How did you make out on this? Any word yet 
25 years and counting :thumb:
25 years and counting :thumb:
Firearm ownership and misdemeanor DV
In 1994 and again in 1996 I was falsely accused of domestic violence because my ex wife was having an affair with other people and I decided to leave her. As result I was convicted. In October of 1996 Democratic Senator Frank D. Laughtenberg from New Jersey went into a closed session and made law what is now called the Laughtenberg amendment, which strips the right to own, possess or have access to a firearm. I have created a petition to repeal this law and need 100,000 signatures before February 16, 2019. Below is the gist of my petition: Dear friends,
I wanted to let you know about a new petition I created on We the People, a new feature on WhiteHouse.gov, and ask for your support. Will you add your name to mine? If this petition gets 99,999 signatures by February 16, 2019, the White House will review it and respond!
We the People allows anyone to create and sign petitions asking the White House to take action on a range of issues. If a petition gets enough support, the White House will issue an official response.
You can view and sign the petition here:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/repeal-1996-laughtenberg-amendment-brady-bill
Here's some more information about this petition:
Repeal the 1996 Laughtenberg Amendment to the Brady bill
The 1996 Laughtenberg amendment is unconstitutional in that it denies law abiding citizens that have been convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence charge from owning possessing or having access to a firearm. This law basically denies us the right to protect our own lives or those of our families in cases of extreme emergencies and does not give equal representation to all. This law also cost many of those in law enforcement and military to resign thereby creating a financial hardship on many otherwise law abiding citizens.
I would ask that any who sign to please pass this on to all that they know and to post on your facebook pages and other social media. Thank you for taking the time to read this all of the way through.
I wanted to let you know about a new petition I created on We the People, a new feature on WhiteHouse.gov, and ask for your support. Will you add your name to mine? If this petition gets 99,999 signatures by February 16, 2019, the White House will review it and respond!
We the People allows anyone to create and sign petitions asking the White House to take action on a range of issues. If a petition gets enough support, the White House will issue an official response.
You can view and sign the petition here:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/repeal-1996-laughtenberg-amendment-brady-bill
Here's some more information about this petition:
Repeal the 1996 Laughtenberg Amendment to the Brady bill
The 1996 Laughtenberg amendment is unconstitutional in that it denies law abiding citizens that have been convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence charge from owning possessing or having access to a firearm. This law basically denies us the right to protect our own lives or those of our families in cases of extreme emergencies and does not give equal representation to all. This law also cost many of those in law enforcement and military to resign thereby creating a financial hardship on many otherwise law abiding citizens.
I would ask that any who sign to please pass this on to all that they know and to post on your facebook pages and other social media. Thank you for taking the time to read this all of the way through.
121 - 132 of 132 Posts
Since somebody decided to bump this old thing . . . .
Ghost, totally sympathize with you. Me? It happened in 1982 in the C.S.S.R.. I was very young, never really been in a jail at all so when the judge said, if you successfully complete an anger management class ($$ for the system) and a few months probation ($$ for the system) and pay a little fine( $$ for the system), we'll give you a deferred prosecution and it won't even go on your record. So like a good little boy, I did all that. And I also learned to walk away from a physical fight with anyone you live with and/or are related to.
I even bought a handgun in the C.S.S.R. in 1985. Full on background check, fifteen day waiting period, the works. After waiting said fifteen days, went home with my handgun.
Fast forward to 1999 or so. I took a rifle of mine to the pawn shop to get a loan on it. Lo and behold when I went to get my own rifle back, they had to run the FFL thingy and I WAS DENIED. I got to talk the NCIC person and they mentioned said incident from Long Beach, CA in 1983. I was floored.
Obviously over the years and years I have looked into this over and over again, and as I have become more successful in life, even looked into hiring an attorney, damn the cost. Because it was in the C.S.S.R. there is nothing I can do. Apparently, in the C.S.S.R. you have to loose ALL your civil rights to be able to get restoration. How convenient! You do not loose your voting rights from a DV.
The main point that arises here is the constitutionality of this and many if not all gun laws. We have allowed the slow but sure erosion of our rights. We allowed the convicted felon thing to be OK because, "Things are different now". The domestic violence thing because "things are different now". People don't really need machine guns, c'mon man. common sense gun laws. Ban them bumpstocks. Take them first, due process alter. But re-read the quotes of the founding fathers that Ghost posted way back on page three, post #50. This one really stuck out to me:
I close with this, the Second amendment says, "shall not be infringed." Period. The founders were smart enough to know how to write, ". . . shall not be infringed unless you have been convicted of certain crimes". Just like they did not write "the right of the people to carry certain arms . . ".
But they did not.
