Confiscated Pistol (Traffic Stop) (Page 1 of 2)
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
26
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
Posted: 11/1/2023 12:22:58 PM EDT
| Driver of car is speeding and gets pulled over. Car smells like Marijuana, driver admits to having Marijuana. Car gets searched. Small amount of loose Marijuana is found. Driver is arrested for simple possession of Marijuana. There is an unrelated firearm in the glove box that is taken "for safekeeping" due to the car being towed. Driver is released from jail and is now being told "prove that you own this pistol" by the police department. Pistol was purchased face-to-face and there is no paperwork. How should the pistol owner proceed? This agency doesn't do this with any other personal property that I know of. Homeless people can pick up their bicycle upon release from jail without showing a receipt or bill of sale. |
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
1562
EE: 0% (0)
LA, USA
|
Don't speed, don't smoke pot for starters. Possession of a federally controlled substance AND a firearm... likely never see it again, especially if you can't prove ownership. Sorry, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. That is not saying I agree with current drug laws, just a recognition of the fact that they are what they are, and drugs means prohibited person. Again, not saying I agree with it, but anybody with two brain cells knows that the two are likel oil and water... they don't mix in the eyes of the government. |
The duty of a patriot is to protect his nation from its government.
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"
|
Originally Posted By HiramRanger: Don't speed, don't smoke pot for starters. Possession of a federally controlled substance AND a firearm... likely never see it again, especially if you can't prove ownership. Sorry, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. That is not saying I agree with current drug laws, just a recognition of the fact that they are what they are, and drugs means prohibited person. Again, not saying I agree with it, but anybody with two brain cells knows that the two are likel oil and water... they don't mix in the eyes of the government. This is obvious. Great explanation. |
|
Prove you own it is kind of stupid. There should have been an inventory paper trail and a receipt at the time of seizure. That said possession of the firearm while impaired may legally be enough for the gun to be destroyed as a nuisance. Of course we differ in that we are screwed with a handgun permitting system. As it sits now that would be reason for a concerned judge to yank the permit and lose the handguns listed on it. Possessing a handgun not on a permit here is its own legal problem.  Of course some time in the future NY may be forced to change all that. Ie less government administrative control over the individual. I don’t see possessing while under the influence going anywhere though. Yea, I know it was just in the glove box but that’s in the legal wrangling category. |
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Driver of car is speeding and gets pulled over. Car smells like Marijuana, driver admits to having Marijuana. Car gets searched. Small amount of loose Marijuana is found. Driver is arrested for simple possession of Marijuana. There is an unrelated firearm in the glove box that is taken "for safekeeping" due to the car being towed. Driver is released from jail and is now being told "prove that you own this pistol" by the police department. Pistol was purchased face-to-face and there is no paperwork. How should the pistol owner proceed? This agency doesn't do this with any other personal property that I know of. Homeless people can pick up their bicycle upon release from jail without showing a receipt or bill of sale. Essentially, the driver is going to have to admit, on paper, that they possessed a firearm and drugs at the same time. Where that paper winds up is anyone's guess. And, I don't know the laws of the land where that occurred, so I can't say what prosecutors might make of it, either. Thinking it over, let's say this driver had family or perhaps friends that lived with him. If they left their firearm in that glovebox for safekeeping and he then drove off in the car unknowingly, they could request it, with a notarized form with the guns' serial number on it averring their ownership. That is, of course, if the driver hasn't already tried to claim ownership. Honestly, from my experience, losing a gun to avoid a larger charge is kind of part and parcel of the lifestyle, and that is what might have to happen here. |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
27
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By HiramRanger: Don't speed, don't smoke pot for starters. Possession of a federally controlled substance AND a firearm... likely never see it again, especially if you can't prove ownership. Sorry, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. That is not saying I agree with current drug laws, just a recognition of the fact that they are what they are, and drugs means prohibited person. Again, not saying I agree with it, but anybody with two brain cells knows that the two are likel oil and water... they don't mix in the eyes of the government. The municipal agency may not enforce federal law, and there are no analogous state laws. There is no crime involving the firearm. |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
28
