This happened today, 03/27/2014....CONFISCATION

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Rack&Roll

    R.I.P
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    22,304
    Bunkerville, MD
    Maryland is insane. How can you serve penance before any judgement is made about what you are serving penance for?

    Everybody knows that the only citizens that ACTUALLY serve Probation Before Judgement are married men...
     

    Ab_Normal

    Ab_member
    Feb 2, 2010
    8,613
    Carroll County
    And they could do so. MD can make the standards stricter than the Federal law. So in essence a MD prohibitor would cease to be a prohibition once the person moved from MD.

    Not the way the federal form is worded. They would be prohibited everywhere.

    Anyone still think they don't have a more sinister plan?:mad54:
     

    Name Taken

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 23, 2010
    11,891
    Central
    Back in the early 90's felony theft was $300+, then they made it $500+, now it is $1000+. I'm convinced because it allows more criminals to vote. Democrat. But that is just the conspiracy theorist in me.

    They keep up with inflation better then the Federal Reserve.
     

    2SAM22

    Moderator Emeritus
    Apr 4, 2007
    7,178
    Not the way the federal form is worded. They would be prohibited everywhere.

    Anyone still think they don't have a more sinister plan?:mad54:

    Allow me provide a current example. In MD, you may not possess a regulated firearm if you meet MD's definition of a "habitual drunkard."

    Federal law has no such prohibition, therefore you may purchase a long gun in MD despite meeting that definition. Or, if you move to another State, that prohibitor no longer applies, unless the State you move to has a similar law.
     

    2SAM22

    Moderator Emeritus
    Apr 4, 2007
    7,178
    A MD conviction for a ANY felony, ANY misdemeanor carrying 2+ years maximum penalty (whether or not any jail sentence was imposed - a guilty finding is enough), any D/V related offense, and ANY common law offense is prohibiting nationwide, for life, unless you get a governor's pardon. This does not apply to black powder and (most) muzzleloading firearms, as long as the receiver cannot accept a barrel that can fit modern ammunition.

    Certain MD prohibitors such as the "habitual drunkard" regarding regulated firearms do not apply once you move out of MD.

    If you call your ex on the phone and cuss her out, you're facing a lifetime ban on firearms under the telephone misuse law.

    § 3-804. Misuse of telephone facilities and equipment

    Prohibited

    (a) A person may not use telephone facilities or equipment to make:

    (1) an anonymous call that is reasonably expected to annoy, abuse, torment, harass, or embarrass another;

    (2) repeated calls with the intent to annoy, abuse, torment, harass, or embarrass another; or

    (3) a comment, request, suggestion, or proposal that is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent.

    Penalty

    (b) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 3 years or a fine not exceeding $500 or both.
     

    2SAM22

    Moderator Emeritus
    Apr 4, 2007
    7,178
    Reference:

    Federal Prohibitors
    SOURCES: Gun Control Act of 1968; Title 18, United States Code (U.S.C.), Sections 921 and 922; Title 27 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) 478.11.
    SECTION 922(g)(1) - PERSONS WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED IN ANY COURT OF A CRIME PUNISHABLE BY IMPRISONMENT FOR TERM EXCEEDING ONE YEAR
    A person convicted (including by a general court martial) of any offense punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, whether or not such term of imprisonment was imposed.
    NOTES:
    The term crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year does not include (a) any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or (b) any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.

    What constitutes a conviction of such a crime shall be determined in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held. Any conviction which has been expunged, or set aside, or for which a person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored, shall not be considered a conviction, unless such pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.
     
    Reference:

    Federal Prohibitors
    SOURCES: Gun Control Act of 1968; Title 18, United States Code (U.S.C.), Sections 921 and 922; Title 27 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) 478.11.
    SECTION 922(g)(1) - PERSONS WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED IN ANY COURT OF A CRIME PUNISHABLE BY IMPRISONMENT FOR TERM EXCEEDING ONE YEAR
    A person convicted (including by a general court martial) of any offense punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, whether or not such term of imprisonment was imposed.
    NOTES:
    The term crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year does not include (a) any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or (b) any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.

    What constitutes a conviction of such a crime shall be determined in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held. Any conviction which has been expunged, or set aside, or for which a person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored, shall not be considered a conviction, unless such pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.


    So if a person has had their record expunged and purchased regulated firearms since the the record was cleared , probably wouldn't have to worry about having their firearms confiscated , since their is nothing on their record ?
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,187
    Don't get me wrong, I'm with you as far as agreeing that what the legislature did here isn't cool. That doesn't mean that it is difficult to conceptually wrap my round about how they reasoned it.

    They're argument is that despite the fact that you do not have a conviction on your record, you did enter a courtroom, take an oath and admit under that oath to underlying facts that would have been sufficient to convict you of the crime you were charged with. The legislature has essentially said that "we don't care whether you have a conviction. your admission to the elements of the crime with which you were charged suffice to negate your 2A rights."

    is it ********?? yes it is. but, nonetheless, that's their reasoning.

    you don't need to agree with your enemy to strive to understand him.

