Not Approved

[Jettster]

Stopped by Christian Soldier on Harford Rd (odd hours BTW) As I was looking around a guy came in to find out if he was "Not Disapproved" for his pistol. The MSP did not approve him, he had stated he was convicted of misdemeanor assault 2 years ago in VA (bar fight, the other guy was convicted of a misdemeanor as well), and served no time, paid a fine and that was that. Not even probation.

Was he not approved because it was an assault charge or just a general misdemeanor?

 

[hole punch]

i have a feeling it's done at will by whomever looks into your background. if they guy goes and tries to buy something else else at a later date he'll probably be not disapproved

 

[Half-cocked]

If it was a misdemeanor for which he could have been sentenced to two years or more, that's also a disqualifier.

 

[novus collectus]

Generally any state misdemeanor that carries no more than 2 years max is not a disqualifying crime, but there are some misdemeanor offenses in MD for domestic abuse or assault that do qualify.
Chances are though that they dissapproved him just to be safe and he is not disqualified.

Also, I have to look again, but I think that even though he cannot own a regulated gun in MD, it is possible to own a an unregulated gun because some crimes disqualify for regulated firearms possession, but not non-regulated.

 

[JasonMD85]

Stopped by Christian Soldier on Harford Rd (odd hours BTW) As I was looking around a guy came in to find out if he was "Not Disapproved" for his pistol. The MSP did not approve him, he had stated he was convicted of misdemeanor assault 2 years ago in VA (bar fight, the other guy was convicted of a misdemeanor as well), and served no time, paid a fine and that was that. Not even probation.

Was he not approved because it was an assault charge or just a general misdemeanor?

I thought "Not Disapproved" meant you could get it, and "Not Approved" meant you couldn't? I seem to recall getting a phone call from a store saying "Your "Not Disapproved" came in. Come pick up your firearm!"

 

[novus collectus]

Disqualifying crimes in MD.


Firearms in general (including antiques).

(b) A person may not possess, own, carry, or transport a firearm if that person has been convicted of:

(1) a felony under this title;

(2) a crime under the laws of another state or of the United States that would be a felony under this title if committed in this State;

For regulated firearms:

(b) A person may not possess a regulated firearm if the person:

(1) has been convicted of a disqualifying crime;

(2) has been convicted of a violation classified as a common law crime and received a term of imprisonment of more than 2 years;...




(c) (1) A person may not possess a regulated firearm if the person was previously convicted of:

(i) a crime of violence; or

(ii) a violation of § 5-602, § 5-603, § 5-604, § 5-605, § 5-606, § 5-607, § 5-608, § 5-609, § 5-612, § 5-613, or § 5-614 of the Criminal Law Article.

 

[novus collectus]

"Crime of violence":

(c) "Crime of violence" means:

(1) abduction;

(2) arson in the first degree;

(3) assault in the first or second degree;

(4) burglary in the first, second, or third degree;

(5) carjacking and armed carjacking;

(6) escape in the first degree;

(7) kidnapping;

(8) voluntary manslaughter;

(9) maiming as previously proscribed under former Article 27, § 386 of the Code;

(10) mayhem as previously proscribed under former Article 27, § 384 of the Code;

(11) murder in the first or second degree;

(12) rape in the first or second degree;

(13) robbery;

(14) robbery with a dangerous weapon;

(15) sexual offense in the first, second, or third degree;

(16) an attempt to commit any of the crimes listed in items (1) through (15) of this subsection; or

(17) assault with intent to commit any of the crimes listed in items (1) through (15) of this subsection or a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year.

 

[Jaybeez]

I actually got a call about this today. The guy in the original post is a friend of a friend, my phone rings because i'm "the expert".

The thinking is that the assault is being treated as a crime of violence. Could someone verify that theory? I'd like to put this guy in touch with someone that could give him better legal advice. Or at least a qualified attorney.

 

[novus collectus]

I actually got a call about this today. The guy in the original post is a friend of a friend, my phone rings because i'm "the expert".

The thinking is that the assault is being treated as a crime of violence. Could someone verify that theory? I'd like to put this guy in touch with someone that could give him better legal advice. Or at least a qualified attorney.

"Assault" in crimes of violence is only first or second degree assault, but second degree assault is so vague, it could be the throwing of a snowball at someone from how I gather.

(b) Assault.- "Assault" means the crimes of assault, battery, and assault and battery, which retain their judicially determined meanings.

I vaguely remember reading somewhere that a permit holder lost his permit because it was discovered he was convicted in DC of having a dangerous weapon which was a big stick and was only something like six months in prison max, but because in MD the same charge was a second degree assault, he lost his rights.

I remember the delegates arguing at the judiciary hearing something about how MD is just one of only a couple of states where someone can still get ten years in prison for pushing someone.

 

[hole punch]

I thought "Not Disapproved" meant you could get it, and "Not Approved" meant you couldn't? I seem to recall getting a phone call from a store saying "Your "Not Disapproved" came in. Come pick up your firearm!"

This is correct, and I assume a typo on the part of the OP.

 

[LastDon]

Ironically, every single one of those "Crimes of violence" also carries at least 2 years as a maximum penalty in MD.

 

[txiyo]

If it was in a bar, he could have got public intoxication and the reviewer could just assume that makes him a habitual drunkard. I know there is a formal legal definition, # of offenses, etc but it could just be MSP's judgement.

 

[novus collectus]

If it was in a bar, he could have got public intoxication and the reviewer could just assume that makes him a habitual drunkard. I know there is a formal legal definition, # of offenses, etc but it could just be MSP's judgement.

