The chances of Pelosi's bill surviving the Senate are very slim. It's all just posturing anyway.
I didn't see this thread that way, several people have opined that being around a felon should not be a cause for worry with a CCW.
Someone linked to my post on this subject back in the spring. The guy I was going to have working for me struck out on his own and has his own lawn care service now and did well this past year, he is now married to one of the ladies that works in our office and he's genuinely a pleasent guy to be around.
If I know someone is a felon I consider it my responsibility to not intentionally do something which could cause them to have legal issues.
Back in 96 or 97 right after I first had my CCW I had a friend in my truck, this guy is truly a bad guy, but he never was anything but straight up and honest with me for some reason, anyway I get pulled over, do the whole heres my license I'm carrying a pistol here routine. The officer comes back hands me everything back and looks right at my passenger and says I know you, turns to me and says do you know your passenger is an ex con. I asked if this was a problem and was told no and sent on down the road.
I know the felony passenger portion of the SDA has changed I wish I had my original manual from way back when so I could point out the differences.
How did you folks find out that the people or friends around you were felons?
Did it come up in casual conversation? I have given ride to town to people that needed to go shopping and never thought to ask them if they were felons. I normally carry so should I check on this for their protection as well as mine from the law?
Michael
Did it come up in casual conversation? I have given ride to town to people that needed to go shopping and never thought to ask them if they were felons. I normally carry so should I check on this for their protection as well as mine from the law?
Michael
In the instance of the individual who was going to work with me mowing lawns his girlfriend told me he was looking for work and needed a job but was having a hard time because he just got of prison. In the other instance of my buddy who was in the truck with me years ago his wife stripped at the bar I ran, she told me about him getting out of prison in time for his kids birthday.
I'm all about second chances for people who have paid their debt to society. And associating with law abiding citizens who exercise their right to keep and bear arms should not be detrimental to their freedom. But the fact of the matter is that it is what it is the law says no no for them and if I know about it I don't want to be the person that causes them to get into more legal trouble.
I completely agree, it is just to easy for felony convictions in my opinion. However I do not want to disarm myself either, that is an infiringement on my rights then. That law does not make sense at all....
I have a bad habit of checking ODCR/OSCN on random people when I'm bored. Sometimes, I'll check the ODOC mugshots for a good laugh. Seriously, the range of expressions in mugshots is downright astounding. I came across one person once who still had at least one tear that the camera picked up going down her face. Then you get the "it wasn't me" looks, "so what" looks, "oh sweet" looks, etc.
If its a guy hanging around my sister, I've been known to have background checks ran.
You might be surprised how many people you think are role models are felons. I think that says something about how the penal code needs to be fixed. There's a lot you can get a felony for that you shouldn't.
I haven't actually put it in a spreadsheet, but I'd say its a fair estimate that 1 in 4 people that I am around on at least a weekly, if not daily, basis have felonies.
I found this old thread when doing some research on the topic of carrying with a felon and think that mons meg has stated what I believe to be the absolute best assessment of the statute. Having composed some language for statutes I know there is no way to make it clear for EVERYONE to understand. The SDA is a good example of a statute that should have been written without leaving out some of the "assumed" language. Someone, somewhere won't assume the same thing the original author intended. The subsequent interpretation of these laws are the ones that are dangerous. Just look at the most famous law we have, THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.
Anyway, thanks mons meg!
[original OK Statute] A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, it shall be unlawful for any person convicted of any felony in any court of this state or of another state or of the United States to have in his or her possession or under his or her immediate control, or in any vehicle which the person is operating, or in which the person is riding as a passenger, or at the residence where the convicted person resides, any pistol, imitation or homemade pistol, altered air or toy pistol, machine gun, sawed-off shotgun or rifle, or any other dangerous or deadly firearm.
Anyway, thanks mons meg!
