemeanors.

BUT, MA has a few more disqualifiers, the relevant one in this case being any crime involving controlled substances. If the subject has a misdemeanor conviction with less than a 2 year max for this, he triggers the state DQ even though it does not meet the criteria of a federal DQ.

is there any way to reverse it?

Certain state level DQs may be relieved by the MA FLRB, however, a drug offense is not one of them. Even if the FLRB was able to grant relief, the feds would refuse to honor it.

Your only option is a pardon and, unless you are really, really well connect it's unlikely to happen for a repeat offender with a drug dealing conviction. The MA pardon application specifically asks if you are requesting restoration of firearms rights (yes, there are pardons that are relieve all disability except gun rights), so you will not "slip it in" by talking about how you want your good name and access to professional licensing back and get your gun rights back when nobody is looking.


And, a final comment:

There are situations under which MA *MUST* issue an FID to a federally prohibited person. Such a person having an FID does not provide any protection against federal prosecution as the entrapment by estoppel defense does not crossover between state and federal jurisdictions (and, if it did, applying it in this situation would be a stretch since the state does not explicitly state that an FID undoes a federal disability)

 

[daltrey99]

Since you have already been in contact with the chief, what was his take on your status? oNt that it is a good idea to lay all of your cards on the table for the police, but you already made contact.

 

[alignguy]

He is going to let me know on Monday if I would be disqualified or not. Thanks for the replies guys

 

[Brandon1317]

I can answer both questions since I have looked into this very subject for my self.

You will be eligible for a FID card and that is it not a LTC, but yes you will be "prohibited" under federal since the feds dont recognize the restoration. That is because there was a court cause that basically said that since Mass doesn't restore your full gun rights (to have long guns and handguns outside of your house) the feds don't have to recognize the partial rights that are restored by the state. Of course the funny thing with that ruling really is even if you have a clean record there is no guarantee that you will even get a LTC since it is up to the local chief so I'm not really even sure that makes any sense. Bascially under federal law there are a couple different ways to have your rights restored and that is either a Pardon,expungement or having civil rights restored (Right to sit on a jury, right to vote and right to hold office). In Mass you would have all those civil rights restored after 7 years so technically you should have your firearms restored since Mass allows it but that is where the case I mentioned comes into play.

Even going though the FLRB and getting your rights restored though them would still make you Prohibited under federal law. That is because you don't lose any of your civil rights for misdemeanor convictions and that leaves you with no relief under federal law since you never had your civil rights taken away and they cant be RESTORED as required.It actually makes more sense for them to review felony convictions because if they did restore your rights they would be restored under federal law to. Funny!!

So weather you get a FID card or have your rights restored though the FLRB you are still prohibited under federal law there is no difference. There are some simple fixes to both really. One is to take away your civil rights for certain misdemeanors that can have a jail sentence over 2 years and that would solve the FLRB problem and the other is to allow a people with a felony to get a FID after 7 years and allow them to have long guns or handguns and the final decision is still up to the local police chief to issue a LTC who will probably deny it any way.

From what I have seen on here and other places is the ATF has said they will not prosecute any one cleared by the FLRB! So how could they prosecute any one with a FID card then since it is the same differnce.

For right now I would suggest getting the FID card since that would make you legal under state law. You wouldn't be able to purchase a gun from a dealer since they are federally licensed but you could buy though private sale with a FA-10 since only the state handles those. And have your wife get a LTC or FID and that way atleast she is good under state and federal law just in case. keep the guns in a safe with a digital lock that only "she has the code to" if you know what I mean. That way if for some odd reason you get a visit from the fed's the guns are under her control since you dont have access to it even though it is in the same home. You would need to get caught with a gun within your control to really be charged with possession like in your car or bag or underneath your pillow but if it is in a safe which she only has a code to then they can't prove you have access to it. Worst case you need to use a gun to protect your family then it is what it is and if they want to try to charge you they can.