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By SteelonSteel: Prove you own it is kind of stupid. There should have been an inventory paper trail and a receipt at the time of seizure. That said possession of the firearm while impaired may legally be enough for the gun to be destroyed as a nuisance. Of course we differ in that we are screwed with a handgun permitting system. As it sits now that would be reason for a concerned judge to yank the permit and lose the handguns listed on it. Possessing a handgun not on a permit here is its own legal problem. Of course some time in the future NY may be forced to change all that. Ie less government administrative control over the individual. I don’t see possessing while under the influence going anywhere though. Yea, I know it was just in the glove box but that’s in the legal wrangling category. The firearm is properly stored and documented within the agency. There is a property field in the arrest report showing the pistol and status as taken for safekeeping. The evidence custodian acknowledges all of this, but says the pistol cannot be turned over to the person it was taken to without "proof of ownership." |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
29
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
30
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
| I've heard the tribal police on the indian reservations will confiscate firearms from folks passing through the reservations if they become aware of the firearms. You have to prove ownership to get returned there as well. Being a sovern nation comes into play I believe. |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
32
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By OmegamanX: I've heard the tribal police on the indian reservations will confiscate firearms from folks passing through the reservations if they become aware of the firearms. You have to prove ownership to get returned there as well. Being a sovern nation comes into play I believe. "Tribal land" is actually Federal land in a Bureau of Indian Affairs land-trust and is governed by treaties that supercede local and federal laws. The traffic stop in the original post occurred on a public street in an American city in the United States. |
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: I think he said it was a Smith & Wesson Sigma (not even the updated SW9VE), so I don't think they're going to put forth much effort to "fight for it." Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By BadRREngineer: Hire a lawyer and sue. I think he said it was a Smith & Wesson Sigma (not even the updated SW9VE), so I don't think they're going to put forth much effort to "fight for it." Just a peanut gallery addition and maybe not germane to this sub-forum, but good God, this is hitting every stereotype there is. |
| I'd leave it alone lest some cocksucker calls his jerk off buddy that works for the ATF to jam him up. |
To those who have gone before us. May we earn what they have given.
"We didn't even get the good communism with gulags and death squads. We got the gay communism with trannys and women's basketball." - Agilt
"We didn't even get the good communism with gulags and death squads. We got the gay communism with trannys and women's basketball." - Agilt
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
33
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Just a peanut gallery addition and maybe not germane to this sub-forum, but good God, this is hitting every stereotype there is. Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By BadRREngineer: Hire a lawyer and sue. I think he said it was a Smith & Wesson Sigma (not even the updated SW9VE), so I don't think they're going to put forth much effort to "fight for it." Just a peanut gallery addition and maybe not germane to this sub-forum, but good God, this is hitting every stereotype there is. Does it help if I mention he's BLACK, and the officer was white? |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
34
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By CharlesRyan: Buy another gun and thank the lord you didnt catch a felony for unlawful carry of a firearm. Here in Texas, if you are caught with drugs and a gun, you get charged with a felony unlawful carry of a firearm. That charge would be impossible in South Carolina based on the firearm being stored as property in a lockable compartment, as dictated by law. The firearm was not carried. |
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Does it help if I mention he's BLACK, and the officer was white? Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By BadRREngineer: Hire a lawyer and sue. I think he said it was a Smith & Wesson Sigma (not even the updated SW9VE), so I don't think they're going to put forth much effort to "fight for it." Just a peanut gallery addition and maybe not germane to this sub-forum, but good God, this is hitting every stereotype there is. Does it help if I mention he's BLACK, and the officer was white? Wasn't even going to go there - no one race has the corner on this path. |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
36
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Wasn't even going to go there - no one race has the corner on this path. Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By BadRREngineer: Hire a lawyer and sue. I think he said it was a Smith & Wesson Sigma (not even the updated SW9VE), so I don't think they're going to put forth much effort to "fight for it." Just a peanut gallery addition and maybe not germane to this sub-forum, but good God, this is hitting every stereotype there is. Does it help if I mention he's BLACK, and the officer was white? Wasn't even going to go there - no one race has the corner on this path. Now I'm curious to know how many rounds were in the magazine. Usually, criminals have partially-loaded magazines, often with mismatched ammunition. |
Joined:
May 2023
Posts:
244
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
What is proper documentation? Why do I have to prove property you TOOK FROM ME is property I own? What about my watch and ring? I personally would donate a Sigma to the arresting agency and never look back. However I can’t help but think of all the firearms I own that were straight up trades, gifts, inheritance, or just owned so long I have no documentation other than MAYBE a log entry and/or photograph. It begs the question if taken for “safe keeping” by a government entity, how would I prove they were mine? |
Joined:
May 2023
Posts:
245
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