Ghost, totally sympathize with you. Me? It happened in 1982 in the C.S.S.R.. I was very young, never really been in a jail at all so when the judge said, if you successfully complete an anger management class ($$ for the system) and a few months probation ($$ for the system) and pay a little fine( $$ for the system), we'll give you a deferred prosecution and it won't even go on your record. So like a good little boy, I did all that. And I also learned to walk away from a physical fight with anyone you live with and/or are related to.
I even bought a handgun in the C.S.S.R. in 1985. Full on background check, fifteen day waiting period, the works. After waiting said fifteen days, went home with my handgun.
Fast forward to 1999 or so. I took a rifle of mine to the pawn shop to get a loan on it. Lo and behold when I went to get my own rifle back, they had to run the FFL thingy and I WAS DENIED. I got to talk the NCIC person and they mentioned said incident from Long Beach, CA in 1983. I was floored.
Obviously over the years and years I have looked into this over and over again, and as I have become more successful in life, even looked into hiring an attorney, damn the cost. Because it was in the C.S.S.R. there is nothing I can do. Apparently, in the C.S.S.R. you have to loose ALL your civil rights to be able to get restoration. How convenient! You do not loose your voting rights from a DV.
The main point that arises here is the constitutionality of this and many if not all gun laws. We have allowed the slow but sure erosion of our rights. We allowed the convicted felon thing to be OK because, "Things are different now". The domestic violence thing because "things are different now". People don't really need machine guns, c'mon man. common sense gun laws. Ban them bumpstocks. Take them first, due process alter. But re-read the quotes of the founding fathers that Ghost posted way back on page three, post #50. This one really stuck out to me:
See the date there? Reminds me of this quote as well, "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun" Eccl 1:9 The founders knew this. There were evil dangerous folks around when the Bill of Rights was written. Criminals and crime is NOT something new at all."The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776
I close with this, the Second amendment says, "shall not be infringed." Period. The founders were smart enough to know how to write, ". . . shall not be infringed unless you have been convicted of certain crimes". Just like they did not write "the right of the people to carry certain arms . . ".
But they did not.
I'm truly sorry that you had to go through that Teddy. Right now I am waiting to see if my letter comes in the mail saying yes or no. They were supposed to review my case last month on the 23rd but then again they were supposed to look at it back in June and postponed it due to CV-19. I keep praying that they say yes and I have my faith in God that he will answer my prayers. Until then I do what I must to stay out of trouble, and that means not having any firearms even though I completely agree with you about the founders and the constitution. But what good is it for me to have one if I end up in prison for it? Unless there is a huge change of heart about what the 2nd means, I will just have to wait. Anyways, I still believe in God first and foremost and I believe what the Bible says about believing what you pray for has come to pass and it shall. I still keep my head on a swivel and I carry a Gerber strongarm with me everywhere I go. I know it is nothing against a gun but maybe it will give me some leverage in an unfair fight. :thumb:Since somebody decided to bump this old thing . . . .
Ghost, totally sympathize with you. Me? It happened in 1982 in the C.S.S.R.. I was very young, never really been in a jail at all so when the judge said, if you successfully complete an anger management class ($$ for the system) and a few months probation ($$ for the system) and pay a little fine( $$ for the system), we'll give you a deferred prosecution and it won't even go on your record. So like a good little boy, I did all that. And I also learned to walk away from a physical fight with anyone you live with and/or are related to.
I even bought a handgun in the C.S.S.R. in 1985. Full on background check, fifteen day waiting period, the works. After waiting said fifteen days, went home with my handgun.
Fast forward to 1999 or so. I took a rifle of mine to the pawn shop to get a loan on it. Lo and behold when I went to get my own rifle back, they had to run the FFL thingy and I WAS DENIED. I got to talk the NCIC person and they mentioned said incident from Long Beach, CA in 1983. I was floored.
Obviously over the years and years I have looked into this over and over again, and as I have become more successful in life, even looked into hiring an attorney, damn the cost. Because it was in the C.S.S.R. there is nothing I can do. Apparently, in the C.S.S.R. you have to loose ALL your civil rights to be able to get restoration. How convenient! You do not loose your voting rights from a DV.
The main point that arises here is the constitutionality of this and many if not all gun laws. We have allowed the slow but sure erosion of our rights. We allowed the convicted felon thing to be OK because, "Things are different now". The domestic violence thing because "things are different now". People don't really need machine guns, c'mon man. common sense gun laws. Ban them bumpstocks. Take them first, due process alter. But re-read the quotes of the founding fathers that Ghost posted way back on page three, post #50. This one really stuck out to me:
See the date there? Reminds me of this quote as well, "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun" Eccl 1:9 The founders knew this. There were evil dangerous folks around when the Bill of Rights was written. Criminals and crime is NOT something new at all.
