Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
3/20/2017 5:03:23 PM
Posted: 2/27/2001 7:58:30 PM EDT
I recently was retained by professional, productive, law-abiding, family man who was recently unlawfully arrested, handcuffed and hauled away to jail from a gunshow in front of friends and family. My client has been collecting for almost 20 years, has attended many gunshows and often will make a purchase at shows. This past fall he went to a Hampton Roads area gun show and attempted to make a purchase (just as he had done countless times before). After filling out the paperwork and waiting for approval, he felt a tap on his shoulder, turned and was ordered to follow a State Trooper to a room where he was handcuffed and arrested. Why? Because there was a typo on his NCIC background check. In the late seventies, when he was 19, he commited his only criminal offense, to-wit: simple assault and battery. Evidently, the printout included something that lead the trooper to believe it was aggravated assault (a felony in most states). What was it that lead the trooper to believe this? That question is being explored, however, it was either a typo/paper error or the trooper really just dropped the ball and got it wrong. At any rate, my client pleaded with the trooper to take him to his home so that he could show him the actual paperwork from the conviction (including the sentencing order which clearly showed it was a misdemeanor and expungement paperwork- which had actually recently been approved). No dice, the guy was a d*ck, or, depending on your particular bias, was really busy and just trying to do his job. At any rate, the trooper ignored his pleas and explanations and simply drug him to the magistrate, secured a criminal felony warrant and had him thrown in jail until he could make bail. Of course, the charge was dismissed at arragnment once the Commonwealth Attorney realized the unmitigated f*ck up. The arrest and charge were expunged. He has come to me for a possible civil suit against the state. Moral: If any of you guys have de minimus criminal records, ie. misdemeanors, go pay the 10 to 20 bucks to get a printout of your criminal background and CHECK FOR MISTAKES. Most of you can go to your local or state police to get this. If it's accurate, TAKE IT WITH YOU WHENEVER YOU MAKE A PURCHASE.
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 8:11:01 PM EDT
Thanx for the info Steve. I got thrown in the pokey once for driving on a suspended lics for the 2nd time. My lawyer had it dropped to driving without a valid lics(kinda like expired lics). Wonder if that will do anything. I have since bought a firearm or two since. Thanks for the heads up. BTW you gonna moderate the Legals Forum again. I hope so. You are always a great go to guy for legal stuff. [img]cwm.ragesofsanity.com/s/diablo/DRUIDD.GIF[/img]
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 8:15:22 PM EDT
That's what you get when you live in a commonwelth and not a state!!! SO what, did it appear all these years that he was a felon? because of a type-o??? BISHOP
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 8:21:12 PM EDT
steve in va, Could you look at the post by slt223 on getting an FFL and his angle on getting a gunsmith license to get around the zoning stuff?? thanks
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 8:50:33 PM EDT
In today's political climate anything more than a traffic ticket is going to make peaple look twice when you try to buy a gun. BTW: "law abiding" and "Assualt Conviction" should never be used to describe the same person. Sorry, but if you have ever been to court on a misdemeanor or felony charge & been convicted or plead guilty/no contest, or served any jail time, you are NOT "Law Abiding". I dont care if you served only 30 days for drunk driving 50 years ago, you dont rate the term "law abiding". That term is reserved for those of us that have managed to stay out of court & jail.
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 9:07:20 PM EDT
What is a commonwealth? nobody better be taking money out of my banking accout [:)]
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 11:04:02 PM EDT
a commonwealth is a term reserved for states that were originaly organized as a seperately governed territory under superision and will of the royal house of england! a granted territory if you will, proprietary in nature!It is a term going back to pre revolution days!
