Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Domestic Battery and possession of firearms question

  1. #1
    Regular Member renoglock22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Posts
    170

    Domestic Battery and possession of firearms question

    Due to the awesome investigative work of the sheriff's department and our fine justice system here in Washoe County, my wife was just stuck with a domestic battery charge. During her hearing the judge told her that she could not own or possess a firearm and that if I had any firearms I would have to keep them somewhere else away from the home. I don't care what they say but they are not infringing on my rights because of someone else. I also looked up our firearms laws and NRS 202.360 under ownership and possession of firearms by certain persons and as far as I can see it only pertains to felons and there is no mention of misdemeanor domestic battery in there at all. So is the judge just blowing smoke or is there a law that states she can't own or possess a firearm?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    86
    Was she convicted? I am not an attorney, but the Lautenberg amendment [18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8)(C)(ii)] would prohibit her from owning firearms; perhaps that is what the judge was referring to.

    I think you can make the case that the guns are in a safe to which only you have access to.

    mbogo

  3. #3
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by renoglock22 View Post
    Due to the awesome investigative work of the sheriff's department and our fine justice system here in Washoe County, my wife was just stuck with a domestic battery charge. During her hearing the judge told her that she could not own or possess a firearm and that if I had any firearms I would have to keep them somewhere else away from the home. I don't care what they say but they are not infringing on my rights because of someone else. I also looked up our firearms laws and NRS 202.360 under ownership and possession of firearms by certain persons and as far as I can see it only pertains to felons and there is no mention of misdemeanor domestic battery in there at all. So is the judge just blowing smoke or is there a law that states she can't own or possess a firearm?
    I don't know what the actual statute is but since when does a god (the judge) have to concern himself with the law?

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Was you wife criminally charged with domestic battery, or did she receive a protective order?

    Absent the protective order I can find nothing in Nev. law that says she is disqualified from possession of firearms.http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-2...l#NRS202Sec360 Closest I could come is that she might have her concealed permit revoked just for having been charged, if someone files the appropriate paperwork. Nothing seems to allow the Sheriff to do it ex parte.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    As far as I know, YOU are not now a prohibited person, and should not need to move your firearms. It would be understandable if you were told to ensure they were secure from her possession if she is indeed now 'encumbered.'


    The act bans shipment, transport, ownership and use of guns or ammunition by individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, or who are under a restraining (protection) order for domestic abuse in all 50 states. The act also makes it unlawful to knowingly sell or give a firearm or ammunition to such persons.
    As to the specifics, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesti...fender_Gun_Ban would be a place to start. There should be ample links.

    Note that the DV offender gun ban is for convicted persons, and it is as restrictive as being a felon wrt firearm possession, as near as I understand it.

    A protective order might also include a court stipulation barring possession on a temporary basis, but AFAIK, that isn't automatic.
    Last edited by wrightme; 05-18-2012 at 05:33 PM.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  6. #6
    Regular Member renoglock22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Posts
    170
    She was convicted of misdemeanor domestic battery but there is no protection order. So why is it if you are charged with DB you can't own or possess a firearm? I can own a gun if convicted of assault or just battery but because it happened at home guns are banned? makes no sense to me.

  7. #7
    Regular Member DooFstersGirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Nellis AFB
    Posts
    102
    They say you can't have a firearm if charged with a domestic battery charge because they're afraid of it being used in another dispute. (if there is one) A guy I've known for years was convicted of DB and he had to show the court proof that his weapons were not in his name anymore nor in his possession. He even admitted that he might lose his cool with his wife again and didn't want them around because he didn't want to add an even bigger problem to the mix with a weapon being involved.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    Quote Originally Posted by renoglock22 View Post
    She was convicted of misdemeanor domestic battery but there is no protection order. So why is it if you are charged with DB you can't own or possess a firearm? I can own a gun if convicted of assault or just battery but because it happened at home guns are banned? makes no sense to me.
    The Lautenberg Act has been in effect for years.

    I personally believe it is unconstitutional to take away a God-given right for a misdemeanor charge.

    Sounds like you might need to consult an attorney.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by varminter22 View Post
    The Lautenberg Act has been in effect for years.

    I personally believe it is unconstitutional to take away a God-given right for a misdemeanor charge.....
    I agree with its wrongness as a law. I think its biggest travesty of justice was making the effects retroactive. A person convicted of such a misdemeanor decades ago lost his current rights to still own firearms, even after decades of no problems. Remember how many cops got [unarmed] desk jobs after the law took effect?

    That said, I think wife-beaters should be publicly beaten the first time and hanged the second time.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    Me too, MAC.

  11. #11
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    I agree with its wrongness as a law. I think its biggest travesty of justice was making the effects retroactive. A person convicted of such a misdemeanor decades ago lost his current rights to still own firearms, even after decades of no problems. Remember how many cops got [unarmed] desk jobs after the law took effect?

    That said, I think wife-beaters should be publicly beaten the first time and hanged the second time.
    Many more women these days are being arrested for spousal abuse. In the <old> days women did not get arrested because men did not admit to it and did not press charges. Now the cops don't need a complaint to be filed.

    One of the big problems is that as an example, a women could attack a man, he slaps her to defend himself and when the police show up she has a red mark on her face. The man gets arrested and because of that, loses his right to own a firearm.

    The only recourse as I understand it is to go to court to try to get your rights restored. Of course many people do not have that option do to the money involved.

    I like the old days in that when you served your time, you have paid your debt and were a full citizen again.

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  12. #12
    Regular Member renoglock22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Posts
    170
    Just to be clear for everybody, there was no abuse of any kind. My son got beat up at school and for some reason the teacher didn't catch it and the next day when he went to school with bruises they asked him if someone at home hit him. Well of course he gets spanked every now and then so he said yes. Well in this great state they will take the word of a six year old out of context. Since he answered their question of "Did someone at home hit you?" with "yes" they automatically assumed my wife left the bruises without doing any kind of investigative work and now she can no longer own a gun. I read that after a period of time she could have the charge sealed and get her rights back. How true is this?

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,552

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by renoglock22 View Post
    they automatically assumed my wife left the bruises without doing any kind of investigative work and now she can no longer own a gun. I read that after a period of time she could have the charge sealed and get her rights back. How true is this?
    What happened at the trial? Did you all have an attorney? Is your wife still allowed contact with your son?
    Total ignorance: an Obama supporter's stock in trade
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    All the talk about Overthrowing Big Government, Revolution, etc., it's just another one of those nostalgic ideas that individuals have idealized.
    O RLY?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...and_rebellions
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Books are overrated; and so is history.

  14. #14
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713
    As a side note, federal laws preventing felons and misdemeanor of domestic violence convicts from owning firearms do not consider "antique firearms" like the Remington 1858 to be a firearm, and state law only prohibits felons from owning guns, not those convicted of misdemeanors of domestic violence.

  15. #15
    Regular Member renoglock22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by ManInBlack View Post
    What happened at the trial? Did you all have an attorney? Is your wife still allowed contact with your son?
    It didn't go to trial because for them to drop the felony child abuse she had to plead to the domestic. She is allowed to be around my son because even CPS says she is no threat. We did have a lawyer but to take it to trial would have cost us money we don't have right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Felid`Maximus View Post
    As a side note, federal laws preventing felons and misdemeanor of domestic violence convicts from owning firearms do not consider "antique firearms" like the Remington 1858 to be a firearm, and state law only prohibits felons from owning guns, not those convicted of misdemeanors of domestic violence.
    I looked up state law and you are right, it says nothing about domestics no being able to own firearms but on this one it seems they know federal law and will enforce it.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,552
    Quote Originally Posted by renoglock22 View Post
    It didn't go to trial because for them to drop the felony child abuse she had to plead to the domestic. She is allowed to be around my son because even CPS says she is no threat. We did have a lawyer but to take it to trial would have cost us money we don't have right now.
    When you agree to plead to a domestic, there are very bad consequences. I think she might be stuck unless she can convince a judge to set aside the conviction (snowball's chance in hell).

    I had a friend get hemmed up on a B.S. D.V. charge (called in by a vindictive sister in law, who had just gotten done "celebrating" her 21st birthday). His wife refused to talk to the cops, as did the only other witness. He refused to plead to anything with D.V. attached to it. He even offered to plead guilty to a battery (which was more than what he was originally charged with, but didn't have D.V. attached to it). Eventually, with the help of his lawyer, he plead guilty to disturbing the peace.

    Bottom line, taking any D.V. plea is bad, bad news when it comes to your firearm rights.
    Total ignorance: an Obama supporter's stock in trade
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    All the talk about Overthrowing Big Government, Revolution, etc., it's just another one of those nostalgic ideas that individuals have idealized.
    O RLY?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...and_rebellions
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Books are overrated; and so is history.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •