Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Page Hometown » Iowa
Site Notices
Posted: 7/13/2010 9:03:22 AM EST
OK we all know that if guilty of any domestic violence you're prohibited from firearms. Due to a psycho ex girlfriend that's my brother now. Stuck his dick in crazy, had to defend himself from a knife and was scared into pleading guilty to domestic assault(original charge would have been a 10 year felony). What does IA law say about him owning a blackpowder gun (not a gun by ATF regs) or a bow? Being like me, he still wants to hunt, would either of these be legal for him, or does IA prohibit everything that fires a projectile? I've heard some states either allow blackpowder for prohibited gunowners or just simply haven't addressed it, and he asked me about bowhunting-I had no idea about that one.
Link Posted: 7/13/2010 2:57:31 PM EST
tagged have a friend with same question
Link Posted: 7/13/2010 3:44:46 PM EST
Might be of Help. Otherwise, hope your friends have been given defered judgements which can be completely expunged from one's criminal record.
Link Posted: 7/13/2010 4:04:54 PM EST
Originally Posted By shack357:
....pleading guilty to domestic assault....


he might be screwed, but i was under the impression black powder weapon didn't count. you can buy them without a transfer from cabelas online for shit sake... better send a letter to iowa dps, but i think he's clear.

Link Posted: 7/13/2010 4:15:47 PM EST
DPS contacted. Will update this thread when I get a reply.
Link Posted: 7/14/2010 12:57:35 PM EST
We had a local subj in our county that is a convicted felon and he was in possession of a black powder rifle. He was charged as a felon in possession of a firearm. The felon went to court to have it thrown out on the reasoning that a black powder rifle is not considered a firearm since you didn't need to go thru a FFL holder. The county attorney was against the dismissal stating that he was in possession of an offensive weapon. Lo and behold, the judge cited with the county attorney saying he was in possession of a offensive weapon and will stand trial. I, along with some other officers, were surprised with this decision (I was in court and heard the whole thing).
Now this was a case of a convicted felon, now I don't know about someone convicted of domestic abuse, but they could say that he is in possession of an offensive weapon.
Link Posted: 7/14/2010 3:52:30 PM EST
Originally Posted By Coltgunner:
We had a local subj in our county that is a convicted felon and he was in possession of a black powder rifle. He was charged as a felon in possession of a firearm. The felon went to court to have it thrown out on the reasoning that a black powder rifle is not considered a firearm since you didn't need to go thru a FFL holder. The county attorney was against the dismissal stating that he was in possession of an offensive weapon. Lo and behold, the judge cited with the county attorney saying he was in possession of a offensive weapon and will stand trial. I, along with some other officers, were surprised with this decision (I was in court and heard the whole thing).
Now this was a case of a convicted felon, now I don't know about someone convicted of domestic abuse, but they could say that he is in possession of an offensive weapon.


if your county attorney thinks a black powder gun is an 'offensive weapon' then he's a dumbfuck. he might consider reading the iowa code he's supposed to consult from time to time... wow... that one is a hell of a note chuck. what about the judge? just as bad....

Link Posted: 7/14/2010 7:17:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By septic-tank13:
Originally Posted By Coltgunner:
We had a local subj in our county that is a convicted felon and he was in possession of a black powder rifle. He was charged as a felon in possession of a firearm. The felon went to court to have it thrown out on the reasoning that a black powder rifle is not considered a firearm since you didn't need to go thru a FFL holder. The county attorney was against the dismissal stating that he was in possession of an offensive weapon. Lo and behold, the judge cited with the county attorney saying he was in possession of a offensive weapon and will stand trial. I, along with some other officers, were surprised with this decision (I was in court and heard the whole thing).
Now this was a case of a convicted felon, now I don't know about someone convicted of domestic abuse, but they could say that he is in possession of an offensive weapon.


if your county attorney thinks a black powder gun is an 'offensive weapon' then he's a dumbfuck. he might consider reading the iowa code he's supposed to consult from time to time... wow... that one is a hell of a note chuck. what about the judge? just as bad....


I had to bite my lip, if you go by what the judge said, a knife or a stick could be considered an offensive weapon. Normally the judge is fair but I'm still surprised. I'm going to have to ask the county attorney and show me where it states offensive weapon in the code book.
Link Posted: 7/15/2010 4:09:21 AM EST
Coltgunner....ask the county attorney your question and post what is said/done. I am curious.
Link Posted: 7/15/2010 6:10:12 AM EST
Not good that a judge is calling a black powder firearm an offensive weapon!
Link Posted: 7/15/2010 2:48:18 PM EST
I will be watching this thread for clarification.

My son is a felon. He was involved in a domestic dispute and two black powder rifles were confiscated. They charged him with felon in possesion, and the DV charge was dropped because his girlfriend decided filing a false report might backfire on her.

Anyway, I looked up Iowa code at the time this happened (about four years ago) and found to my horror that Iowa reclassified black powder firearms to be illegal for felons to own. They were gifts from his Grandfather, and at the time I told him he was legal to own them. I was wrong.

