Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 6/30/2002 5:56:57 AM EST
I have a friend who unfortunately is being prosecuted for his third drunk driving charge. This is a felony in Michigan. We were discussing whether he can retain his firearms if he is convicted of a felony. Does anyone have any insight they can share? It certainly doesn't seem reasonable. But he may lose all his guns because of this. Can anyone elaborate on how he should or could proceed with keeping, selling or trading the guns. If the handguns are transferred to his wife, is that sufficient? Thank you for your consideration. Phil
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 6:08:54 AM EST
Being convicted of a felony means you lose all rights to owning any firearm. His wife could keep them IF she had the keys/combo to the safe and he didn't. But he could never talk her into opening the safe so he could take a gun to the range/go hunting/whatever. That would be "a felon in possesion of a firearm." It really sucks, but there it is. There is a way for non-violent felons to petition the BATF for a restoration of their firearms rights. However, you should start by talking with an attorney. And he would likely have to wait a few years, so's to prove he has amended his ways and worthy of forgivness.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 6:22:04 AM EST
I agree he is sort of SOL on this one. I told him to just give the guns to me :) The BATF petition may be the best thing to do. Several of the guns are his father's (who died when he was very young). The value is more sentimental than anything. I will do some checking into the BATF procedure. Perhaps he can store them in escrow until he can get rights re-instated. Thanks for your assistance. Any other constructive thoughts would be appreciated. Phil
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 8:05:54 AM EST
I don't know about MI, but in PA you have 30 days from when you are convicted of a felony to get all the guns out of your household. Another interesting point: in PA if you are convicted of 3 dui's in 5 years even though they are misdemeners you are considered a "habitual drunk" and you lose your right to own guns.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 9:18:13 AM EST
I wonder if there is a corresonding Michigan statute. It does make sense that they would either impound the guns or require you to remove them from your premises.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 10:02:11 AM EST
First thing I would tell him to do is fight tooth and nail to NOT get a felony conviction. He needs to explain how important the gun issue is to his attorney. He may be SOL if it's his third one though...I looked it up and DUI in MI is charged as a felony for the 2nd offense (if within 7 years), similar to many other states. He should use every avenue of leverage he can to get the charge amended to a misdemeanor in exchange for some serious sentencing (jail time, comm service, AA, etc.). Failing that, pursue every avenue of appeal. The problem is that they probably already cut him a break on his second one (amended it to a misdemeanor). My guess is he's in for a tough time here. That's a tough situation, and it sucks because your friend is probably very responsible with guns despite his drinking and driving. Good luck.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 10:12:45 AM EST
He can not "transfer" them to his wife as a means of keeping them. Giving weapons to spouses or other persons residing in the same household are not considered a legitimate transfer of the weapons.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 10:14:31 AM EST
State statues concerning felony convictions with respect to firearms rights take a back burner to the federal prohibition against firearms possession by convicted felons unless the state laws are stricter. Your friend would have to get both his federal rights and state rights restored.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 10:16:28 AM EST
Should someone who repeatedly 'drunk drives' have firearms?
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 10:26:31 AM EST
Originally Posted By tommytrauma: Should someone who repeatedly 'drunk drives' have firearms?
View Quote
No shit! He gets what he deserves. If he thought his right were that precious, he would not have been driving drunk and endangering us all.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 10:32:31 AM EST
Originally Posted By blackholegun: I agree he is sort of SOL on this one. I told him to just give the guns to me :) The BATF petition may be the best thing to do. Several of the guns are his father's (who died when he was very young). The value is more sentimental than anything. I will do some checking into the BATF procedure. Perhaps he can store them in escrow until he can get rights re-instated. Thanks for your assistance. Any other constructive thoughts would be appreciated. Phil
View Quote
[URL=http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#a10] Firearms privileges restored [/URL]... however, the catch is that there is no funding available to conduct the necissary background check, fact finding and paper work.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 4:04:14 PM EST
Originally Posted By QCMGR:
Originally Posted By tommytrauma: Should someone who repeatedly 'drunk drives' have firearms?
View Quote
No shit! He gets what he deserves. If he thought his right were that precious, he would not have been driving drunk and endangering us all.
