DGDevin wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...

Has Gov. Perry decided Texas should remain within the Union after
all?

## Far as I know, it's still an open question.

Actually that question was settled back in the 1860s.


No, that question was settled in 1848 when The Republic of Texas joined the
United States by treaty.

Such things as concealed carry on college campuses, open carry,
restoring the right to felons, and so forth.

Excuse me, restoring the right to felons?

Right now, federal law permits a felon to OWN a gun if it's been
five or more years since his conviction was completed.

Really, so if someone is convicted and gets a ten-year sentence, he's
allowed to have a gun in his cell for the last five years?

No, it's five years after his conviction was completed. That is, he served
his time or his parole or completed probation.


On a more serious note, "permits" is a poor choice of words here
considering it requires the ex-con to apply for and be granted relief
from disabilities, it isn't automatic. It's also worth noting that
some very bad people who committed very serious and sometimes violent
crimes were able to have their right to own firearms restored and
then went onto commit more crimes which is partly why Congress
stripped funding from this program for years.

No. Not according to FEDERAL law. States may have their own rules, but as
far as federal "felon in possession," the five year rule applies.

Today, in all states but two (Wisconsin and Illinois), plus the
District of Columbia, it is possible for a private citizen to carry
a pistol concealed.

Possible, but not likely in some may-issue states and quite a pain
in the butt in others. 8,000,000 million people in New Jersey and
less than 1,000 CCW permits--what does that tell you?

That New Jersey is hopeless.

Aside from NJ (which is a de facto almost no CCW state), California,
Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island are
problematic for getting a permit (unless you're a Democratic member of
Congress); Alabama and Connecticut are half-hopeless as they can't
make up their minds if they are shall-issue states or not. Your
depiction of only Wisconsin, Illinois and D.C. as unfriendly to CCW
was inaccurate.

Wisconsin, Illinois, and D.C. are the only states in which it is against the
law, in all conditions, to carry concealed. The other states you mention at
least pay lip-service to concealed carry.


Remember, New Jersey is the home of Senator Lautenberg, who authored
the famous "Lautenberg Amendment" that prohibits gun possession of
ANYONE ever convicted of ANY form or degree of "domestic violence"
or under any order of protection.

This includes members of the military. And police officers.

The wisdom and/or technical construction of the law aside, once it is
the law then why should cops and service personnel be exempt?

I think EVERYBODY should be exempt if the enhancing act took place before
the Lautenberg Amendment took effect.

They should be exempt because the law is, in my view, almost an ex-post
facto law. There have been thousands of crimes or arrests that have taken
place in the past where misdemeanor domestic violence (MDV) was used as a
plea-bargain for some unrelated offense. Until the Lautenberg Amendment, no
one was EVER advised that pleading guilty to MDV would forever prevent them
from owning a gun. The weren't advised because it wasn't a sanction when
they offered their plea.

I saw a case where a drunk husband threw all his wife's things out of the
house because she went dancing! She wasn't even HOME when the carnage took
place! I recall one woman who spanked her 7-year old then plead guilty to
MDV to avoid a charge of child abuse. And so on.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:57:17 -0800, "DGDevin"
wrote:

relief from disabilities

That right there will get an ex-con clearance to own a gun and even
work in law enforcement. Stranger things happen.

In article ,
Oren wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:57:17 -0800, "DGDevin"
wrote:

relief from disabilities

That right there will get an ex-con clearance to own a gun and even
work in law enforcement. Stranger things happen.

There are many more impediments to him or her getting into law
enforcement than ex-con clearance. For example, it would still show up
on background checks, etc.

--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
---PJ O'Rourke

On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 06:54:36 -0500, Kurt Ullman
wrote:

In article ,
Oren wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:57:17 -0800, "DGDevin"
wrote:

relief from disabilities

That right there will get an ex-con clearance to own a gun and even
work in law enforcement. Stranger things happen.

There are many more impediments to him or her getting into law
enforcement than ex-con clearance. For example, it would still show up
on background checks, etc.

Yes. But having a rap-sheet won't necessarily preclude him from
working in law enforcement.

Depends if the agency hires him....