I Stopped Listening to The Noise and Read The Law That’s On The Books

I had to stop listening to all the noise and read the law. I am a first time felon for a felony DUI I got 12 years ago which was the last of a few. When I submitted for my CCW card they had me give them every bit of documentation they could think of, and I did now I am waiting 12 days for the decision, but based on the law for Arizona which I posted below my right were restored automatically. 2A strong

13-907. Automatic restoration of civil rights for first offenders; firearm rights

A. On completion of probation for an offense committed in this state or absolute discharge from imprisonment, any person who has not previously been convicted of a felony offense shall automatically be restored any civil rights that were lost or suspended as a result of the conviction if the person pays all victim restitution imposed. A person who is entitled to the restoration of any civil rights pursuant to this subsection is not required to file an application pursuant to section 13-908, except that if the person does file an application, the court shall grant the application without receiving a response from the state or holding a hearing.

B. On completion of probation for an offense committed outside the jurisdiction of this state or absolute discharge from a prison in another state or the federal bureau of prisons, a person who has not previously been convicted of a felony offense is eligible for automatic restoration of any civil rights that were lost or suspended as a result of the conviction if the person pays all victim restitution imposed. A person who is entitled to the restoration of any civil rights pursuant to this subsection shall file an application pursuant to section 13-908, and the court shall grant the application without receiving a response from the state or holding a hearing.

C. This section does not apply to a person’s right to possess a firearm as defined in section 13-3101 if the person was convicted of any of the following:

  1. A dangerous offense under section 13-704 or an offense committed outside the jurisdiction of this state that would be a dangerous offense under section 13-704 if committed in this state.

  2. A serious offense as defined in section 13-706 or an offense committed outside the jurisdiction of this state that would be a serious offense as defined in section 13-706 if committed in this state.

D. If the person is not entitled to the automatic restoration of firearm rights pursuant to this section, the court may order the restoration of the right to possess a firearm pursuant to section 13-910.

2 Likes

Good luck on your new path.

I’m not a lawyer so this legalese is a bit confusing to me. By not previously convicted of a felony it is unclear to me if they are including or excluding the charge for which the person is currently completing their probation. It is my admittedly limited understanding that a single felony conviction excludes a person’s right to firearm ownership in most States unless that person undertakes the steps needed to restore those rights.

Whatever the law actually is saying I hope the process works out for you in the end. It seems unfair and unnecessary to deny your right to self defense based on a nonviolent act from over a decade ago. Good luck!

2 Likes

Thank you for the kind sentiments, but I don’t believe in luck. I believe in pure law, and the gun.

Let’s examine Federal rules, and laws as it pertains to firearms.

1435. POST-CONVICTION RESTORATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS

A frequently litigated issue under § 922(g)(1) is whether a convicted felon is exempt from the prohibitions of the statute because of a post-conviction restoration of civil rights under State law. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20), a conviction does not disqualify an individual from possessing firearms if the person convicted “has had civil rights restored.” In § 922(g)(1) cases based upon a State felony conviction, courts have uniformly looked to the law of the State where the conviction was obtained to determine whether the defendant’s civil rights have been restored and whether such action has nullified the conviction’s incidental prohibition on firearms possession. With respect to Federal felony convictions, the Supreme Court declared in Beecham v. United States, 511 U.S. 368 (1994), that only Federal law can nullify the effect of the conviction through expungement, pardon, or restoration of civil rights. This is so, the Court ruled, even though there is no Federal procedure for restoring the civil rights of Federal felons.

In United States v. Ramos, 961 F.2d 1003, 1009 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, U.S., 113 S. Ct. 364 (1992), the court held that the term “restored” in § 921(a)(20) requires the State to make an “individualized official judgment” that the defendant should be excepted from the prohibitions of § 922(g)(1). The Criminal Division takes the position that where State law contains any provision purporting to restore civil rights – either upon application by the defendant or automatically upon the completion of a sentence – it should be given effect. It is not necessary that the State issue an individualized certificate reflecting the judgment of State officials regarding an individual defendant. The Ramos case should be limited to its unique facts and not extended in attempts to nullify the effect of other State schemes for civil rights restoration. A State restoration document that is absolute on its face should disqualify the affected State felon from prosecution under § 922(g)(1) unless the facts of the case strongly support a finding that the felon had actual notice of his/her continuing State firearms disability despite the terms of the restoration document.

[cited in JM 9-63.500]

November 10, 2008 2008-R-0617
RESTORATION OF RIGHT TO CARRY FIREARMS
UNDER FEDERAL LAW
By: Veronica Rose, Principal Analyst

You asked for information on a federal law that allows convicted felons to petition for relief from federal firearm disabilities. Your constituent has been informed about a lack of funding to process his petition.

SUMMARY

Under federal law, convicted felons and certain other people cannot possess or distribute firearms. But they may apply to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) for relief from the disabilities imposed by federal law. BATF may restore an applicant’s gun privileges if (1) it does not deem the applicant “dangerous to public safety” and (2) restoration is not “contrary to the public interest.”

Under the law, an applicant whose request is denied may seek judicial review in federal court. But since 1992, Congress, in its annual appropriations, has explicitly barred BATF from expending funds to investigate or act on applications by individuals. Consequently, BATF has not been processing applications. In Bean, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with BATF, holding that the bureau’s inaction on applications does not constitute a “denial” under the law, in light of the congressional ban on expenditures. Thus, applicants cannot go to federal court to seek judicial review to regain their firearm privileges.

For purposes of the Gun Control Act, a person is not considered convicted in certain instances (e.g., if he or she has been pardoned or had his or her civil rights restored). As an alternative to the above BATF process, a person convicted of a federal offense may apply for a presidential pardon. A person convicted of a state offense may apply to appropriate state officials for a pardon or civil rights restoration.

FEDERAL LAW AND GUN RESTORATION RIGHTS

The 1968 Gun Control Act prohibits convicted felons and certain other persons from possessing or receiving firearms (18 USC §§ 922(g) and 922(n)). But they may petition BATF for relief from these disabilities. BATF may grant the relief if it determines that (1) the applicant is not likely to endanger public safety and (2) granting relief would not be contrary to the public interest. Anyone whose application is denied may seek judicial review in federal court (18 USC § 925(c)).

Since October 1992, Congress, in its annual appropriations, has prohibited BATF from using appropriated funds to investigate or act upon applications for relief submitted by individuals. BATF claims that as long as this ban remains in place, it cannot process such applications.

THE THOMAS BEAN CASE

Thomas Bean, a convicted felon, applied for reinstatement of his firearm privileges. BATF returned the application unprocessed, explaining that a provision in its annual appropriations barred it from expending funds to process applications. Bean sought relief in federal district court, on the grounds that the bureau’s inaction constituted a denial within the meaning of the law and was thus subject to judicial review. BATF contended that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because an actual decision by BATF was a prerequisite for judicial review and the bureau had not denied Bean’s application. The district court sided with Bean and the appeals court affirmed the decision (Bean v. BATF, 253 F.3d 234 (5th Cir. Tex. 2001)).

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the lower courts’ rulings, finding that an actual BATF decision on an application was a prerequisite for judicial review, and inaction did not amount to a denial within the meaning of the law (U.S. v. Bean, 537 U.S. 71, (2002)). According to Justice Thomas, who wrote the opinion, “mere inaction by ATF does not invest a district court with independent jurisdiction to act on an application” (Id., at 76).

ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO GET RELIEF FROM DISABILITIES

For purposes of the Gun Control Act, a person is not considered convicted if he or she (1) has been pardoned, (2) had his or her civil rights restored or set aside, or (3) had his or her conviction expunged or set aside, unless the pardon, restoration, or expungement expressly bars shipping, transporting, possessing, or receiving firearms (18 USC § 921(a)(20) and (a)(33)).

Anyone convicted of a federal offense may apply for a presidential pardon. Federal regulations (28 CFR § 1.1-1.10) specify the rules governing petitions for obtaining such pardons (copy attached). Your constituent, who appears to have been convicted of a federal offense, may contact the Pardon Attorney’s Office to inquire about the procedures for obtaining such a pardon. The address is:

Pardon Attorney’s Office

U.S. Department of Justice

500 First St. N.W.

Washington DC 20530

In Connecticut, the Board of Pardons is authorized to grant pardons for state offenses. The address is:

Rowland State Government Ctr.

55 West Main St.

Suite 520

Waterbury 06702

Does the federal government issue a license or permit to carry a concealed weapon?

No. Neither ATF nor any other federal agency issues a permit or license to carry a concealed weapon. Carrying permits may be issued by a state or local government. Please contact your state’s Attorney General’s Office for information regarding permits to carry firearms.

Last Reviewed April 12, 2022

(ii) A person shall not be considered to have been convicted of such an offense for purposes of this chapter if the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense) unless the pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.

Gun Control Act of 1968 Great Seal of the United States140x140
Other short titles State Firearms Control Assistance Act
Long title An Act to amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for better control of the interstate traffic in firearms.
Acronyms(colloquial) GCA, GCA68
Enacted by the 90th United States Congress
Effective October 22, 1968
Citations
Public law 90-618
Statutes at Large 82 Stat. 1213-2
Codification
Titles amended 18 U.S.C.: Crimes and Criminal Procedure
U.S.C. sections amended 18 U.S.C. ch. 44 § 921
Legislative history

Firearm legal topics of the
United States
Greater coat of arms of the United States.svg90x95


The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA or GCA68) is a U.S. federal law that regulates the firearmsindustry and firearms ownership. Due to constitutional limitations, the Act is primarily based on regulating interstate commerce in firearms by generally prohibiting interstate firearms transfers except by manufacturers, dealers and importers licensed under a scheme set up under the Act.