I'm not a lawyer but I have done a lot of research on this and have gotten some legal advice from a Lawyer. One thing I will say is alot of the "gun lawyers out there suck" there is a only a couple that know what they are doing. Some one should have filed suit against the state by now for even issueing the FID card to certain people since in the law it says they will only issue if YOUR NOT PROHIBITED UNDER STATE OR FEDERAL LAW so when you are they shouldn't be issuing the license even though it is a shall issue.

 

[Brandon1317]

Also I have never seen a case of some tried for Felon in posseion under federal law from this state with a FID card unless there was another crime invloved which lead to them finding weapons.
How often do the police come and search your house?? How often have you had police contact that would warrant a search? These are questions you need to ask your self. As the crime gets worse and worse you need to be protected. The hype around 2012 has sparked a huge demand for weapons and survival supplies alone never mind the problems that re really coming!

 

[Len-2A Training]

Also I have never seen a case of some tried for Felon in posseion under federal law from this state with a FID card unless there was another crime invloved which lead to them finding weapons.
How often do the police come and search your house?? How often have you had police contact that would warrant a search? These are questions you need to ask your self. As the crime gets worse and worse you need to be protected. The hype around 2012 has sparked a huge demand for weapons and survival supplies alone never mind the problems that re really coming!

Taking these in order:

I do know of at least one case where a local police chief couldn't convince a PP with FID that he couldn't legally possess firearms. Finally, said chief contacted BATFE and they confiscated the guns . . . I was led to believe that he was also charged by the feds. I know nothing of the outcome. This info came directly from said police chief. I've heard of other such cases, but have no first-hand knowledge.

Police searches:

- Police accompany FD and EMS to calls. If any of them sees something they are likely to take action (FD and EMS reporting same to PD, PD obtaining search warrant).
- I read of a story where a guy had a heart attack while sitting at the kitchen table cleaning a gun. He called 911. Police, seeing an "unsecured gun" on the kitchen table, went to guy's hospital room (after he had sufficiently recovered) and charged him with "improper storage". Again, no idea of outcome.
- I talked with a person recently who had a house fire. Even though the fire was started by an electrical appliance, after the firefighters left, the State Fire Marshal's Office investigated, an accelerant sniffing dog was used, the police were there, etc.
- In the above cases, police contact was "real" and uninvited if you look at it technically. Results will be the same no matter if you invite them in or they are there because of a medical, fire, other incident.

 

[Brandon1317]

What I don't get is why is state issing the license, it clearly says it will not be issued if your prohibited under state or FEDERAL law. So even though it's a shall issue license the person is prohibited under federal law so it should not be issued. If some one is charged federally then the state should be charged with conspiracy or at least sued.

 

[Racenet]

- I read of a story where a guy had a heart attack while sitting at the kitchen table cleaning a gun. He called 911. Police, seeing an "unsecured gun" on the kitchen table, went to guy's hospital room (after he had sufficiently recovered) and charged him with "improper storage". Again, no idea of outcome.

The outcome of this should be the police officers loosing their jobs. That is some fuked up $hit!

 

[Brandon1317]

A lot of these stories are cops shooting in the dark with these charges most of these probably don't stand up in court. Lately I have seen a change in a lot of cases where there really needs to be solid evidence to bring charges un like years ago were you could charge any one with anything and get away with it. I'm also seeing a lot more cops being charged with crimes while on duty, some are questionable but a lot deserved it.

 

[alignguy]

I got my answer from the police chief today and it was not good. He said I was federally banned for life for a possession with intent to deliver...I should never of plead guilty because I was living in the house and my name was on the lease but I was not dealing. They charged me with trafficking so they could flip me and I would not do that to my friends. They ended up offering me the lessor charge but when you are 19-20 you don't think of these things. I am going to contact a attorney and see if I can get letters from the 2 guys I lived with and see if that would help...My guess it is a waste of time and I should forget about it.....My problem is that I try to do this legal instead of getting a gun off the street and as far as the Feds are concerned I will never be anything but a drug dealer...It's not right but I don't have the money to fight the good fight.....Does anyone know of a attorney or a organization that help in these cases??? I appreciate your ears as it feels good to vent.