Link Posted: 2/27/2001 11:52:11 PM EDT
Steve, Thank You for the sound advice. ACGUNNER PEACE IS A LONG FORGOTTEN DREAM
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 12:10:43 AM EDT
So by LawDawg's criteria, people who serve 10 years for rape and are later found innocent due to the new DNA tests are not "law abiding" because they did jail time. I'm happy he's not a judge.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 1:53:51 AM EDT
Lordtrader: I'll be up and running soon in legal, until then, if you have any questions, I'm still lurking over there before and after work (and sometimes during- there's a computer at the Virginia Beach Courthouse in the law library that's online for us- I always get funny looks when I log on to ar15). Bishop: No, as a matter of fact, this is the first time it was ever a problem. I am getting a copy to see what it was the trooper saw but I don't know if it was a recent thing or just an oversight by the trooper. That's why I'm suggesting everyone carry an ACCURATE one with them when they purchase. Bubbatheredneck: I'll check that out today.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 3:33:04 AM EDT
LawDawg: Please tell me you are joking, otherwise, I must assume you are either pedantically anal, or extremely elitist. If you are anal and wish some clarification, how about this: ". . . law abiding, save one youthful indescretion some twenty-five (25) years ago wherein my client, then a teenager, made a poor choice in clocking a smart-assed punk who made a comment regarding alleged promiscuity on the part of his mother. Other than that, he has lead a productive, legal, healthy, positive life generating income to support his family and our economy." How's that? If you are making that statement because you truly believe one misdemeanor some 25 years ago makes you persona non grata, then there is no point arguing with you since you obviously lead a rightous and noble life and know better than the rest of us heathans (btw, I don't have a record, misdemeanor or otherwise, however, I have made mistakes in the past just like the rest of us, save LawDawg, and tend not to judge based solely on isolated bad behavior from one's youth).
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 4:20:41 AM EDT
LawDawg is usually pretty sharp, but the term "pinhead" comes to mind reading his above post. [;)] Sorry, LawDawg. Plenty of people find themselves in court and sometimes convicted of things they didn't do. And you *can* be law-abiding at age 40 even if you were a complete FU at age 20. Anyway, if you have a minimal and remote criminal record, it can cause some hassle avoidance to petition the court for a vacation or expungement of your conviction. Usually the court, at least around here, will grant such a petition if you have a few years of no police/court contact.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 5:35:17 AM EDT
Yes this can happen!! I am 40 now, but on my 18th birthday this was in 1978. I was with a buddy in Galveston and got cought with some grass. It was a misterminer charge. In 1994 I went to buy a pistol but was flaged for a felony. I had to go to Galveston to get the paper work and clear this situation up. The Texas Department Of Puplic Saftey was very helpful with getting this cleared up, I just had to fax the paper work to them. The funny thing is that when I was buying this gun they would not let me have it because of the background check but I was able to buy my first AR-15 and leave with it that same day, But could not take the pistol. Makes alot of sense Hu!!! I have bought many guns since and I always get delayed!!!!
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 5:57:04 AM EDT
>I dont care if you served only 30 days for >drunk driving 50 years ago, you dont rate the >term "law abiding". That term is reserved for >those of us that have managed to stay out of >court & jail DAMN, GUY! I guess I'm a hardened criminal then (with a CCW to boot!)I might as well quit my job and do armed roberries, I got the hardware. The way you talk I'm guessing you're "law abiding" but from your text, it won't surprise me when we see you on the news in an armed standoff with the police for the last act of your shooting rampage, tell me guy who will your initial targets be? Those damn hippies? disease spreading queers? blacks? jews? yuppies? christians? or just anyone who looks like they've ever had black ink on their palms. ALLUHAH AKBAR!! "I am the angel of death, the time of purification is at hand"
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 6:20:14 AM EDT
Computerized criminal history records are notorious for being inaccurate. They should always be verified if at all possible before proceeding with a criminal charge. I'm surprised the judge remanded him. Given his standing in the community why didn't he just ROR him? Glad to hear you'll be back in the legal forum. Would you comment on the following thread in legal: Statue of Limitations [url]www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=4837#lastPost[/url] How does the statute of limitations effect the AW provisions of the '94 crime bill with respect to manufacture/possession? TIA
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 6:23:22 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 6:45:21 AM EDT
"Nope, the term for that is lucky. Everyone here, even you, has done something at one time or another that would land us in jail or in court, some people just don't get caught. There are so many laws on the books that NOBODY over the age of 13 can honestly say they have never broken the law." Dang. This is starting to get frightening. I agree with Garandman again. Maybe the Apocalypse is at hand...