I would challenge the police to prove I DIDN'T legally own the pistol. Obviously I had possession of it, and I am not required to maintain proof of purchase. I would file a small claims case to get my pistol back. The police report noting that the pistol was seized when it was in my possession should be adequate to prove to it was my pistol. It would be up to the police to prove to the judge that the pistol was stolen or otherwise was NOT in my possession. When writing to the police, I would let them know that unless the pistol is released to me I will file in small claims court, and would also request that I be reimbursed for all the small claims court fees. Small claims court would probably be cheaper than hiring an attorney. |
|
Had similar happen in MI years ago. Wound up charged with felony weapons possession. PISSED. ME. OFF. Hired a HOTROD lawyer From Detroit. He wrapped them up, got me off, charges dropped, got the gun back.  Anyway, during the court affair, the cops wanted me to produce proof of ownership of the weapon. Like I said, I was HOT about the whole thing so I asked my lawyers (who brought the request to me), wasn't the burden on them to prove it wasn't mine to which they answered yes but.... I stopped them right there and reminded them that the whole point of this thing was to break my foot off in their ass if possible and that I wasn't about to help the fucking pricks in any manner. So unless the law is different where you are, then burden is on them, not you. |
I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
37
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
38
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By Hillbilly69: Had similar happen in MI years ago. Wound up charged with felony weapons possession. PISSED. ME. OFF. Hired a HOTROD lawyer From Detroit. He wrapped them up, got me off, charges dropped, got the gun back. Anyway, during the court affair, the cops wanted me to produce proof of ownership of the weapon. Like I said, I was HOT about the whole thing so I asked my lawyers (who brought the request to me), wasn't the burden on them to prove it wasn't mine to which they answered yes but.... I stopped them right there and reminded them that the whole point of this thing was to break my foot off in their ass if possible and that I wasn't about to help the fucking pricks in any manner. So unless the law is different where you are, then burden is on them, not you. I'm not the guy involved. I'm the guy he asked about what happened to him. I'm not black, I don't possess Marijuana, and I don't have a Sigma. |
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: I'm not the guy involved. I'm the guy he asked about what happened to him. I'm not black, I don't possess Marijuana, and I don't have a Sigma. The moral of the story is the same. |
I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
39
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
| Advised him to get a friend, draw up a fake bill of sale, and get both their signatures notarized. That should stop this civil rights violation. The traffic stop was legit. The arrest was legit (albeit unnecessary and extra, given that he could have been given a citation and released). The seizing the pistol to prevent the tow guy from stealing it was legit. But requiring "proof of ownership," FROM THE GUY YOU TOOK IT FROM, and ONLY for a firearm, is a clear Civil Rights violation. I can't stand this shit. They're pulling fake, fucked-up bullshit, so they're going to get fake bullshit compliance. |
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
1565
EE: 0% (0)
LA, USA
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
40
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By BadRREngineer: Got a receipt for your shoes? Your pants? How about the jack and spare tire? Hmmm? The idea that I have to be able to prove that everything I own is mine is flat out fucking absurd. Originally Posted By BadRREngineer: Originally Posted By akethan: Provide a bill of sale Got a receipt for your shoes? Your pants? How about the jack and spare tire? Hmmm? The idea that I have to be able to prove that everything I own is mine is flat out fucking absurd. They literally hold backpacks, a dozen garbage bags full of clothes, and bicycles for homeless people that are arrested. The jail won't take it and it can't be abandoned if they're in proximity of it during arrest. Upon release from jail they only have to prove their own identity and they get everything held in safekeeping. No receipts for anything. |
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Advised him to get a friend, draw up a fake bill of sale, and get both their signatures notarized. That should stop this civil rights violation. The traffic stop was legit. The arrest was legit (albeit unnecessary and extra, given that he could have been given a citation and released). The seizing the pistol to prevent the tow guy from stealing it was legit. But requiring "proof of ownership," FROM THE GUY YOU TOOK IT FROM, and ONLY for a firearm, is a clear Civil Rights violation. I can't stand this shit. They're pulling fake, fucked-up bullshit, so they're going to get fake bullshit compliance. Well this will be a fun one to watch the reactions to. You're advising him to commit fraud, and then document that it's fraud by having a notary date it this week, with fake signatures from some time prior. To be a judgy dick on this - this guy makes bad decisions. Based on your posts it doesn't sound like family and you don't sound like legal council - how do you even know this guy? If that was someone in my circles, I'd advise them they are lucky not to be going to prison over Drugs+Firearm, watch their driving better, stop smoking pot and driving (which is an intoxicated driver crime btw), stop smoking pot in general, and write off the POS Sigma; not to mention their fortune of lack of any criminal record from any of this. Every case is different, and for some of the ones in here I'd probably handle it differently. But I will close with this isn't my playground and if anyone wants to shoot me down, I'll take it and smile for the correction. 