 

[s4mt3k]

sigh....

I'm sorry dude....

 

[joeendris]

Police searches:

- Police accompany FD and EMS to calls. If any of them sees something they are likely to take action (FD and EMS reporting same to PD, PD obtaining search warrant).
- I read of a story where a guy had a heart attack while sitting at the kitchen table cleaning a gun. He called 911. Police, seeing an "unsecured gun" on the kitchen table, went to guy's hospital room (after he had sufficiently recovered) and charged him with "improper storage". Again, no idea of outcome.
- I talked with a person recently who had a house fire. Even though the fire was started by an electrical appliance, after the firefighters left, the State Fire Marshal's Office investigated, an accelerant sniffing dog was used, the police were there, etc.
- In the above cases, police contact was "real" and uninvited if you look at it technically. Results will be the same no matter if you invite them in or they are there because of a medical, fire, other incident.

Was the heart attack in PRM, or in a free state?

 

[terraformer]

I got my answer from the police chief today and it was not good. He said I was federally banned for life for a possession with intent to deliver...I should never of plead guilty because I was living in the house and my name was on the lease but I was not dealing. They charged me with trafficking so they could flip me and I would not do that to my friends. They ended up offering me the lessor charge but when you are 19-20 you don't think of these things. I am going to contact a attorney and see if I can get letters from the 2 guys I lived with and see if that would help...My guess it is a waste of time and I should forget about it.....My problem is that I try to do this legal instead of getting a gun off the street and as far as the Feds are concerned I will never be anything but a drug dealer...It's not right but I don't have the money to fight the good fight.....Does anyone know of a attorney or a organization that help in these cases??? I appreciate your ears as it feels good to vent.

This is a tough one. You ended up losing when you took the deal. The time to fight it was back then. Now, there is something you may be able to do but it would take years of keeping your crap together and money when you do it.

 

[Kicker96FS]

Was the heart attack in PRM, or in a free state?

Oh please, what do you think?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

This is a tough one. You ended up losing when you took the deal. The time to fight it was back then. Now, there is something you may be able to do but it would take years of keeping your crap together and money when you do it.

T. Former calls it accurately.

Assuming the offense occurred in MA, there are two avenues:

1. Governor's pardon. Very unlikely as there is a "gun rights" checkoff box on the form, and pardons are issued with and without gun rights restoration. As mentioned in other threads, you will not "trick" the system into giving back your gun rights by stating reasons like "wanting your good name back", "wanting eligibility for professional licensing", etc. Leave out "gun rights" and you will be considered for a no gun rights pardon. Put them in, and your chances go from slim to slim squared.

2. Re-opening the case and have it disposed of differently. Very difficult, expensive, and the real risk you will spend the money only indulge in wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Unlike some states, MA does not have a "rehabilitation of record" program to expunge a record, or to retroactively downgrade a felony to a misdemeanor after a certain amount of time passes. The MA idea of "progress" in this area is to pass a CORI law prohibiting private sector employers from seeing certain types of offenses after set periods of time, but MA never limits LE access to such records.

Feds are concerned I will never be anything but a drug dealer.

The "felon" definition is FAR broader than classic criminals. Receiving funds for deposit by an insolvent banking institution gets you the same treatment as running a meth lab when it comes to gun rights.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Was the heart attack in PRM, or in a free state?

Oh please, what do you think?

Of course I'm referring to MA!

"Proper Storage" in a Free State is leaving it on a countertop loaded as long as no young ones are around who could do harm to themselves.