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 8:26:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By rkbar15: . Would you comment on the following thread in legal: Statue of Limitations [url]www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=4837#lastPost[/url] How does the statute of limitations effect the AW provisions of the '94 crime bill with respect to manufacture/possession? TIA
View Quote
The applicable statute of limitations tolls (begins to run)when the offense is committed. So far as possession cases, that is an ongoing offense and really makes that affirmative defense moot. Manufacturing crimes are a different story. The date of illegal manufacture would toll the statute for that offense.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 8:56:43 AM EDT
Hey LawDawg, Interesting post you had. I am currently a law enforcement officer with the rank of Deputy Chief. Back in the early 70's, I was arrested with a group of fellow servicemen for disturbing the peace. We actually did three days in jail along with a fine. Since then, no arrests and only one traffic ticket. I have spent the last eighteen years in the public safety sector but I guess I better resign tomorrow since according to your definition, I am not "law-abiding". Does this really make sense to you?
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 9:08:38 AM EDT
My suggestion would be IF you have ANY record whatsoever, let the business/seller run a check on you while you wait BEFORE you attempt make a purchase as you "may not recall what type of crime it was". If someone were to pull out a NCIC on themselves, the first thing I'd think is the guy's a criminal! My experience with NCIC is that they're very reliable...but mistakes can happen..that's why we use "certifed convictions" in the courts to introduce into evidence.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 10:44:04 AM EDT
Shit by Lawdogs definition the anti's would have their way. Everybody in the US save for a few babies not old enough to do anything, have committed a crime. Ever speed? Crime. Ever toilet paper a house or soap a window when you were a teen? Crime. Ever throw snowballs at passing cars when you were a teen? Crime. Smoke a joint? Crime. Not cross the street in the crosswalk? Crime. Poke your wife in the ass? Crime in some states. Curse in public? Crime in some cities. Get that extra refill in a restaraunt where it says one re-fill only please? Crime. You could be arrested for these and about a million other offenses hauled to jail and to court. LawDog your statement is pure ignorance.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 11:10:20 AM EDT
LawDawg, You sir are full of sh!t. The term "law abiding" if you wish to take the definition to the (anal) limit, describes one who has NEVER broken the law. Getting caught is irrelevant in this context. So your "reserved for those of us that have managed to stay out of court & jail" comment shows what a low life hypocrite you are. What you really are, by your own definition, is a criminal. The fact that you never got CAUGHT for your lawbreaking simply proves that you were lucky, because intelligence is out of the question. Me, I have broken the law, and I have been held to account for some of my offenses, others not. You better hope your luck holds, because you wouldn't last five minutes in a jail cell.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 11:16:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By akrazy: Ever speed? toilet paper a house or soap a window when you were a teen? Ever throw snowballs at passing cars when you were a teen? Smoke a joint? Not cross the street in the crosswalk? Poke your wife in the ass? Curse in public? Get that extra refill in a restaraunt where it says one re-fill only please? You could be arrested for these and about a million other offenses hauled to jail and to court.
View Quote
Speeding: Infraction. Teen vandalism: free and clear at 18. Jaywalking: Infraction. Consenting Sodomy Amoung Adults: If thats your sort of thing, whatever. Petty theft: Chop off your hands if i had my way. Drug use: can be a infraction,misdemeanor,or felony depending on which drug and how much. are potheads "law abiding".? Hell no, they are potheads. I stand by my statement. If you have been convicted of a crime and sent to jail or prison you never rate the term "law abiding" ever again.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 11:19:49 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Werd: You better hope your luck holds, because you wouldn't last five minutes in a jail cell.