[original OK Statute] A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, it shall be unlawful for any person convicted of any felony in any court of this state or of another state or of the United States to have in his or her possession or under his or her immediate control, or in any vehicle which the person is operating, or in which the person is riding as a passenger, or at the residence where the convicted person resides, any pistol, imitation or homemade pistol, altered air or toy pistol, machine gun, sawed-off shotgun or rifle, or any other dangerous or deadly firearm.
This is something that should really be fixed.
Maybe I should nag my new rep a bit. After all, I know where he lives, his cell phone, all emails, and his car.
Or maybe I should just bite the bullet come election time if I don't like him enough and run my own damn self. How much does it cost to run as an independent in an area with ~6,000-7,000 voter turnout (out of 15,000-16,000 total)?
Last year I was taking a class that involved firearms training. There was a couple that were attending the class and the husband was a convicted felon while the wife had a CCL. This came up in a conversation outside of the class when folks who didn't have their CCL were asking those that did what it took to get licensed. The lady also mentioned that her daughter had her CCL and owned a bar, but still lived at home. And how they had taken in one of their fathers who was a convicted felon.
This led to one young man asking the lady how the felons lived in the same house with two CCL and not violate the no gun restriction. The lady explained that they had called OSBI and asked them about the situation. The response, as told by the lady, was that the Constitutional Rights of a non-felon were not to be infringed upon by the restrictions on a felon. As the wife, her rights superseeded the State's interest in restricting the felon. Same with the daughter. It also applied in the case of the daughter's ABC license, the State's interest could not infringe upon her right to exercise her relationship with her father. The restrictions against the felon not handling, having control of, or easy access to the guns was still in effect, but it was assumed that the gun on the person of the CCL holders were in their control and therefore were not within easy access to the felon. The mother and the daughter bought those little gun safes and that is where they secured their weapons at night (well, they had the safes anyway.)
Another lady in the class had a son come home after being released from prison and the parole officer was aware that she had a CCL and guns in the house. She said there were no problems with the parole officer, the guns and the felon son living in the house.
I also know of a case in which a state license (not a CCL, but another type of bonded license regulated by the state) was revoked, which removed that person's means of earning a living because a convicted felon lived in the same house. It looks like it all depends on the agency you are dealing with.
This led to one young man asking the lady how the felons lived in the same house with two CCL and not violate the no gun restriction. The lady explained that they had called OSBI and asked them about the situation. The response, as told by the lady, was that the Constitutional Rights of a non-felon were not to be infringed upon by the restrictions on a felon. As the wife, her rights superseeded the State's interest in restricting the felon. Same with the daughter. It also applied in the case of the daughter's ABC license, the State's interest could not infringe upon her right to exercise her relationship with her father. The restrictions against the felon not handling, having control of, or easy access to the guns was still in effect, but it was assumed that the gun on the person of the CCL holders were in their control and therefore were not within easy access to the felon. The mother and the daughter bought those little gun safes and that is where they secured their weapons at night (well, they had the safes anyway.)
Another lady in the class had a son come home after being released from prison and the parole officer was aware that she had a CCL and guns in the house. She said there were no problems with the parole officer, the guns and the felon son living in the house.
I also know of a case in which a state license (not a CCL, but another type of bonded license regulated by the state) was revoked, which removed that person's means of earning a living because a convicted felon lived in the same house. It looks like it all depends on the agency you are dealing with.
Also depends if the felony is state or federal. While the state may recognize that the rights of the non-felon exceed the rights of the state, the federal government takes the exact opposite approach.
They also practice the principal of "constructive possession" which means that control is not a requirement of possession. If a felon is in the car or house with a firearm, they are deemed to be "in possession" of the firearm regardless if it is in a closet or a holster on your belt; whether they know about it or not. The result is 5 years for that person regardless of what their prior conviction was for.
And they enforce it with a fervor.
They also practice the principal of "constructive possession" which means that control is not a requirement of possession. If a felon is in the car or house with a firearm, they are deemed to be "in possession" of the firearm regardless if it is in a closet or a holster on your belt; whether they know about it or not. The result is 5 years for that person regardless of what their prior conviction was for.
And they enforce it with a fervor.
Similar threads