When I vacation in NH, VT or ME, I leave my gun holstered beside the bed when I sleep . . . it's legal and acceptable practice there. It's subject of great debate in MA on the legality of doing the same here (two firearms attorneys had differing views on the legality of this, again assuming no rug-rats in the equation).

 

[alignguy]

I assume that this will follow me no matter where I live? I am planning on moving to South Carolina where they give you a pistol with your license pretty much. They have much more relaxed rules but because of the Fed ban, then that is it, correct? Is it stupid of me to take him up on the FID offer anyway in hopes they change the laws or is that stupid?? What about if my wife gets a LTC because she is clean as a whistle...as long as I am not in possession then I am safe, correct? I am about to give up on this fight, I can't afford it. Thank you guys so much, I really appreciate it.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I assume that this will follow me no matter where I live? I am planning on moving to South Carolina where they give you a pistol with your license pretty much. They have much more relaxed rules but because of the Fed ban, then that is it, correct?

Unfortunately, yes.

 

[lord1234]

Just be warned, if your wife gets it, you can not have access. That includes knowing thesafe combo, etc. That can become a very large legal mess

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

 

[Brandon1317]

I assume that this will follow me no matter where I live? I am planning on moving to South Carolina where they give you a pistol with your license pretty much. They have much more relaxed rules but because of the Fed ban, then that is it, correct? Is it stupid of me to take him up on the FID offer anyway in hopes they change the laws or is that stupid?? What about if my wife gets a LTC because she is clean as a whistle...as long as I am not in possession then I am safe, correct? I am about to give up on this fight, I can't afford it. Thank you guys so much, I really appreciate it.

Yes it will fallow you.

The best thing to do is to get the FID card because atleast you wont be breaking any state laws and at some point this will get corrected either by a court ruling or new law. You may either "really" gan your gun rights back or lose them all together. Have your wife get a license and keep any firearms in a safe that "she only has the combo for" as mention. Even in the same house its not within your control. I have yet to see a case of a PP with a valid FID card get arrested by the Feds unless there was another crime involved. There was one case of a guy who bought a rifle for his son at a dealer and got a delayed response and after the waiting got the rifle, a few weeks later the ATF came to his house and made him surrender the weapon and other rifles that weren't secured and belonged to his wife. Now keep in mind he technically broke two federal laws PP with a firearm and lieing on the background check. Even though technically your not lieing since you can answer no since your civil rights were restored.

 

[JoeS4]

Frank, practical, realistic answer (not trying to be rude) - You're screwed. Forget about ever owning a gun.

If you're concerned about home defense, get a Surefire flashlight and a baseball bat or a big fixed blade knife. And a big dog.

 

[Emoto]

So, talking to a friend of mine who is, along with his wife, interested in applying for a permit of some kind, seems to have a misdemeanor class D possession conviction in MA on his record from 20+ years ago. I'm still not clear even after browsing a number of threads, is he prohibited from gun ownership in MA and federally?

ETA: I have sent him a note asking for more info about it, like if it was CWOF, etc.

 

[Len-2A Training]

ANY drug conviction, regardless of sentence, is a lifetime DQ in MA!

CWOF is not a DQ, but falls under "suitability" at the discretion of his/her local PD.

 

[Emoto]

ANY drug conviction, regardless of sentence, is a lifetime DQ in MA!

CWOF is not a DQ, but falls under "suitability" at the discretion of his/her local PD.

Thanks, Len. I'll see what he says the disposition was and then let him know what it means.

 

[jasons]

ANY drug conviction, regardless of sentence, is a lifetime DQ in MA!

CWOF is not a DQ, but falls under "suitability" at the discretion of his/her local PD.

Just curious, but do people who were pinched for pot possession before that was made "less illegal" have standing to have their rights restored now?

 

[richc]

What about a firearm that is over 100 years old? They are considered antiques and not firearms.

Would a DQ person legally be able to own one? And with an FID card they could buy/possess ammunition.

Just thinking outside the box here.

Rich