I close with this, the Second amendment says, "shall not be infringed." Period. The founders were smart enough to know how to write, ". . . shall not be infringed unless you have been convicted of certain crimes". Just like they did not write "the right of the people to carry certain arms . . ".
But they did not.
THE EFFECTS of Lautenbug..
an example...
2 brothers, 1-18 and 1-19 doing a little drinking and get into a fight as brothers tend to do on occasion.
Cops come,
brothers spend the night in jail,
both go before a JP, plead to D&D , time served and $50 each.
10 years later, Luatenbug... which should have been canned because it literally was an ex-post facto law comes into effect.
both of them now are forever lost as to gun ownership.
They had no knowledge that guilty plea would have that effect
there is nothing corrective in the law that allows for redress of their issue.
I have always believed it to be unconstitutional as it did not account for people who had no knowledge and could not make a voluntary and knowing waiver of their rights to trial etc and also a knowing and intelligent plea.
Further it greatly enhanced the criminal penalties for actions years before, in essence turning a wrist slap misdemeanor into essentially a felony.
One day we will have to re-remind the congress critters who they really work for...
an example...
2 brothers, 1-18 and 1-19 doing a little drinking and get into a fight as brothers tend to do on occasion.
Cops come,
brothers spend the night in jail,
both go before a JP, plead to D&D , time served and $50 each.
10 years later, Luatenbug... which should have been canned because it literally was an ex-post facto law comes into effect.
both of them now are forever lost as to gun ownership.
They had no knowledge that guilty plea would have that effect
there is nothing corrective in the law that allows for redress of their issue.
I have always believed it to be unconstitutional as it did not account for people who had no knowledge and could not make a voluntary and knowing waiver of their rights to trial etc and also a knowing and intelligent plea.
Further it greatly enhanced the criminal penalties for actions years before, in essence turning a wrist slap misdemeanor into essentially a felony.
One day we will have to re-remind the congress critters who they really work for...
unfortunately for me and millions more like me, that does little to no good. In order to get this overturned it would take an act of the Supreme Court (meaning an Army of Lawyers) and they do not wish to hear cases involving the Lautenberg Amendment. So we are just hung out to dry. Thousands upon thousands of law enforcement were terminated because of this bill and that does not even mention Military personnel that was other than honorably discharged because of it. And then there is the little guy, like me, who does not have the money to spend on a legal battle that more than likely he will lose. So what can we do other than abide by it until it personally affects someone in power and it gets overturned?THE EFFECTS of Lautenbug..
an example...
2 brothers, 1-18 and 1-19 doing a little drinking and get into a fight as brothers tend to do on occasion.
Cops come,
brothers spend the night in jail,
both go before a JP, plead to D&D , time served and $50 each.
10 years later, Luatenbug... which should have been canned because it literally was an ex-post facto law comes into effect.
both of them now are forever lost as to gun ownership.
They had no knowledge that guilty plea would have that effect
there is nothing corrective in the law that allows for redress of their issue.
I have always believed it to be unconstitutional as it did not account for people who had no knowledge and could not make a voluntary and knowing waiver of their rights to trial etc and also a knowing and intelligent plea.
Further it greatly enhanced the criminal penalties for actions years before, in essence turning a wrist slap misdemeanor into essentially a felony.
One day we will have to re-remind the congress critters who they really work for...
In Texas assault can be touching somebody with a feather. So if I throw a crunched up wad of paper at a family member I could lose my gun rights. That’s wrong and it needs to change.
My understanding is that recent court rulings have invalidated the revocation of gun rights for plea bargains where the accused was not informed of the loss of gun rights in the agreement for misdemeanors. .Since somebody decided to bump this old thing . . . .
Ghost, totally sympathize with you. Me? It happened in 1982 in the C.S.S.R.. I was very young, never really been in a jail at all so when the judge said, if you successfully complete an anger management class ($$ for the system) and a few months probation ($$ for the system) and pay a little fine( $$ for the system), we'll give you a deferred prosecution and it won't even go on your record. So like a good little boy, I did all that. And I also learned to walk away from a physical fight with anyone you live with and/or are related to.
I even bought a handgun in the C.S.S.R. in 1985. Full on background check, fifteen day waiting period, the works. After waiting said fifteen days, went home with my handgun.
Fast forward to 1999 or so. I took a rifle of mine to the pawn shop to get a loan on it. Lo and behold when I went to get my own rifle back, they had to run the FFL thingy and I WAS DENIED. I got to talk the NCIC person and they mentioned said incident from Long Beach, CA in 1983. I was floored.
Obviously over the years and years I have looked into this over and over again, and as I have become more successful in life, even looked into hiring an attorney, damn the cost. Because it was in the C.S.S.R. there is nothing I can do. Apparently, in the C.S.S.R. you have to loose ALL your civil rights to be able to get restoration. How convenient! You do not loose your voting rights from a DV.