    I don't have the code in front of me and I'm not about to look it up, but it is implicit in the court's authority to grant a PBJ disposition, so that's where in the law you would find it. and technically, I don't know that at the time the PBJ is granted that one could consider himself innocent. in fact one would have just finished pleading guilty to a crime, it is only after the PBJ is granted AND SATISFIED that the option for the actual judgment to never be entered matures.

    i think you are too narrowly defining the term "probation" and are thinking of it only as something that comes post judgment of guilt. the law does not limit it so.

    Read the bolded portion of your prior post... Telling the court that you agree to the fact that they have sufficient evidence to convict you in a court trial. And then, accepting a probation for that charge IS all the State needs to prohibit you from purchasing firearms. No one forces you to accept the states argument. You accept it? Then you have sentenced your self. No truly innocent person should EVER FOR ANY REASON accept a PBJ.
     

    tm12

    Active Member
    Dec 22, 2012
    115
    I foresee the state bumping up the max penalties to 2+ years for everything including minor traffic.

    Exactly. According to my understanding of a conversation with an officer in the licensing division, the fingerprint requirement of the HQL (and having those fingerprints already in the criminal database) will immediately alert them that you have regulated firearms so that they can take those firearms (including those purchased prior to the offense) if you commit a disqualifying offense. With this being Maryland, I could see the list of disqualifying offenses growing to include more minor offenses (e.g. too many speeding tickets). It is a potentially slippery and scary slope.
     

    2SAM22

    Moderator Emeritus
    Apr 4, 2007
    7,178
    2SAM22, what other prohibitors, if any, fit this same criteria of being n/a once one leaves MD?

    There have been some wacky court rulings and I can't recall off the top of my head, but just an example of how MD has tightened the restrictions on its residents beyond even what Federal law says. So DUI's affect your ability to get a handgun as a MD resident buy not in other states.

    Federal law is pretty harsh on CDS though. You an even be prohibited for multiple CDS arrests with no conviction (for one year from the last arrest, so it's temporary, but still).

    Also as of now (AFAIK) there is no medical marijuana exemption for firearms possession.

    So if a person has had their record expunged and purchased regulated firearms since the the record was cleared , probably wouldn't have to worry about having their firearms confiscated , since their is nothing on their record ?

    Correct. MSP can't usually find expunged records after a very short time. They're really -poof- gone from databases.
     

    Alutacon

    Desert Storm
    May 22, 2013
    1,120
    Bowie
    The defendant does not take an oath to plead guilty and then ask for a PBJ. In fact, I usually do all the talking in those circumstances and the defendant never says a word unless the judge asks him/her a direct question.

    Now, if we elect to go to trial and the defendant decides to actually testify, then the testimony will be under oath. However, in that case there will never be an admission of guilt, merely a guilty finding by the judge.

    I am willing to defer to you on the issue since I haven't done criminal work, or any work in District Court for that matter, in over a decade. However, if you don't have to testify as to the underlying facts, I am certain the prosecutor makes a proffer and the defendant, whether individually or through counsel, has to agree that the proffer is correct. Am I right on that count?
     

    mtnwisdom

    Active Member
    Sep 9, 2012
    290
    Sparrows Point
    I've often wondered about this. What if you tell the leos at the door that the firearms in question are not on the premises. Do they have the right to tear your house apart looking, or will they just haul you in?

    Hi Guys, but my attorney said that without a search warrant I should not open the door. Nothing personal...
     

    Ab_Normal

    Ab_member
    Feb 2, 2010
    8,613
    Carroll County
    Allow me provide a current example. In MD, you may not possess a regulated firearm if you meet MD's definition of a "habitual drunkard."

    Federal law has no such prohibition, therefore you may purchase a long gun in MD despite meeting that definition. Or, if you move to another State, that prohibitor no longer applies, unless the State you move to has a similar law.

    I thought there was some question on the federal form about habitual drinking as well.

    I haven't seen the latest revision so maybe it has been changed.
     

    2SAM22

    Moderator Emeritus
    Apr 4, 2007
    7,178
    Hi Guys, but my attorney said that without a search warrant I should not open the door. Nothing personal...

    Might work out, but be careful what you wish for. Might also result in being awoken by a flash bag at 3am. But you'd get that warrant.
     

    2SAM22

    Moderator Emeritus
    Apr 4, 2007
    7,178
    I thought there was some question on the federal form about habitual drinking as well.

    I haven't seen the latest revision so maybe it has been changed.

    77R yes, ATF 4473 No.
    See Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922[g][1-9])
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    I thought there was some question on the federal form about habitual drinking as well.

    I haven't seen the latest revision so maybe it has been changed.

    Here is what ATF has on its website regarding Form 4473. Looks like the question is 11e. Alcohol would be a depressant, but it would take further digging into the actual laws to see what 11e pertains to.