|
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Charleston Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By Bklyn_Irish: What part of the state? Charleston I guessed correctly. |
"Whisky for the gentlemen that like it. And for the gentlemen that don't like it - Whisky!" -Alec Guinness as MAJ (acting Colonel) Jock Sinclair, D.S.O., M.M. "Tunes of Glory"
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
41
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Well this will be a fun one to watch the reactions to. You're advising him to commit fraud, and then document that it's fraud by having a notary date it this week, with fake signatures from some time prior. To be a judgy dick on this - this guy makes bad decisions. Based on your posts it doesn't sound like family and you don't sound like legal council - how do you even know this guy? If that was someone in my circles, I'd advise them they are lucky not to be going to prison over Drugs+Firearm, watch their driving better, stop smoking pot and driving (which is an intoxicated driver crime btw), stop smoking pot in general, and write off the POS Sigma; not to mention their fortune of lack of any criminal record from any of this. Every case is different, and for some of the ones in here I'd probably handle it differently. But I will close with this isn't my playground and if anyone wants to shoot me down, I'll take it and smile for the correction. It isn't fraud to get your own property back from an unlawful seizure. He wasn't charged with driving while impaired. He wasn't charged with unlawful carry. Because he wasn't impaired and he wasn't carrying. Incidentally, he is family. That's why he sought my counsel. |
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: It isn't fraud to get your own property back from an unlawful seizure. He wasn't charged with driving while impaired. He wasn't charged with unlawful carry. Because he wasn't impaired and he wasn't carrying. Incidentally, he is family. That's why he sought my counsel. 
|
Why do you own a fire extinguisher when you have the fire department to protect you?
Politicians should wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers so we could see their corporate sponsors.
Politicians should wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers so we could see their corporate sponsors.
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: It isn't fraud to get your own property back from an unlawful seizure. He wasn't charged with driving while impaired. He wasn't charged with unlawful carry. Because he wasn't impaired and he wasn't carrying. Incidentally, he is family. That's why he sought my counsel. Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Well this will be a fun one to watch the reactions to. You're advising him to commit fraud, and then document that it's fraud by having a notary date it this week, with fake signatures from some time prior. To be a judgy dick on this - this guy makes bad decisions. Based on your posts it doesn't sound like family and you don't sound like legal council - how do you even know this guy? If that was someone in my circles, I'd advise them they are lucky not to be going to prison over Drugs+Firearm, watch their driving better, stop smoking pot and driving (which is an intoxicated driver crime btw), stop smoking pot in general, and write off the POS Sigma; not to mention their fortune of lack of any criminal record from any of this. Every case is different, and for some of the ones in here I'd probably handle it differently. But I will close with this isn't my playground and if anyone wants to shoot me down, I'll take it and smile for the correction. It isn't fraud to get your own property back from an unlawful seizure. He wasn't charged with driving while impaired. He wasn't charged with unlawful carry. Because he wasn't impaired and he wasn't carrying. Incidentally, he is family. That's why he sought my counsel. There we go, thanks. Good luck. |
|
Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: The municipal agency may not enforce federal law, and there are no analogous state laws. There is no crime involving the firearm. Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By HiramRanger: Don't speed, don't smoke pot for starters. Possession of a federally controlled substance AND a firearm... likely never see it again, especially if you can't prove ownership. Sorry, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. That is not saying I agree with current drug laws, just a recognition of the fact that they are what they are, and drugs means prohibited person. Again, not saying I agree with it, but anybody with two brain cells knows that the two are likel oil and water... they don't mix in the eyes of the government. The municipal agency may not enforce federal law, and there are no analogous state laws. There is no crime involving the firearm. Can the DA with written admission of owning the gun and the evidence of pot in the car and the admission of being high turn that over to the feds for prosecution of a federal crime, ie prohibited person in possession? ETA: he was not charged with anything? I thought they were setting up up, buy not charged and they want prove the gun is his to give it back, they gave the car back. Not giving the gun back is bullshit. |
Mach
Nobody is coming to save us.
.
Nobody is coming to save us.
.
