Skip to comments.
Records show vet denied right to buy gun over 1971 pot charge was never convicted
The Houston Chronicle's Narco Confidential ^
| August 30, 2013
| Dane Schiller
Posted on 09/01/2013 2:09:25 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-33 last
To: 2ndDivisionVet
It’s my recollection that possession was a felony in Texas back then. It was long before I moved here, but I seem to recall talk about it.
21
posted on
09/01/2013 6:39:51 AM PDT
by
PAR35
To: Chainmail
Didn't say the codification made it right. I happen to disagree with the law. The only slender, minuscule and vanishingly tiny encouragement I can extract out of this pitiful situation is that they, at the bare minimum, are not violating their own codes.
See, because that's next.
22
posted on
09/01/2013 6:41:01 AM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(Early 2009 to 7/21/2013 - RIP my little girl Cathy. You were the best cat ever. You will be missed.)
To: logi_cal869; Lazamataz
Your story is right on point: these extra powers have oozed all through our many governments and your friend was probably an inch from losing his life as well as any future right to bear arms - since our law enforcement officers have become antiterrorist commandos and we're the "terrorists". We haven't voted this stuff in, we haven't consented to lose our constitutional rights, haven't agreed to prosecution without due process, yet here we are.
If we just sit still and hope all of this blows over, it becomes irreversible.
23
posted on
09/01/2013 6:52:21 AM PDT
by
Chainmail
(A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
To: Gaffer
Something isnt right here. Was he charged under Federal or Local/State law? Ive heard that here in Georgia, one can seek a pardon letter from the Governor for things like this. At least from my understanding the NICS check is used by the state to determine whether to allow the purchase or not. Essentially, the NICS check being a backstop for the state. Am I wrong here? Full of it?
I'd guess that these were state charges, not federal. Basic local police stuff.
Herein lies the problem with the NICS background checks - these older criminal case records were not all retained using the same system; there were as many subtly different formats as there are county courthouses. I'll bet data from these old records was collated by some courthouse records room employee using a template. I wonder how many other people are marked down as "convicted" improperly?
24
posted on
09/01/2013 6:59:17 AM PDT
by
Charles Martel
(Endeavor to persevere...)
To: An.American.Expatriate
Requiring a background check converts an inalienable right into a government granted privilege. Any background check is unconstitutional. Now ask what clause allows banning possession of a plant.
25
posted on
09/01/2013 7:05:12 AM PDT
by
SpeakerToAnimals
(I hope to earn a name in battle)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
He should just go buy a gun privately. By the time this all gets sorted out he will die of old age.
26
posted on
09/01/2013 8:41:47 AM PDT
by
Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
To: Gaffer
He was merely arrested, never charged or convicted of ANYTHING! Can you believe it?
27
posted on
09/01/2013 9:21:13 AM PDT
by
2ndDivisionVet
(I aim to raise a million plus for Gov. Palin. What'll you do?.)
To: Durus; RC one
28
posted on
09/01/2013 9:24:45 AM PDT
by
2ndDivisionVet
(I aim to raise a million plus for Gov. Palin. What'll you do?.)
To: Lazamataz
He was only arrested. He never went to trial and was never convicted of any crime. Read it again.
29
posted on
09/01/2013 9:26:06 AM PDT
by
2ndDivisionVet
(I aim to raise a million plus for Gov. Palin. What'll you do?.)
To: PAR35
For a long time it was, then it was changed, then it was changed back, then back to misdemeanor again. Depends on the numbber of drug warriors in the legislature and how many believe the DEA’s “10 times stronger” bullpuckey.
30
posted on
09/01/2013 10:44:54 AM PDT
by
jimt
(Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed.)
To: DuncanWaring
Just a starting point.
If they served their time their rights should be restored the
31
posted on
09/01/2013 11:49:52 AM PDT
by
Vendome
(Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
To: RC one
Shoot even felonies (though I’m sure no one would be willing to tackle that for political reasons). If someone has “paid their debt” and demonstrated decent discipline outside of prison for a few years, what’s the problem? Dems think they should be allowed to VOTE, which is far more dangerous.
32
posted on
09/01/2013 1:19:33 PM PDT
by
Still Thinking
(Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
To: Lazamataz
Of course, this sort of s**t is why we strenuously opposed background checks to begin with, no?Absolutely YES!!!!
33
posted on
09/01/2013 5:40:26 PM PDT
by
2nd amendment mama
( www.2asisters.org | Self defense is a basic human right!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-33 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson