Never allowed to own a gun,vote,etc.

[cbucher]

I wasn't sure where to put this so I hope I chose the right place. I have a co-worker that made the comment today that he was not allowed to own a firearm ever. He then proceeded to tell me he could not vote and several other things, but my mind was stuck on the first two. I asked him what kind of trouble he had been in ( felony and such) for this to be true. We did not have time to go into this in detail today, but are going to talk more tomorrow. I was just curious if any of the lawyers on this forum or any other members would have any idea on what would keep you from ever owning a firearm or voting. I will of course add details as I get them from him. He is wondering what he might be able to do in order to protect his family and property. Any thoughts?

[74novaman]

If I remember correctly, any felony will restrict your ability to vote or own guns....non violent or not.

In addition, a misdemeanor domestic violence charge restricts your gun rights. (but not voting)

[puma guy]

If I remember correctly, any felony will restrict your ability to vote or own guns....non violent or not.

In addition, a misdemeanor domestic violence charge restricts your gun rights. (but not voting)

The information I found on the internet does not support loss of voting rights for convicted felons after they complete their probation, parole or sentence. Federal law prevents felons from owning/possessing firearms and ammunition. Perhaps your friend is still serving out his sentence, i.e. probation/parole.

[C-dub]

That sounds about right, but I understand some states are giving the rights back to some felons depending on the type crime after they have served their sentence.


Edit:I remembered reading an article not too long ago and found it pretty easily. I think it was even mentioned on this forum.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/fe ... wanted=all" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[cbucher]

I was just doing some reading on this too. It was my understanding that he was finished with probation/parole,but I am not certain. The article I was reading was saying that for felony conviction in Texas it is almost impossible to get it expunged. So I guess he doesn't really have any options for home protection other than bow and arrow or something along those lines. I am still going to get the details from him on the voting issue though.

[C-dub]

I was just doing some reading on this too. It was my understanding that he was finished with probation/parole,but I am not certain. The article I was reading was saying that for felony conviction in Texas it is almost impossible to get it expunged. So I guess he doesn't really have any options for home protection other than bow and arrow or something along those lines. I am still going to get the details from him on the voting issue though.

I guess that would also depend on whether or not the conviction was here in Texas. Maybe it was in one of those states that he might have a better chance of getting his rights back.

[Oldgringo]

It sounds like your co-worker is/was one of the BG's fantacized so frequently in the "what if" threads on this forum, you reckon?

[cbucher]

He did admit to me that it was some pretty bad stuff. I am real curious of the specifics. He is a very likable person and I would think if it were to bad of a situation my company would not have hired him. Which is why I am wondering about the details and he has no problem telling me, he just didn't have time today. So, we will see.

[Carry-a-Kimber]

So I guess he doesn't really have any options for home protection other than bow and arrow or something along those lines.

He can always get a cap and ball revolver, might work better than a bow inside a house.

[powerboatr]

In addition, a misdemeanor domestic violence charge restricts your gun rights. (but not voting)

we love this one. my past daughter in law was just found guilty of domestic violence against my son and his new wife by default (called DA and told him she wasn't coming to court from tn to texas, so judge decided for her)...no gun for you now, but she lives in tn so its not worth worrying about here

[jocat54]

My son is in that category, when he was 17, him and another kid stole several(like 30) cases of beer and were caught and convicted. He is now 35 and there isn't a day that goes by that he doesn't regret his stupidity. He would love to own a firearm (other than black powder) and vote.

[RPBrown]

If you are convicted of a felony, you can not own a gun other than black powder. This is federal law. After 5 years, you can get your voting rights back (at least in Texas, not sure about other states). Had a nephew go through all of this.

[The Annoyed Man]

He did admit to me that it was some pretty bad stuff. I am real curious of the specifics. He is a very likable person and I would think if it were to bad of a situation my company would not have hired him. Which is why I am wondering about the details and he has no problem telling me, he just didn't have time today. So, we will see.

That's what the neighbors always say about serial killers, right after the po-po take them away.

Just kidding........

I'm pretty much on the fence about loss of gun rights for felony convictions, and that alone is evidence that my attitudes have changed over the years. I used to be militantly against the idea of felons having gun rights, but I'm not so sure any longer. Although the justification for being able to take away someone's gun/voting rights for a felony conviction is based on the idea of due process, can due process have any validity when we start with the notion that a right is "natural" and "God-given?" If God (or "Nature's God," or however you want to phrase this) gives us a right, then who are puny humans to take a right away? Simply put, we can't. What we can do is suspend an individual's access to the expression of his right. I know that sounds like mere semantics, but it is an important distinction...... He still has the right; he's just no longer allowed to express it, because we forbid it. The problem with this, of course, is that the exact same arguments could be made, for various reasons, to suspend an individual's right to free speech, free association, religious preference, and so on. We can, using the same logic, invalidate the 3rd though the 8th Amendments, etc., etc. When that is the case, we no longer actually have rights. What we then have is permission. I don't like the sound of that.

[Jumping Frog]

Although the justification for being able to take away someone's gun/voting rights for a felony conviction is based on the idea of due process, can due process have any validity when we start with the notion that a right is "natural" and "God-given?" If God (or "Nature's God," or however you want to phrase this) gives us a right, then who are puny humans to take a right away? Simply put, we can't. What we can do is suspend an individual's access to the expression of his right. I know that sounds like mere semantics, but it is an important distinction...... He still has the right; he's just no longer allowed to express it, because we forbid it. . . . When that is the case, we no longer actually have rights. What we then have is permission. I don't like the sound of that.

The most basic natural right is the right to life, yet I have no problem with capital punishment in appropriate cases.

[koconcept]

I have a coworker in a similar situation who is wantingg to buy a firearm. I'm on the fence about it as yea I do think everyone needs to be able to defend themselves. The thing that has me torn is knowing his crime when he was 17 was a violent gun crime. So no I don't think he should have a firearm, the nature of his crime was in no way self defense and it kinda bothers me to even talk about firearms with someone like this knowing they may not have the same inte ntions I may have. Sorry for the ramble I'm on my phone so yea.