It is defined in code as so many drunk driving convictions over a certain number of years. They can't be their judgment for "not dissproval" of a regulated firearm transfer.

 

[txiyo]

It is defined in code as so many drunk driving convictions over a certain number of years. They can't be their judgment for "not dissproval" of a regulated firearm transfer.

You're probably right. But I would not put it past the MSP. I just did a secondary transfer at the barracks and they looked pretty jeleous when I got my Springfield XD45 Tactical and they had there Beretta storms.

What gun did he get disapproved for?

Maybe they don't like people with nicer guns than they are issued.

 

[CLIFF566]

A conviction for Domestic Assault is automatic NO FIREARMS and that law was retro-active, signed in law 09/30/1996. This means that if you were arrested for assaulting your spouse either physically or verbally, in 1960, you now have lost the right to own a firearm, on the federal side a FELONY is ANY conviction that carries a one year or more
In jail. A Restraining Order Clause can force you to turn in your firearms. So keep your spouse happy, as a former FFL, I know you can not win
Cliff

 

[novus collectus]

A conviction for Domestic Assault is automatic NO FIREARMS and that law was retro-active, signed in law 09/30/1996. This means that if you were arrested for assaulting your spouse either physically or verbally, in 1960, you now have lost the right to own a firearm,

This is bound to change soon in all but six states. I will try to find the link in a minute.

on the federal side a FELONY is ANY conviction that carries a one year or more
In jail.

Not true. A felony that carries more than one year in prison makes one a prohibitted person, but a misdemeanor that carries no more than two years does not.

A Restraining Order Clause can force you to turn in your firearms. So keep your spouse happy, as a former FFL, I know you can not win
Cliff

Not all restraining orders.

 

[novus collectus]

A conviction for Domestic Assault is automatic NO FIREARMS and that law was retro-active, signed in law 09/30/1996. This means that if you were arrested for assaulting your spouse either physically or verbally, in 1960, you now have lost the right to own a firearm,...

Found it.

November 11, 2008
The Supreme Court will decide whether people convicted of misdemeanor assault against their spouses or partners should have their 2nd Amendment rights restored because of a flaw in federal law.

Reporting from Washington -- Thousands convicted of a misdemeanor for threatening or assaulting a spouse or girlfriend could once again own guns because of a flaw in the federal law.

That prospect grew more likely Monday after the Supreme Court gave a skeptical hearing to a government lawyer who argued that a crime of domestic violence should result in a loss of gun rights.

Neither families nor police officers should face "the powder keg situation of a domestic offender with a gun," said Nicole Saharsky, a Justice Department lawyer.

But she ran into sharp questioning from justices who said the law was badly written.

Congress in 1996 sought to strengthen the laws against domestic violence. Before, only persons convicted of violent felonies in such situations lost their rights to own a gun. Going a step further, lawmakers adopted an amendment to take away gun rights for those who had a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" on their records....


...But last year, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia cast doubt on the law's reach. Its judges decided the federal gun ban did not cover misdemeanor convictions involving assault or battery at home. Instead, it said the federal ban applied only to those convicted under a state's domestic violence law.

That would make the federal gun law "a dead letter in two-thirds of the states," according to the government's lawyer. Saharsky said most states do not have misdemeanor laws specifically targeting domestic violence....


....
"This statute is a mess," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy commented at one point.

Roberts noted that California, Illinois, Michigan and Ohio have misdemeanor domestic violence laws. People convicted under those measures would not benefit from a ruling that limited the reach of the federal law, he said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scotus11-2008nov11,0,2414660.story

 

[SigXFive]

Try this for size. If you were convicted in another state for a crime having a max of 6 months and the equivlent crime in Maryland is 2 years, Guess What Happens? They come and take your guns. Best bet, Bar fight, Road rage, Domestic. Keep your hands in your pockets and your mouth shut. Better to turn the other cheek than give MSP a new sniper rifle.

 

[rummy]

hey guys...the guy who this is about is a good friend of mine. in fact, i took him to Christian Soldier to get the pistol, a Glock 23 to be exact.

he gave me permission to talk about this, but i won't go into too many specifics.

he was convicted for 2nd degree assault - 1 years probation and $120 fine.

his probation ended over the summer.

since then he has been straight as an arrow, and is going to school fulltime to do IT work...the guy is good to go. the fight was at an apartment at some school in VA - while it makes no difference in the eyes of the law, (and without going into too much unnecessary detail) his motives were righteous, trust me on that.

his only reason for wanting to own a pistol is to defend his home...in fact, there was one attempted break in already, and many more DEFCON-type situations going on in the neighborhood.

i'm glad you guys are hashing this out already as i had told him this would be the place to go for honest, informed answers.

oh, while i'm at it, i had a question for some of you guys who've shopped around at multiple gun shops...let me preface this by saying that the guys at Christian Soldier (mike?) were apparantely really cool with him, and pretty understanding - to the point of calling a LEO friend to talk with him...that being said, my buddy payed a pretty penny for the glock, something like $650 w/out night sights. i told him that was a bit high, but i support small business, expecially faith-based ones...but that is neither here nor there - but apparantely his $100 deposit was forfeited for restocking? is that the normal going rate for denials? i've never delt with the issue (thank goodness), but $100 is a decent chunk of change to charge someone on top of telling them they can't own a pistol, especially when it never left the premesis...is there something more to the fee that i am missing?


thanks again for putting this stuff together...here's to hoping the People's Republic allows him to have a shotgun.

 

[novus collectus]

Ask him for the specific violation name, Virginia seems to have something called "simple assault".