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
42
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By Mach: Can the DA with written admission of owning the gun and the evidence of pot in the car and the admission of being high turn that over to the feds for prosecution of a federal crime, ie prohibited person in possession? Originally Posted By Mach: Originally Posted By PraetorEvocatus: Originally Posted By HiramRanger: Don't speed, don't smoke pot for starters. Possession of a federally controlled substance AND a firearm... likely never see it again, especially if you can't prove ownership. Sorry, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. That is not saying I agree with current drug laws, just a recognition of the fact that they are what they are, and drugs means prohibited person. Again, not saying I agree with it, but anybody with two brain cells knows that the two are likel oil and water... they don't mix in the eyes of the government. The municipal agency may not enforce federal law, and there are no analogous state laws. There is no crime involving the firearm. Can the DA with written admission of owning the gun and the evidence of pot in the car and the admission of being high turn that over to the feds for prosecution of a federal crime, ie prohibited person in possession? The solicitor can try. But it is almost impossible to get the Feds to pick-up legitimate gun cases, like "prohibited person" or "defaced serial number." Can't even really have success with "possession of stolen firearm" and have to go with "unlawful carry," instead. |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
43
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By Mach: ETA: he was not charged with anything? I thought they were setting up up, buy not charged and they want prove the gun is his to give it back, they gave the car back. Not giving the gun back is bullshit. Pulled over for speeding. Given a warning. He was solely charged with "Simple Possession of Marijuana." Instead of a simple ticket, they OPTED to arrest. That gave them cause to tow the car. Gun was seized for safekeeping, just like would happen with gold coins, or a laptop. |
|
Originally Posted By CharlesRyan: Buy another gun and thank the lord you didnt catch a felony for unlawful carry of a firearm. Here in Texas, if you are caught with drugs and a gun, you get charged with a felony unlawful carry of a firearm. Even with Permitless Carry now they will still jam you up with a gun charge, usually UCW, if you are DUI/DWI even if yo have a permit. It's usually pleaded down or away but it's just another extortion attempt by the state and the local agencies. |
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Caddyshack
Some men are morally opposed to violence. They are protected by those who are not.
Let's Go Brandon!!!!!!!!
Caddyshack
Some men are morally opposed to violence. They are protected by those who are not.
Let's Go Brandon!!!!!!!!
|
Originally Posted By Ohiogators: This is obvious. Great explanation. Originally Posted By Ohiogators: Originally Posted By HiramRanger: Don't speed, don't smoke pot for starters. Possession of a federally controlled substance AND a firearm... likely never see it again, especially if you can't prove ownership. Sorry, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. That is not saying I agree with current drug laws, just a recognition of the fact that they are what they are, and drugs means prohibited person. Again, not saying I agree with it, but anybody with two brain cells knows that the two are likel oil and water... they don't mix in the eyes of the government. This is obvious. Great explanation. Yep |
|
The agency should have an ownership affidavit for the gun. Just you swearing the property is yours. Simple form to do and some agencies will require it to be notarized. |
He who covers his sins will not prosper,
But whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy.
But whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy.
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
44
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By UV18: The agency should have an ownership affidavit for the gun. Just you swearing the property is yours. Simple form to do and some agencies will require it to be notarized. I just double-checked, and there's no such form. I pulled-up a blank Property Release Form and the only caveat to receive property, as indicated on the form, is "proper identification is required to receive this property" followed by a field for "reason for release of property" |
Joined:
Jun 2023
Posts:
29
EE: 0% (0)
WA, USA
| I understand wanting to make the police eat one but you have to wonder if it is worth the time for a 300 dollar pistol. I gave a g26 up after a stop didnt go my way. Used giving it up as leverage for better deal with the libtard prosecutor. They always want to brag about getting another gun off the "streets" I figure any carry piece is disposable and always keep multiple reliable carry guns available incase one has to go byebye. |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
45
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA
|
Originally Posted By pirate_CNC: I understand wanting to make the police eat one but you have to wonder if it is worth the time for a 300 dollar pistol. I gave a g26 up after a stop didnt go my way. Used giving it up as leverage for better deal with the libtard prosecutor. They always want to brag about getting another gun off the "streets" I figure any carry piece is disposable and always keep multiple reliable carry guns available incase one has to go byebye. It's his only gun. It's also his only arrest, and the officer said he'll drop the charge if he produces a clean urinalysis. |
|
Originally Posted By CharlesRyan: Buy another gun and thank the lord you didnt catch a felony for unlawful carry of a firearm. Here in Texas, if you are caught with drugs and a gun, you get charged with a felony unlawful carry of a firearm. It's not a felony, it's a misdemeanor. And UCW was changed last legislative session that only in certain circumstance can you actually be charged. The only way you can get charged with a felony, is if you are a felon in possession of a firearm. |
Joined:
Oct 2023
Posts:
49
EE: 0% (0)
SC, USA