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

[tc617]

Your driver's license expires every 5 years. How would you renew the driver's license if it has been suspended or revoked at the time. Pretty sure MVA Express would tell you at that point that your license is suspended or revoked. Not only that, but MVA usually mails a letter to a person that has a suspended or revoked license.

Then, even if you are pulled over on a suspended or revoked license and the reason isn't one of Failure to Appear, Contempt of Court, massive child support in arrears, you usually get off the first one with a slap on the wrist. Had a client get busted driving on suspended not once, but twice within a 30 day period. His license was suspended because he failed to go to emissions. He was busted for driving on suspended tags. Then, he never paid that fine or showed for trial. The MVA had an incorrect address on file for him. The first Assistant State's Attorney dropped the charges. The second didn't, but the judge gave him PBJ for a day and a $50 fine.

This stuff with a PBJ causing a person to be prohibited for life is complete BS compared to driving on suspended.
Not even going to get into the privilege versus right issue.

Does this PROHIBITED FOR LIFE only apply to Maryland? If a person was to find themselves in this situation, moving to Virginia would restore their 2A rights, correct?

 

[Inigoes]

Does this PROHIBITED FOR LIFE only apply to Maryland? If a person was to find themselves in this situation, moving to Virginia would restore their 2A rights, correct?

Yep

 

[teratos]

My main point is that these folks should be notified in some way and not turned into overnight criminals.

Thank you for pointing out and poking holes in the rest of my post though.

Much appreciated.

There is a way to notify people. MSP shows up at their door and takes their guns......

 

[Not_an_outlaw]

Yep

Equal Protection Case?

 

[Ab_Normal]

Equal Protection Case?

YEAH RIGHT!!

 

[PJDiesel]

Buddy of mine is being told by the MSP (and his lawyer) they're unsure if he'll even be able to legally HUNT within MD, this is over a very similar situation I've mentioned in the other thread (old charge in DE, married the woman he had supposed domestic with ~8 years ago, still with her)

 

[Ab_Normal]

Buddy of mine is being told the MSP (and his lawyer) are unsure if he'll even be able to legally HUNT within MD, this is over a very similar situation I've mentioned in the other thread (old charge in DE, married the woman he had supposed domestic with ~8 years ago, still with her)

This has all gotten out of control.

 

[tc617]

Equal Protection Case?

No, it's called America, and I hear it's nice.

 

[Mooseman]

Unbelievable but completely believable in Maryland.

 

[Not_an_outlaw]

So, if you committed the disqualifying offense in another state (that would be prohibited in MD), and then you moved to MD with your firearms purchased out of state, how would MD know? Then wouldn't this be equal protection?

I don't what that offense might be, so its a hypothetical.

 

[44man]

Does this PROHIBITED FOR LIFE only apply to Maryland? If a person was to find themselves in this situation, moving to Virginia would restore their 2A rights, correct?

damned if i didnt see an article saying the feds were trying to make it country wide for domestics and other pbj crimes. i cant find the link though. \

i hope i misunderstood.

 

[highfructosecornsyrup]

We walk on egg shells in this state folks...

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

damned if i didnt see an article saying the feds were trying to make it country wide for domestics and other pbj crimes. i cant find the link though. \

i hope i misunderstood.

The federal form 4473 includes this question already:

i. Have you ever been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence? (See Instructions for Question 11.i.)

EXCEPTION to 11.c. and 11.i.: A person who has been convicted of a felony, or any other crime, for which the judge could have imprisoned the person for more than one year, or who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, is not prohibited from purchasing, receiving, or possessing a firearm if: (1) under the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred, the person has been pardoned, the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or the person has had their civil rights (the right to vote, sit on a jury, and hold public office) taken away and later restored AND (2) the person is not prohibited by the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred from receiving or possessing firearms. Persons subject to this exception should answer “no” to 11.c. or 11.i., as applicable.

 

[Ab_Normal]

The federal form 4473 includes this question already:

i. Have you ever been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence? (See Instructions for Question 11.i.)

EXCEPTION to 11.c. and 11.i.: A person who has been convicted of a felony, or any other crime, for which the judge could have imprisoned the person for more than one year, or who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, is not prohibited from purchasing, receiving, or possessing a firearm if: (1) under the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred, the person has been pardoned, the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or the person has had their civil rights (the right to vote, sit on a jury, and hold public office) taken away and later restored AND (2) the person is not prohibited by the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred from receiving or possessing firearms. Persons subject to this exception should answer “no” to 11.c. or 11.i., as applicable.

Doesn't sound very 'unalienable' to me.

 

[44man]

The federal form 4473 includes this question already:

i. Have you ever been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence? (See Instructions for Question 11.i.)

EXCEPTION to 11.c. and 11.i.: A person who has been convicted of a felony, or any other crime, for which the judge could have imprisoned the person for more than one year, or who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, is not prohibited from purchasing, receiving, or possessing a firearm if: (1) under the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred, the person has been pardoned, the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or the person has had their civil rights (the right to vote, sit on a jury, and hold public office) taken away and later restored AND (2) the person is not prohibited by the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred from receiving or possessing firearms. Persons subject to this exception should answer “no” to 11.c. or 11.i., as applicable.

yep i have seen that. this was something different that was in the news in in the last day or two. damn i wish i paid more attention to that when i saw it.


here is what i heard. i dont know what bearing it has but the guy was a pos anyway. http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_25422800/high-court-bolsters-domestic-violence-gun-ban-law

 

[Ab_Normal]

No, it's called America, and I hear it's nice.

I have to be honest, I did chuckle a little when I read that.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

yep i have seen that. this was something different that was in the news in in the last day or two. damn i wish i paid more attention to that when i saw it.

Maybe the ruling in United States v Castleman issued on Wednesday (3/26)?

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/united-states-v-castleman/

Holding: Castleman's state conviction for misdemeanor domestic assault qualifies as a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" for purposes of possessing a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9).

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/26/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence/6918457/

 

[Not_an_outlaw]

So if I read "And(2)" correctly, if a DC resident moved to Texas after being convicted in DC for unlawfully possessing a musket ball, he would be forever prohibited?

 

[redeemed.man]

Sounds like Jr. is a prohibited person...maybe should have thought about what consequences his actions would have had down the road when he was breaking the law.

I'm sure I'll be in the minority.

Maybe you missed the part about him being 17 when the alleged crime occurred. Is it possible that he didn't even commit a crime, maybe he was with a stupid friend who did. Maybe the judge wanted him to choose better friends so he sent his message through a PBJ. Have you ever spent anytime in a MD courtroom? Prior to 10/1/13 judges gave out PBJ's to damn near anyone for a first offense without even considering whether they were innocent or not. Walk into a PG or Baltimore City courtroom even today and you will see every first time arrestee that can't afford an attorney will be lined up gladly accepting a PBJ without understanding the consequences. PBJ's are and will continue to be given out to innocent people who don't understand the consequences. Not to mention the fact that when the alleged crime occur this law (SB281) wasn't even in place to begin with.

You just go right ahead and keep on judging someone you don't know and a story you only have pieces of. Must be nice to live life in the mistake free zone.

 

[44man]

Maybe the ruling in United States v Castleman issued on Wednesday (3/26)?

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/united-states-v-castleman/

Holding: Castleman's state conviction for misdemeanor domestic assault qualifies as a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" for purposes of possessing a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9).

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/26/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence/6918457/

Yes maam i edited my post. Thanks