View Quote
I suppose you could take that position. I don't know what drunk driving has to do with not being able to own firearms. That doesn't sit right by me. It makes sense he shouldn't be able to drive anymore. But the felony conviction I think is excessive. I assume it was put in place by a bunch of liberals (which he is a card carrying member), so I suppose maybe he is getting what he deserves. Yet still I don't think he should lose family heirlooms or personal property unrelated to the Traffic violation. Facing one to five years in prison or whatever the punishment is would seem to be sufficient. He may also lose his license to practice law. It still bums me out that all this is out there waiting because of a traffic violation that injured no-one. As far as I know he has never had and accident or a speeding ticket other than this problem. He is an honest member of society and a good friend (like my brother). I imagine I will be giving him a lot of rides in the near future after his prison term. Thanks for all the suggestions and opinions. Hopefully, he can plead it down.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 5:57:40 PM EST
Originally Posted By blackholegun: He may also lose his license to practice law.
View Quote
Oh dear...you didn't mention this part. Felony conviction = bye bye law license (usually in most states). He might be able to get it back eventually.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 7:08:37 PM EST
Originally Posted By blackholegun:
Originally Posted By QCMGR:
Originally Posted By tommytrauma: Should someone who repeatedly 'drunk drives' have firearms?
View Quote
No shit! He gets what he deserves. If he thought his right were that precious, he would not have been driving drunk and endangering us all.
View Quote
I suppose you could take that position. I don't know what drunk driving has to do with not being able to own firearms. That doesn't sit right by me. It makes sense he shouldn't be able to drive anymore. But the felony conviction I think is excessive. I assume it was put in place by a bunch of liberals (which he is a card carrying member), so I suppose maybe he is getting what he deserves. Yet still I don't think he should lose family heirlooms or personal property unrelated to the Traffic violation. Facing one to five years in prison or whatever the punishment is would seem to be sufficient. He may also lose his license to practice law. It still bums me out that all this is out there waiting because of a traffic violation that injured no-one. As far as I know he has never had and accident or a speeding ticket other than this problem. He is an honest member of society and a good friend (like my brother). I imagine I will be giving him a lot of rides in the near future after his prison term. Thanks for all the suggestions and opinions. Hopefully, he can plead it down.
View Quote
I agree, Those types of laws suck. But why is the guy driving drunk when he knows what is at stake (No just the gun issue but all you described).
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 7:17:26 PM EST
Does he trust you? If so...Sit down and cut him a detailed reciept for his weapons serial number by serial number and then buy them from him for $1.00. Assure him that they will never be sold and will be kept safe. He can still have black powder weapons,in most states anyway, BTW. If your friend is a lawyer then he should have a little more respect for the law, even the stupid laws. He should be able to get into a diversion program if he gets on his belly and crawls a bit. Lots of pro bono stuff, etc etc.
Link Posted: 6/30/2002 7:26:29 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/30/2002 7:27:45 PM EST by FirearmTom1]
Originally Posted By QCMGR:
Originally Posted By tommytrauma: Should someone who repeatedly 'drunk drives' have firearms?
View Quote
No shit! He gets what he deserves. If he thought his right were that precious, he would not have been driving drunk and endangering us all.
View Quote
I agree!!! I hate to see anyone GIVE UP THEIR RIGHTS. We all make choices in life, and he made his. Tell him to try [url]www.gunbroker.com[/url] It will help with his legal fees. Flames intended.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 5:59:13 AM EST
Originally Posted By blackholegun:
Originally Posted By QCMGR:
Originally Posted By tommytrauma: Should someone who repeatedly 'drunk drives' have firearms?
View Quote
No shit! He gets what he deserves. If he thought his right were that precious, he would not have been driving drunk and endangering us all.
View Quote
I suppose you could take that position. I don't know what drunk driving has to do with not being able to own firearms. That doesn't sit right by me. It makes sense he shouldn't be able to drive anymore. But the felony conviction I think is excessive. I assume it was put in place by a bunch of liberals (which he is a card carrying member), so I suppose maybe he is getting what he deserves. Yet still I don't think he should lose family heirlooms or personal property unrelated to the Traffic violation. Facing one to five years in prison or whatever the punishment is would seem to be sufficient. He may also lose his license to practice law. It still bums me out that all this is out there waiting because of a traffic violation that injured no-one. As far as I know he has never had and accident or a speeding ticket other than this problem. He is an honest member of society and a good friend (like my brother). I imagine I will be giving him a lot of rides in the near future after his prison term. Thanks for all the suggestions and opinions. Hopefully, he can plead it down.
View Quote
With piss poor judgement. Yeah I mean really, if he keeps deciding to get drunk then use the most dangerous weapon most people will ever operate, a car, shooting while drunk would NEVER happen. Life is full of choices. When someone gets DUI #1....... that causes many people to think seriously about what they are doing, and MAKE AN EFFORT TO ACT LIKE A RESPONSIBLE ADULT. When you start piling up the DUI's you are pretty much saying you're irresponsible, and a drunkard. Yeah it stinks he looses the weapons, BUT HE DECIDED WHAT HE WANTED TO DO. Funny everyone is all for personal responsiblity, until their hand is in the cookie jar.......... then there is a "reasonable explanation" as to why that happened. RIGHT.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 6:14:22 AM EST
Thanks for all the assistance guys. I know he's a lawyer and should respect the law and all. But I am guessing just about everybody has speeded at one time or another. And probably most people have driven when they have had too many. Arguably he has been dealing with the problem. Went to AA and did a lot of therapy. But all it took was one more mistake and felony time. I still have mixed feelings as to whether it should be a felony. It seems revocation of all driving priviledges and all the other sentences should be proper punishment. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, right? Thanks again for your advice. Phil
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 6:14:41 AM EST
I have no sympathy for someone with 3 DUI's. Picture them veering into your lane one night and killing you and your family while on vacation, or perhaps your mother on the way back home the grocery store, or maybe your nephew on his bike. Some DUI convictions are not entirely legitimate, but to get three, you are a moron... If he wants money, tell him to sell the guns. Personally I would give them away to friends and family who would give them good homes.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 6:33:40 AM EST
Originally Posted By blackholegun: Thanks for all the assistance guys. I know he's a lawyer and should respect the law and all. But I am guessing just about everybody has speeded at one time or another.
View Quote
Yes I have, and I'm sure others have, but I bet very few of us have done 60 mph through a school zone with kids present.
And probably most people have driven when they have had too many.
View Quote
Uhh, NO. Failing that I'm sure a few people had to "feel their oats" and needed a little wake up call. Most people get it after DUI #1, A few see the light after DUI #2. But DUI #3 that's a lifestyle. They didn't get the hint so it's time for the punishment phase.
Arguably he has been dealing with the problem. Went to AA and did a lot of therapy.
View Quote
No he was not dealing with it, sucesfully anyway.
But all it took was one more mistake and felony time. I still have mixed feelings as to whether it should be a felony. It seems revocation of all driving priviledges and all the other sentences should be proper punishment. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, right? Thanks again for your advice. Phil
View Quote
Well I kinda agree with you that DUI #3 being a felony is on the harsh side, but I think HE understood that. In WI DUI # 1 .10 is non-criminal DUI # 2 .10 is criminal, and jail happens. DUI # 3 .08 is criminal, and more jail happens. DUI # 4 .02 is criminal, and way more jail happens. DUI # 5 .02 is felony traffic, and prison happens. Unless you have kids in the car, then the punishments for #1 and #2 go up, and #3 is a felony. I like the way WI does it. He's a lawyer huh?? Well why didn't he plan ahead, cab ride, designated driver, call to wife. Never mind I know.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 7:54:41 AM EST
Out with the flaming....Back to the facts.... Here in IL where FOID(firearm owners Identification cards) are required to possess,buy, etc firearms & ammo. The IL state police run the checks to issue these. I received a felony 12 years ago and 3 years later petitioned the State Police for reinstatement of right to bear arms. It didnt cost me a dime! My felony was a non violent and non alcohol related. It was approved 2 weeks later and had a FOID card 1 1/2 weeks later. I did not have to go through the BATF at all. And yes my gun cabinet is full. I strongly suggest not fouling up if right to bear arms are restored though because then it is next to impossible to get again!! You will be lucky to catch me even speeding!!! Don't drink so im good to go there!!