The DA dicked around for a year and then decided their office was too busy to prosecute him so they dropped the charge. I spent two hours today trying to find the code I read back then, with no luck, so I can't cite one specifically.

A clear yes or no on this question would be appreciated.
Link Posted: 7/15/2010 3:28:58 PM EST
You all understood the OP story?
Link Posted: 7/15/2010 10:04:10 PM EST
AR-10 has it right, although a federal "loophole" a felony or domestic violence conviction prohibits IA residents from possessing blackpowder firearms.
Link Posted: 7/15/2010 11:58:44 PM EST
I know one thing, the DV laws are too far reaching in this state. They need revised. As it is now you do not need to touch anyone, all they need is to feel threatened. That is going too far. I had a friend go through this a few years back as he and his wife were heading into a divorce which was in no small way her fault. Neither touched the other one. He wound up with a deferred sentence so it doesn't show on his record but others are not so lucky.

I had taken possession of his guns and had to turn them all in, including a blackpowder rifle, or they would put him back in jail. Tried to argue that it wasn't a firearm but got nowhere with the Cedar County Attorney. My friend eventually got them back after a year unsupervised probation.

Perhaps the overreach of the DV laws in this state would be something for IFC to look at. Don't get me wrong, DV is a legit problem, but the laws are too inclusive as to what constitutes DV.
Link Posted: 7/16/2010 4:19:22 AM EST
Originally Posted By river_rat:
I know one thing, the DV laws are too far reaching in this state. They need revised. As it is now you do not need to touch anyone, all they need is to feel threatened. That is going too far.


Making statements that causes a person to feel threatened or unsafe is assault (Chap 708.1). It's up to judges to determine the legitimacy in the situation it occurred.

Link Posted: 7/16/2010 4:22:00 AM EST
Originally Posted By river_rat:
I know one thing, the DV laws are too far reaching in this state. They need revised. As it is now you do not need to touch anyone, all they need is to feel threatened. That is going too far. I had a friend go through this a few years back as he and his wife were heading into a divorce which was in no small way her fault. Neither touched the other one. He wound up with a deferred sentence so it doesn't show on his record but others are not so lucky.

I had taken possession of his guns and had to turn them all in, including a blackpowder rifle, or they would put him back in jail. Tried to argue that it wasn't a firearm but got nowhere with the Cedar County Attorney. My friend eventually got them back after a year unsupervised probation.

Perhaps the overreach of the DV laws in this state would be something for IFC to look at. Don't get me wrong, DV is a legit problem, but the laws are too inclusive as to what constitutes DV.


agreed. unfortunately these laws are abused by people with relationship problems routinely. accusations apparently are enough in regard to this and that simply won't do. very troubling law all the way around.

Link Posted: 7/16/2010 6:14:10 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/16/2010 6:15:46 AM EST by Strongarm66]
Originally Posted By septic-tank13:
Originally Posted By river_rat:
I know one thing, the DV laws are too far reaching in this state. They need revised. As it is now you do not need to touch anyone, all they need is to feel threatened. That is going too far. I had a friend go through this a few years back as he and his wife were heading into a divorce which was in no small way her fault. Neither touched the other one. He wound up with a deferred sentence so it doesn't show on his record but others are not so lucky.

I had taken possession of his guns and had to turn them all in, including a blackpowder rifle, or they would put him back in jail. Tried to argue that it wasn't a firearm but got nowhere with the Cedar County Attorney. My friend eventually got them back after a year unsupervised probation.

Perhaps the overreach of the DV laws in this state would be something for IFC to look at. Don't get me wrong, DV is a legit problem, but the laws are too inclusive as to what constitutes DV.


agreed. unfortunately these laws are abused by people with relationship problems routinely. accusations apparently are enough in regard to this and that simply won't do. very troubling law all the way around.



Yep. And don't forget the fooking attorneys that promote abuse of this law and lazy judges that allow it happen. I know Mrs. BH disagrees with the lazy judge part, but they could put an end to A LOT of the BS...........!!!!!!!!

Link Posted: 7/16/2010 2:16:19 PM EST
He might have an argument for a side lock (or antique arm). He is screwed on everything else. I know there is at least some case law on this.
Link Posted: 7/21/2010 10:13:24 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/21/2010 10:20:12 AM EST by TheMirage]
DPS says it's a no go via this pdf

http://www.dps.state.ia.us/asd/weapons/wbrochure.pdf

I'm guessing on the following:

It says it's because of Iowa Code 702.7.

then Iowa Code 702.7 says "A "dangerous weapon" is any instrument or device designed primarily for use in inflicting death or injury upon a human being or animal, ...

and if you search Iowa Code for "Black Powder" you'll see it's been added for use for hunting 'animals' (See where I'm going with this?)


So if it's legal to hunt animals with it, it's a dangerous weapon, if it's a dangerous weapon a felon can not posses one.


* Proceed to tear apart my 10 min attempt at legalize.

* Also in the process of coming to this conclusion It strikes me how easily it is for someone to argue a point and use the various seemingly unrelated laws of the state to make anything criminal.
Page Hometown » Iowa
Top Top