< Back to the Main Site

Author Topic: Felons and Firearms  (Read 690 times)

Offline AAllen

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2008
  • Posts: 4275
Felons and Firearms
« on: October 28, 2011, 09:48:05 AM »
We have had some discussions on this issue here in the past so I thought some of you may be interested in this:

http://volokh.com/2011/10/27/second-amendment-protects-felon-whose-convictions-were-30-years-ago/

Offline AAllen

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2008
  • Posts: 4275
Re: Felons and Firearms
« Reply #1 on: October 30, 2011, 11:25:42 AM »
I'm a mamber of a discussion group of firearms rights leaders where there have been a couple of comments about this that I found interesting so I thought I would share those to see if it draws some discussion.

Agree that they seem to be heading in the right direction. The word "felon" always scares the populace because it evokes images of hoodie-wearing thugs holding up liquor stores. And while none of us wants to be (or appear to be) on the side of such hardcore types, it IS important to draw a clear distinction between genuinely violent (and repeat) offenders and some 40-something now-solid-citizen who sold a barely felony-level bag of weed when he was a 19 year old in college, or a single mother who bounced a couple of checks to feed her kids.

John Caile
Minnesota Gun Owners PAC (MNGO)

In 2009 we changed the law in Oregon so a felon could petition the courts or the right to have a firearm. It passed both house with NO opposition and the governor signed it.

From that moment on, the guy who sponsored it (but who apparently could not read it) worked to reverse it.

In our 2010 “special session” two bills he pushed to reverse it failed. In 2011, he tried again and now all the same people who opposed him before got on board because it would look bad for their campaigns if they “supported felons having guns.”  It was NOT a campaign issue before, but suddenly it became one.  Totally inexplicable except our pro-gun Republicans can’t fold fast enough.

Kevin Starrett
Oregon Firearms Federation

Make sure any restoration is a "complete restoration" or the Feds    don't honor it.

Ohio only restored some rights. (Not Dangerous ordinance) So we had    people with CHL, and police who had their rights restored, but were    under a federal firearms disability. We finally fixed that a few months ago.

The issue was easy to get support from last session under a D    governor, but more problematic this time under and R Governor. Yes,    it was the wimpy R's that were giving us problems.

Angles that seemed to help us:
2A rights are the only rights not automatically restored.
We are talking non-violent felons - ie bad checks/tax evasion
Police need this fix to keep good officers on the street and    undercover.

There was not testimony on topic, but multiple PD's contacted us asking when this was going to get done because they had a guy affected and didn't want to pull him in.

Still - good luck in an election year.
Jim Irvine
Buckeye Firearms Association