The main point that arises here is the constitutionality of this and many if not all gun laws. We have allowed the slow but sure erosion of our rights. We allowed the convicted felon thing to be OK because, "Things are different now". The domestic violence thing because "things are different now". People don't really need machine guns, c'mon man. common sense gun laws. Ban them bumpstocks. Take them first, due process alter. But re-read the quotes of the founding fathers that Ghost posted way back on page three, post #50. This one really stuck out to me:
See the date there? Reminds me of this quote as well, "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun" Eccl 1:9 The founders knew this. There were evil dangerous folks around when the Bill of Rights was written. Criminals and crime is NOT something new at all."The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776
I close with this, the Second amendment says, "shall not be infringed." Period. The founders were smart enough to know how to write, ". . . shall not be infringed unless you have been convicted of certain crimes". Just like they did not write "the right of the people to carry certain arms . . ".
But they did not.
if you can find said rulings please inform me where I can find them as well, because when I plead no contest in '94 I specifically asked if I would lose my right to own firearms and was told no because it was just a misdemeanor and again in '96 I asked the same question and given the same answer.My understanding is that recent court rulings have invalidated the revocation of gun rights for plea bargains where the accused was not informed of the loss of gun rights in the agreement for misdemeanors. .
If a citizen is safe enough to live in the community, then they should have all rights restored upon completion of sentence.
I believe that was the intent of the framers when they said every free man should have the right to bear arms.If a citizen is safe enough to live in the community, then they should have all rights restored upon completion of sentence.
My understanding is that recent court rulings have invalidated the revocation of gun rights for plea bargains where the accused was not informed of the loss of gun rights in the agreement for misdemeanors. .
Me too. As much as I would love to believe this, suc a huge percentage of criminal prosecutions are settled via plea bargains, there would be a ton of folks then not affected by Lautenberg and actually this thread would not even exist.if you can find said rulings please inform me where I can find them as well, because when I plead no contest in '94 I specifically asked if I would lose my right to own firearms and was told no because it was just a misdemeanor and again in '96 I asked the same question and given the same answer.
I argued that law with numerous other Leo's and always won based on one simple principle: How can you be found guilty of something that didn't exist when you committed the crime?
Every day, you drive down the same section of road on your way to work. Same road, same time every day, in the same car at exactly 44 miles an hour because the speed limit is 45 and you don't want to push it. There's a cop that sits on the corner every time.
Then one day, you see that they've put in a crosswalk and the speed is now only 15 miles an hour. No problem. You saw it in time and were going 14 miles an hour through that zone. (Gotta give it that 1 mph cushion!)
But a cop pulls you over anyway, the same cop you passed every morning for the past years. He writes you a ticket for all kinds of violations that will cost several thousand $$ by the time it's done.
The reason? Because you were going 44 mph every morning for the past several years and the speed limit was made retroactive back to forever!
That's what the DV law did! And honestly, I don't think it saved any lives. The ones who are going to do harm to their ex's are already breaking the law by doing the harm. What makes anybody think they'd refrain from carrying a gun because it was against the law?
I'd often get asked by the victims what they should do now. I'd tell them to get a restraining order. They'd sometimes smile all sad like and say they already had one but it didn't work. Then I'd tell them to get a little dog and a big gun. Learn to trust the one and to use the other. Or get a big dog and a little gun. Best is a big dog and huge gun.
Every day, you drive down the same section of road on your way to work. Same road, same time every day, in the same car at exactly 44 miles an hour because the speed limit is 45 and you don't want to push it. There's a cop that sits on the corner every time.
Then one day, you see that they've put in a crosswalk and the speed is now only 15 miles an hour. No problem. You saw it in time and were going 14 miles an hour through that zone. (Gotta give it that 1 mph cushion!)
But a cop pulls you over anyway, the same cop you passed every morning for the past years. He writes you a ticket for all kinds of violations that will cost several thousand $$ by the time it's done.
The reason? Because you were going 44 mph every morning for the past several years and the speed limit was made retroactive back to forever!
That's what the DV law did! And honestly, I don't think it saved any lives. The ones who are going to do harm to their ex's are already breaking the law by doing the harm. What makes anybody think they'd refrain from carrying a gun because it was against the law?
I'd often get asked by the victims what they should do now. I'd tell them to get a restraining order. They'd sometimes smile all sad like and say they already had one but it didn't work. Then I'd tell them to get a little dog and a big gun. Learn to trust the one and to use the other. Or get a big dog and a little gun. Best is a big dog and huge gun.
121 - 132 of 132 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Survivalist Forum
A forum community dedicated to survivalists and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, gear, DIY projects, hobbies, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Carne Frio
793 Replies
Forrest Mosby
518 Replies
subvetredux
489 Replies