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 8:31:32 AM EST
Blackholegun, I could understand your sentiment if we were talking about speeding 10 over the limit, or a broken tail light or such, but do you really doubt that driving while intoxicated endangers the public? Will you stipulate that a person generally has to be pretty impaired to attract the attention of a police officer? We are not talking about a simple traffic offence in which no one was hurt, we are talking about repeated, deliberate actions which endangered the public at large. Someone else wondered about the correlation between drunken driving and firearm ownership; as a firearm owner, I am tacitly telling society that I can be trusted to act responsibly with a potentially lethal instrument. If I drive while intoxicated, I’m demonstrating a lack of judgement, and a lack of compunction against endangering my fellow man by my actions. I have significant concerns about any individual who has committed repeated, deliberate actions which endanger the public possessing firearms. If we want to label an inability to control drinking a sickness, that’s fine. But I don’t expect anyone on this board to advocate allowing a floridly psychotic individual to have firearms, because they cannot control their actions. How is it different if a person can’t control their actions because of booze? Once is a lapse in judgement. If he got CAUGHT three times, how many times do you think he piloted several tons of steel through city streets without getting caught? How many times should we be allowed to place the general public at risk before it is considered a felony? Oh, and in response to your posit that most of us have committed DUI, ummm, no. I haven’t. If I sound too strong in my opinions, I apologize. I hope you see this as an exchange of thoughts and not a flame. I have responded to several DUI involved accidents, including a couple of fatalities. Interestingly, the culpable party in both fatalities had several prior DUI convictions. Each one had been given several chances to clean up their act, and had failed to do so. I have to recognize that these experiences have left me with a bias on this issue. I truly hope that your friend does not lose his livelihood because of this, but if he gives up his guns for a few years while he gets this issue under control, I don’t see that as a terrible thing. I hope he can sell them to you or something, so he can reclaim them once he has demonstrated control over this problem. Good luck to him, and he is lucky to have support like yours.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 9:35:56 AM EST
mja, You are still a felon in the eyes of the feds if you didn't go through the BATF and get your federal rights restored. You might want to think about that.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 9:49:27 AM EST
3 DUI's is excessive. He should have learned and gotten his life straight after the first time he made that "mistake". The average DUI driver has driven drunk 25 times for every time they are caught and arrested. Let's not be naive and overly sensitive to his gun problem, this guy has endangered our families and friends long enough.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 10:17:24 AM EST
Originally Posted By mjacvn71: Out with the flaming....Back to the facts.... Here in IL where FOID(firearm owners Identification cards) are required to possess,buy, etc firearms & ammo. The IL state police run the checks to issue these. I received a felony 12 years ago and 3 years later petitioned the State Police for reinstatement of right to bear arms. It didnt cost me a dime! My felony was a non violent and non alcohol related. It was approved 2 weeks later and had a FOID card 1 1/2 weeks later. I did not have to go through the BATF at all. And yes my gun cabinet is full. I strongly suggest not fouling up if right to bear arms are restored though because then it is next to impossible to get again!! You will be lucky to catch me even speeding!!! Don't drink so im good to go there!!
View Quote
Actually, those aren't the facts...you're in deep, DEEP shit if the right hand ever figures out what the left hand has done. Your federal rights are NOT restored...you need to get a lawyer, and dispose or otherwise secure your weapons out of your immediate control. I repeat, GET a LAWYER who can represent you in the federal system and get to work on getting your rights restored. QS
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 12:19:19 PM EST
Thanks for all the comments. I am trying to sort it out too. So I don't take any of your comments as flames. I understand all the comments about him not taking enough precautions after DUI 1 and DUI 2. I don't know if it is a sickness or stupidity or lack of skill or lack of judgement. I think the Wisconsin rule makes more sense. I just have a hard time with this affecting his ability to make a living (I guess that is actually a michigan Bar question...lawyers bar as opposed to drinker's bar). And I really don't think that drunk driving indicates reckless behavior with a firearm. Other than that yeah he screwed up big and is going to get some hefty punishment which is going to include jail time. I think he is going to sell the guns to me and I will hold them until he gets full priviledges back and sell them back to him ($1.00 and other valuable consideration). It just kind of makes me sick to see all this bad stuff happening to him. And I can also imagine a drunk driver coming accross the line and killing someone close to me. When you think about it that way I can see that no punishment is enough. I even followed a guy one time going all over both sides of a two lane highway. I called the police from my cell phone and they weren't interested in apprehending him or doing anything about it " well he is going to be out of our county in a few more miles so we can't do anything" I thought that was pretty lame. Still makes me sick thinking of all this bad stuff happening to him.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 12:37:32 PM EST
Originally Posted By blackholegun: I think he is going to sell the guns to me and I will hold them until he gets full priviledges back and sell them back to him ($1.00 and other valuable consideration).
View Quote
I do not think that he has to sell them? He will just not be able to Have then in his posession.
It just kind of makes me sick to see all this bad stuff happening to him.
View Quote
Part of the price to pay. You are a good friend obviously. Lets us know how it goes.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 1:01:56 PM EST
Originally Posted By FirearmTom1:
Originally Posted By blackholegun: I think he is going to sell the guns to me and I will hold them until he gets full priviledges back and sell them back to him ($1.00 and other valuable consideration).
View Quote
I do not think that he has to sell them? He will just not be able to Have then in his posession.
It just kind of makes me sick to see all this bad stuff happening to him.