View Quote
I have delt with crooks and gang bangers everyday for the last 8 years. Including the worst of the worst like AB & La Eme. Ypou may be a big man but i do this shit for a living, If we were in prison I would run the place and make you my bitch.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 11:31:08 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 11:44:24 AM EDT
LawDawg You strike me as the type of officer that gives the rest of us a bad name. Driving 56 in a 55? Write'em up!! What a pompous attitude. If you have spent 8 years on the street then you should be able to discern the difference between people making mistakes and criminals. "If we were in prison I would run the place and you would be my bitch." Yep, that sounds real law abiding to me. Being a cop doesn't make you right, nor does it make you law abiding.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 12:58:11 PM EDT
I stand by my statement. If you have been convicted of a crime and sent to jail or prison you never rate the term "law abiding" ever again.
View Quote
Actually, you changed your statement. Previously you said [b]convicted or sent to jail[/b] and now you you say [b]convicted and sent to jail[/b], which is slightly more reasonable. However, my position is people do stupid things and young people do stupid things more often. But I don't think one stupid act in your life should bar you from RKBA. I don't understand how someone experienced in law enforcement and gang culture has such a difficult time discerning the difference. You make the hard-line LEO's on glocktalk look like bleeding hearts.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 1:03:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mattja:
I stand by my statement. If you have been convicted of a crime and sent to jail or prison you never rate the term "law abiding" ever again.
View Quote
Actually, you changed your statement. Previously you said [b]convicted or sent to jail[/b] and now you you say [b]convicted and sent to jail[/b], which is slightly more reasonable. However, my position is people do stupid things and young people do stupid things more often. But I don't think one stupid act in your life should bar you from RKBA.
View Quote
Matt, I never once said a conviction or jail time should prevent a person from owning guns. I said I objected to the term "law abiding" being applied to convicted crooks.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 1:12:31 PM EDT
Steve, when a statute of limitations "tolls" that means it is *not* running. An example: The statute of limitations tolls when the suspect voluntarily absents himself from the jurisdiction (i.e., runs) and is not prosecuted during this period as a result of his absence. LawDawg, I know you don't give a fig, but my respect for you and your opinions is taking a precipitous drop the more you post on this thread.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 1:16:37 PM EDT
Whatever....you're like Klinton. Depends on what the definition of "is" is. The term "law abiding" has to do with whether one obeys the laws or not. It has nothing to do with whether one gets caught.
Link Posted: 2/28/2001 4:47:23 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Chairborne Ranger: Steve, when a statute of limitations "tolls" that means it is *not* running. An example: The statute of limitations tolls when the suspect voluntarily absents himself from the jurisdiction (i.e., runs) and is not prosecuted during this period as a result of his absence.
View Quote
You are absolutely right and I stand corrected. Sorry for my dyslexic moment. In civil suits, I toll the statute whenever I file suit within the statute period. I guess I had a brain fart. LawDawg, I read your reply to the laudry list of petty crimes and "infractions", but you really have not answered the underlying question. Have you ever committed a misdemeanor (regardless of whether or not you were caught)? Ever urinate in public? Ever litter? drink a beer underage or appear in public while intoxicated? The list could go on and on. Somewhere along the line, you have committed a misdemeanor, whether you like to admit it or not. Also, I fail to see the logic with regard to your statement about juvenile crimes. Are you saying that because juvey records are sealed (which is not the case under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines btw) for purposes of criminal history, crimes committed as a juvenile don't count? Really, just because, procedurally, the criminal conviction is sealed? How do you justify that and why would that reasoning not also apply to an adult who gets a pardon or expungement (based on merit)? Both are predicated on the same policy concerns.
Link Posted: 3/1/2001 4:16:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2001 4:42:42 PM EDT by Werd]
LawDung, Thank you for informing me that you have sex with men for living. If homosexuality is your thing, fine, but most of us here prefer the opposite sex. So you can stop daydreaming about making me "your bitch". It ain't gonna happen.
Top Top