The GCA was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on October 22, 1968, and is Title I of the U.S. federal firearms laws. The National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) is Title II. Both GCA and NFA are enforced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

GCA repealed the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, though many of its provisions were reenacted as part of the GCA, which revised the FFA and its predecessor, the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).[1]

History

The bill was initially prompted by the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1963.[2] The President was shot and killed with a rifle purchased by mail order from an ad in the magazine American Rifleman.[3] Congressional hearings followed and a ban on mail-order gun sales was discussed, but no law was passed until 1968. At the hearings NRA Executive Vice-President Franklin Orth supported a ban on mail-order sales, stating, “We do not think that any sane American, who calls himself an American, can object to placing into this bill the instrument which killed the president of the United States.”[4][5]

Precursors of the passage of the Gun Control Act were Senate Bill 1975 in 1963, “A Bill to Regulate the Interstate Shipment of Firearms”, and Senate Bill 1592 in 1965, “A Bill to Amend the Federal Firearms Act of 1938”. Both were introduced by Senator Thomas J. Dodd and met with fierce opposition on the floor but the bills also paved the way for the creation of the Gun Control Act of 1968.[6][7]

The April 4, 1968, assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., shortly followed by the June 5 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, as well as the shooting at the University of Texas two years previously, compounded by shifting societal attitudes towards gun ownership, renewed efforts to pass the bill.[4] On June 11, 1968, a tie vote in the House Judiciary Committee halted the bill’s passage.[8] On reconsideration nine days later, the bill was passed by the committee. The Senate Judiciary Committee similarly brought the bill to a temporary halt, but as in the House, it was passed on reconsideration.[9] House Resolution 17735, known as the Gun Control Act, was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on October 22, 1968[10] banning mail order sales of rifles and shotguns and prohibiting most felons, drug users and people found mentally incompetent from buying guns.[11][12]

Prohibited persons

The Gun Control Act of 1968 was amended in 1993 by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act which introduced a background check requirement of prospective gun purchasers by licensed sellers, and created a list of categories of individuals to whom the sale of firearms is prohibited:[13]

It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—

(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

(2) is a fugitive from justice;

(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;

(5) who, being an alien;

(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or

(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26)));

(6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced their citizenship;

(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that—

(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and

(B)

(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or

(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or

(9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

With the following exceptions:[14]

(ii) A person shall not be considered to have been convicted of such an offense for purposes of this chapter if the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense) unless the pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.

While many states upon completion of sentence automatically reinstate rights to vote, sit on a jury, or serve in public office, no states restore gun ownership rights upon completion of sentence.[15] Some states reinstate rights depending on the crime convicted of, and others have a petition process. Those convicted of a federal offense must contact the Office of the Pardon Attorney, Department of Justice, to receive a presidential pardon. Under the Department’s rules governing petitions for executive clemency, 28 C.F.R. §§ 1.1 et seq., an applicant must satisfy a minimum waiting period of five years before he becomes eligible to apply for a presidential pardon of his federal conviction.

According to a 21 Sep 2011 “Open Letter to All Federal Firearms Licensees” from ATF, holders of state-issued medical marijuana cards are automatically “prohibited people” under 18 U.S.C 922 (g)(3) and “shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition” by a medical marijuana card holder is a violation.[16]

Additionally, 18 U.S.C 922 (x) generally prohibits people under 18 years of age from possessing handguns or handgun ammunition with certain exceptions for employment, target practice, education, and a handgun possessed while defending the home of the juvenile or a home in which they are an invited guest.[17]

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 created the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to prevent firearms sales to such prohibited people.

Federal Firearms License (FFL) system

Main article: Federal Firearms License

The Gun Control Act mandated the licensing of individuals and companies engaged in the business of selling firearms. This provision effectively prohibited the direct mail order of firearms (except antique firearms) by consumers and mandated that anyone who wants to buy a gun in an interstate transaction from a source other than a private individual must do so through a federally licensed firearms dealer. The Act also banned unlicensed individuals from acquiring handguns outside their state of residence. The interstate purchase of long guns (rifles and shotguns) was not impeded by the Act so long as the seller is federally licensed and such a sale is allowed by both the state of purchase and the state of residence.

Private sales between residents of two different states are also prohibited without going through a licensed dealer, except for the case of a buyer holding a Curio & Relic license purchasing a firearm that qualifies as a curio or relic.

Private sales between unlicensed individuals who are residents of the same state are allowed under federal law so long as such transfers do not violate the other existing federal and state laws. While current law mandates that a background check be performed if the seller has a federal firearms license, private parties living in the same state are not required to perform such checks under federal law.

A person who does not have a Federal Firearms License may not be in the business of buying or selling firearms. Individuals buying and selling firearms without a federal license must be doing so from their own personal collection.

Under the Gun Control Act, a federally licensed importer, manufacturer, dealer or collector shall not sell or deliver any rifle or shotgun or ammunition for rifle or shotgun to any individual less than 18 years of age, nor any handgun or ammunition for a handgun to any individual less than 21 years of age.[18]

Gunsmith and factory repair exception

While the Gun Control Act prohibits the direct mail-ordering of firearms, a person may ship a gun via contract carrier (such as United Parcel Service (UPS), United States Postal Service or FedEx) to a gunsmith (who has an FFL) or the gunmaker’s factory for repairs or modification. After the repair work is done, the gunsmith or the factory can ship the gun directly back to the customer.

Import restrictions

ATF Form 4590 (“Factoring Criteria for Weapons”)

The GCA created what is known as the “sporting purposes” standard for imported firearms, saying that they must “be generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes”. GCA sporting purposes includes hunting and organized competitive target shooting, but does not include “plinking” or “practical shooting” (which the ATF says is closer to police/combat-style competition and not comparable to more traditional types of sports), nor does it allow for collection for historical or design interest.[19][20]: 16–18

Marking requirements

The law also required that all newly manufactured firearms produced by licensed manufacturers in the United States and imported into the United States bear a gun serial number. Firearms manufactured prior to the Gun Control Act and firearms manufactured by non-FFLs remain exempt from the serial number requirement. Defacement or removal of the serial number (if present) is a felony offense.

Commentary

In a June 1966 essay, Neal Knox wrote that what was then called the Dodd Bill was opposed by outdoorsmen and conservationists Harry R. Woodward, C. R. Gutermuth of the Wildlife Management Institute, Richard H. Stroud of the Sport Fishing Institute, Howard Carter Jr. of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, E. C. Hadley of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute, Robert T. Dennis of the Izaak Walton League, “and countless other sportsmen, and sportsmen and industry groups” because it would have a far-reaching and damaging effect on the hunting and shooting sports, while failing to reduce crime.[21]

In his remarks upon signing the act in October 1968, Johnson said:

Congress adopted most of our recommendations. But this bill—as big as this bill is—still falls short, because we just could not get the Congress to carry out the requests we made of them. I asked for the national registration of all guns and the licensing of those who carry those guns. For the fact of life is that there are over 160 million guns in this country—more firearms than families. If guns are to be kept out of the hands of the criminal, out of the hands of the insane, and out of the hands of the irresponsible, then we just must have licensing. If the criminal with a gun is to be tracked down quickly, then we must have registration in this country. The voices that blocked these safeguards were not the voices of an aroused nation. They were the voices of a powerful lobby, a gun lobby, that has prevailed for the moment in an election year.[10]

At the time of its passage in 1968, NRA executive vice president Franklin Orth wrote in American Riflemanthat “the measure as a whole appears to be one that the sportsmen of America can live with”.[22]: 95 [23]

In the May 1993 issue of Guns & Ammo magazine, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) compared the GCA to Nazi gun laws.[24][25]

In a 2011 article noting the death of former U.S. Senator James A. McClure, the NRA called provisions of the GCA “draconian”.[26] McClure was cosponsor of the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA) of 1986, also called the McClure-Volkmer Act.[26]

Political scientist Robert Spitzer wrote in 2011 that the Gun Control Act of 1968 “provides an ideal case study to highlight the political processes affecting a direct effort to regulate firearms”.[27] He also stated in his book that President Johnson’s proposal called for national registration of all guns as well as licensing for all gun carriers,[10] but his influence over the enacted law was small.[27] House Rules Committee chair William Colmer only released H.R. 17735 to the floor after Judiciary Committee chair Emanuel Celler promised to oppose efforts to add licensing and registration provisions.[28]

Case law

I’m good to go as well as many others per the law.

2 Likes

Appreciate your sharing. I’ve a relative with a past record. Today, he’s a great father and hard working tax payer. He was hesitant to apply. I encourage him.

2 Likes

That’s is what family is all about supporting one another. 2A strong

2 Likes

Just read an article about that. Some misdemeanors carry a felony sentence, even though the offense itself is considered a misdemeanor. Drunk driving is one of those types of offenses in some states. You can get up to five years in prison for a drunk driving conviction. That under federal definition is a felony sentence and while the state may not consider the conviction a felony, the feds, since 1961 have considered any sentence over a year to be a felony sentence and can exclude you from owning a firearms, parts or ammunition. The article even contained the appropriate federal language, so I think I am on pretty safe ground with this general overview. Not a lawyer, never played one in the entertainment field but I did spend 20+ years as a court reporter in CA.

2 Likes