View Quote
Part of the price to pay. You are a good friend obviously. Lets us know how it goes.
View Quote
In Michigan I think it is a felony to possess a handgun that is not registered in your name...so I will have to have the handguns transferred. If he doesn't sell them there are records of them still being in his name...probably resulting in further trouble. I do wonder what the legal definition of Possession is. Another issue for another day. It would be nice to place them all in escrow somewhere for him.
Link Posted: 7/2/2002 4:25:06 AM EST
Originally Posted By tommytrauma: Blackholegun, I could understand your sentiment if we were talking about speeding 10 over the limit, or a broken tail light or such, but do you really doubt that driving while intoxicated endangers the public? Will you stipulate that a person generally has to be pretty impaired to attract the attention of a police officer? We are not talking about a simple traffic offence in which no one was hurt, we are talking about repeated, deliberate actions which endangered the public at large. Someone else wondered about the correlation between drunken driving and firearm ownership; as a firearm owner, I am tacitly telling society that I can be trusted to act responsibly with a potentially lethal instrument. If I drive while intoxicated, I’m demonstrating a lack of judgement, and a lack of compunction against endangering my fellow man by my actions. I have significant concerns about any individual who has committed repeated, deliberate actions which endanger the public possessing firearms. If we want to label an inability to control drinking a sickness, that’s fine. But I don’t expect anyone on this board to advocate allowing a floridly psychotic individual to have firearms, because they cannot control their actions. How is it different if a person can’t control their actions because of booze? Once is a lapse in judgement. If he got CAUGHT three times, how many times do you think he piloted several tons of steel through city streets without getting caught? How many times should we be allowed to place the general public at risk before it is considered a felony? Oh, and in response to your posit that most of us have committed DUI, ummm, no. I haven’t. If I sound too strong in my opinions, I apologize. I hope you see this as an exchange of thoughts and not a flame. I have responded to several DUI involved accidents, including a couple of fatalities. Interestingly, the culpable party in both fatalities had several prior DUI convictions. Each one had been given several chances to clean up their act, and had failed to do so. I have to recognize that these experiences have left me with a bias on this issue. I truly hope that your friend does not lose his livelihood because of this, but if he gives up his guns for a few years while he gets this issue under control, I don’t see that as a terrible thing. I hope he can sell them to you or something, so he can reclaim them once he has demonstrated control over this problem. Good luck to him, and he is lucky to have support like yours.
View Quote
Excellent response. The argument that "his drunk driving has nothing to do with his gun ownership" sounds remarkably like "his lack of morals characterized by his philandering has nothing to do with his ability to be president" a la Bill Clinton. Didn't wash for me then and won't work now.
Link Posted: 7/3/2002 2:55:20 PM EST
DAve G --- in the eyes of the fbi i am not a felon either. I fill out the yellow/orange form just like everyone else when I have a firearm transferred to me. I get the same NICS background check as you do. And since I have had 5 guns transferred to me this year alone I'd guess Im OK since I passed it! I have had my firearms rights restored since 1995. I even bought firearms in florida and virginia when I was in the navy and no problems then either. I even have a C&R FFL. [:D]
Link Posted: 7/9/2002 2:12:31 PM EST
As some of you know, Congress cut out the money to pay for ATF investigations of firearms rights restorations. This happened some years ago, so people currently can't have rights restored as a practical matter. Before this happened, ATF approved about 1/3 of the petitions it received. The Supreme Court granted cert, and will hear, U.S. v. Thomas Bean (01-704) in the upcoming term beginning in October. Bean was a respected FFL and has numerous letters of character from LEOs and judges along with his petition. He got in trouble because he went across the Mexican border with 200 rounds of ammo that he didn't even know was in his car (his employees were told to remove it and forgot), the Mexicans convicted him down there and his (felony) conviction was domesticated under treaty and he served time in the U.S. A judge later released him and let him off supervision soon after. Basically a standup guy who made a mistake. If ever there was a candidate for this restoration, it's him. Let's hope he wins.
Link Posted: 7/9/2002 11:23:12 PM EST
What is this about a BATF right to bear arms restoration?? Batf cannot modify a criminal record in your local county records(aka courthouse). If my rights were not "restored" in the eyes of the BATF then why do I have a valid C&R?? Why EVERYTIME I fill out a 4473 it comes back OK?? I admit after research years ago that I could run into problems moving to another state which may not honor the IL restoration of my right to bear arms. It looks like that I may end up a test case in court to settle that issue if I were to go to another state(don't plan on moving anyway!).
Top Top