    The poster below cited 18 USC 922(g) 1-9 and I just looked it over quickly, did a Chrome search for "drug" in it and found nothing. So, until I go through it with a fine tooth comb, which would not be until after tax season or a paying client asks me to, it will have to wait.

    Question 11e is clear as mud if somebody has an alcohol problem.

    Now, I believe somebody said that under Maryland law a habitual drunkard could still buy a rifle or shotgun, just not a regulated firearm. SB281 changed that. Take a look at Md. Code Public Safety section 5-205:

    5–205.

    (A) THIS SUBTITLE DOES NOT APPLY TO A RIFLE OR SHOTGUN THAT IS
    AN ANTIQUE FIREARM AS DEFINED IN § 4–201 OF THE CRIMINAL LAW ARTICLE.

    (B) A PERSON MAY NOT POSSESS A RIFLE OR SHOTGUN IF THE PERSON:

    (1) HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF A DISQUALIFYING CRIME AS DEFINED IN § 5–101 OF THIS TITLE;

    (2) HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF A VIOLATION CLASSIFIED AS A CRIME UNDER COMMON LAW AND RECEIVED A TERM OF IMPRISONMENT OF MORE THAN 2 YEARS;

    (3) IS A FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE;

    (4) IS A HABITUAL DRUNKARD AS DEFINED IN § 5–101 OF THIS TITLE;

    (5) IS ADDICTED TO A CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE OR
    IS A HABITUAL USER AS DEFINED IN § 5–101 OF THIS TITLE;

    ........
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    I am willing to defer to you on the issue since I haven't done criminal work, or any work in District Court for that matter, in over a decade. However, if you don't have to testify as to the underlying facts, I am certain the prosecutor makes a proffer and the defendant, whether individually or through counsel, has to agree that the proffer is correct. Am I right on that count?

    Yes, either the officer or the assistant state's attorney has to make a proffer and then I either state it is correct or make corrections that the state/officer usually agrees to. It is rather seldom that I have to note a correction, but it happens once in a while.

    District Court is where you get to see all the insane stuff. Recently I got to witness it in Upper Marlboro for traffic court. The Judge was asking people to acknowledge their presence and then make their plea. They were passing on cases for a certain officer because he was running late and the people pleading on those were ridiculous. At first, not a single person approached the bench. Then, they got so lazy that they did not even stand up when acknowledging their presence and they were mumbling "not guilty" under their breath. The Judge allowed 3 people to get away with this before she ended up telling them to at least stand up and speak clearly. The amount of disrespect was incredible. If I was the Judge, I would have made each and every one of them approach the bench and stand behind the table. Walking is good for most people.
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    There have been some wacky court rulings and I can't recall off the top of my head, but just an example of how MD has tightened the restrictions on its residents beyond even what Federal law says. So DUI's affect your ability to get a handgun as a MD resident buy not in other states.

    Federal law is pretty harsh on CDS though. You an even be prohibited for multiple CDS arrests with no conviction (for one year from the last arrest, so it's temporary, but still).

    Also as of now (AFAIK) there is no medical marijuana exemption for firearms possession.



    Correct. MSP can't usually find expunged records after a very short time. They're really -poof- gone from databases.

    Expunged records are NOT gone from law enforcement or judicial databases, they just are not available for the public to be seen and you do not have to disclose them on a government application, during a job interview, etc. Law enforcement and the judiciary will know whether you have already been given a break via PBJ on an earlier matter even if it is expunged.

    As far as the PBJ for a violent crime being a disqualifier per the Simmons Rule, there is an exception for PBJ crimes that have been expunged. So, even though law enforcement can see the PBJ was granted it will be able to see that an expungement was granted and the expungement results in the PBJ not being a disqualifier.
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,187
    Yes, either the officer or the assistant state's attorney has to make a proffer and then I either state it is correct or make corrections that the state/officer usually agrees to. It is rather seldom that I have to note a correction, but it happens once in a while.

    District Court is where you get to see all the insane stuff. Recently I got to witness it in Upper Marlboro for traffic court. The Judge was asking people to acknowledge their presence and then make their plea. They were passing on cases for a certain officer because he was running late and the people pleading on those were ridiculous. At first, not a single person approached the bench. Then, they got so lazy that they did not even stand up when acknowledging their presence and they were mumbling "not guilty" under their breath. The Judge allowed 3 people to get away with this before she ended up telling them to at least stand up and speak clearly. The amount of disrespect was incredible. If I was the Judge, I would have made each and every one of them approach the bench and stand behind the table. Walking is good for most people.

    You should have been there back in the '80s and '90s in the City Courts... Western District and Traffic.

    The defendants were sometimes a walking circus... One Judge was particularly comedic in his courtroom. Sometimes the laughs had to be suppressed... But those who were the recipients of his whit seldom left laughing. Sometimes, I miss the entertainment. And sometimes we would get a visiting Judge from the Eastern Shore... What a shocker for those Judges...
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,930
    Messages
    7,259,473
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom