T Dubya
Campaign Veteran
Don't be so sensitive and quick to criticize. No one was attacking you personally.
I don't blame him one bit. Hunter 45 was out of line. Shouldn't be what we're about.
Don't be so sensitive and quick to criticize. No one was attacking you personally.
I don't blame him one bit. Hunter 45 was out of line. Shouldn't be what we're about.
I don't blame him one bit. Hunter 45 was out of line. Shouldn't be what we're about.
I'm still confused.
Is it you were convicted three years ago and are now applying for a CHP, or were you convicted three years ago and that conviction happened immediately before you applied for your CHP? My guess is the former but grammer is grammer and it's all I can do to parse the sentence.
I am also left to presume that your conviction was a misdemeanor and not a felony.
If all my presumptions are accurate you have a good case. I recommend that you retain the services of an attorney for your ore tenus hearing if for no other reason than because they are (presumably) more skilled than you are in presenting an argument (a legal term) in the way that a judge will not have difficulty following. Suffolk does need to be reminded that the laws are there for both sides of the bench to obey.
stay safe.
It's interesting TD. I was just discussing complicated with someone a few minutes ago. This board gets very complicated at times.
The OP seemed sincere to me and it is a problem we've helped with before even though it is a CHP issue.
A long time back, we had the same thing come up with Thousand Yard Shooter in Isle of Wight, except his was over some ancient bad check charges that had been settled. As I recall, there was some sniping there too.
I'm sure Hunter had his reasons and the OP is in good hands now.
The world is back in balance....for a few minutes:lol:
The world will be back in balance when justice is served and I am rightly issued a CHP lol.
The world will be in balance when you don't need one. Anywhere.:banghead:
Roscoe
Thats the truth. I feel that if I am allowed to purchase a firearm I should be able to conceal that firearm without having to apply for a permit and yadda yadda yadda. Constitutional Carry should be national law. Vermont and I believe Arizona have the right idea.
Please not a federal law - prefer nationwide consistency though.
States with Constitutional Carry:
Anyone who has a basic grasp of the English language should acknowledge that the court appears to be wrong in this case.I'm not saying the court is right or wrong, but can see how they may be looking at his drug conviction as a disqualifier. He used drugs and was convicted for using drugs. Proven by the court that he is a drug user whether he is currently using or not.
If someone is convicted of perjury and haven't lied lately, are they still considered a liar if they ever have to give testimony again?
If someone stole something and was convicted of theft and haven't stole anything for 3 years, are they still a thief?
If someone was convicted of murder, served their time, got out of jail and haven't killed anyone for 3 years after being released, are they still a murderer?
I wish him good luck in his endeavor to get his permit, but it looks like he is going to have a difficult fight on his hands.
Anyone who has a basic grasp of the English language should acknowledge that the court appears to be wrong in this case.
Paragraph E.8 is written entirely in the present tense. "8. An individual who is addicted to, or is an unlawful user or distributor of, marijuana, synthetic cannabinoids, or any controlled substance." Not "was".
Paragraph E.19 specifically covers the restrictions for persons who had issues in the past, and that paragraph clearly specifies the time that is required to pass before one becomes eligible again.
It seems fairly obvious that unless the court has evidence of present tense usage, they are in the wrong, and need to be slapped for it.
ETA: This is nothing more than a judge who is on his own accord changing the law from "shall issue" to "may issue". We already won this battle.
TFred
Just got off the phone with ArmedBarrister and I am disqualified under Code of Virginia 18.2-308.1(5)
He told me that being disqualified under that code is very rare. The reason the court gave me was wrong in the sense that an addict/user is someone who was convicted within the past year of a drug offense or someone who popped dirty on a drug test within the past year.
I will be eligible at the end of August 2014. Damn. Thanks for the help guys, I really appreciate it.
Well... that's a whole different subject altogether!Just got off the phone with ArmedBarrister and I am disqualified under Code of Virginia 18.2-308.1(5)
He told me that being disqualified under that code is very rare. The reason the court gave me was wrong in the sense that an addict/user is someone who was convicted within the past year of a drug offense or someone who popped dirty on a drug test within the past year.
I will be eligible at the end of August 2014. Damn. Thanks for the help guys, I really appreciate it.
Well... that's a whole different subject altogether!
TFred
Yep... Here's the link.Sorry, code of virginia 18.2-308.1:5
I hope this thread can be used to help someone else out if they need it.
Yep... Here's the link.
So if you can't purchase or transport, does that preclude OC as well?
TFred
§ 18.2-308.1:5. Purchase or transportation of firearm by persons convicted of certain drug offenses prohibited.
Any person who, within a thirty-six consecutive month period, has been convicted of two misdemeanor offenses under subsection B of § 18.2-248.1:1, § 18.2-250, or 18.2-250.1 shall be ineligible to purchase or transport a handgun. However, upon expiration of a period of five years from the date of the second conviction and provided the person has not been convicted of any such offense within that period, the ineligibility shall be removed.
(1995, c. 577; 2011, cc. 384, 410.)
I'm not saying the court is right or wrong, but can see how they may be looking at his drug conviction as a disqualifier. He used drugs and was convicted for using drugs. Proven by the court that he is a drug user whether he is currently using or not.
If someone is convicted of perjury and haven't lied lately, are they still considered a liar if they ever have to give testimony again?
If someone stole something and was convicted of theft and haven't stole anything for 3 years, are they still a thief?
If someone was convicted of murder, served their time, got out of jail and haven't killed anyone for 3 years after being released, are they still a murderer?
I wish him good luck in his endeavor to get his permit, but it looks like he is going to have a difficult fight on his hands.