Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Addressing criminal past on NC Application

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by Grifhunter View Post
    Owning a pistol is a civil right. Even in NY. "Moral Character" isn't a criteria to exercise the civil right to go to church, speak out against the government, or to own a pistol. If you arn't willing to stand up to the government for either one or all of your civil rights, then you deserve the chains you willingly accept. 42 US Section 1983 provides for reimbursement of attorneys fees when vindicating a civil right against the government. No one should be intimidated by government agents acting unlawfully.
    “Moral character” , what a fucking joke, it’s one sided.
    Last edited by Nordon; 06-11-2019, 06:09 AM.

    Comment


      #17
      As others have stated, you hit the nail on the head woth your original post. State the circumstances, that it was a mistake that you owned up too, you paid your debt to society and have had no instances since.

      I would also grab a current copy of your drver abstract and the disposition paperwork from the court.

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Bigrob View Post
        The fact of the matter is that they are bound to follow the law just as we are. No where in the penal law does it mention moral character, lastly when anyone hires a lawyer and sues to hold them accountable to the 6 month provision their license magically appears. (Including mine) An investigator not “feeling it” does not legally allow them to deny you. Your friend going through a divorce (unless allegations of domestic violence) does not prohibit you from owning a firearm, either legally or by newyork state and therefore would have legal recourse and a slam dunk at that.
        I'm guessing you never actually read the PL?

        S 400.00 Licenses to carry, possess, repair and dispose of firearms.
        1. Eligibility. No license shall be issued or renewed pursuant to this
        section except by the licensing officer, and then only after
        investigation and finding that all statements in a proper application
        for a license are true. No license shall be issued or renewed except for
        an applicant
        (a) twenty-one years of age or older, provided, however,
        that where such applicant has been honorably discharged from the United
        States army, navy, marine corps, air force or coast guard, or the
        national guard of the state of New York, no such age restriction shall
        apply; (b) of good moral character; (c) who has not been convicted
        anywhere of a felony or a serious offense or who is not the subject of
        an outstanding warrant of arrest issued upon the alleged commission of a
        felony or serious offense; (d) who is not a fugitive from justice; (e)
        who is not an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance
        as defined in section 21 U.S.C. 802;

        And again, this state sucks. The laws, the deprivations and climate suck.

        Kudos to your enthusiasm and your idealism, but you're wrong with pretty much everything you're saying above when it comes to the ground truths and factual application of their vision of why or why not you should be gifted a permit.
        Last edited by Sherm66; 06-11-2019, 11:25 AM.
        When they kick out your front door
        How you gonna come?
        With your hands on your head
        Or on the trigger of your gun?

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Grifhunter View Post

          In this day and age? What age are we in? People DIED for us to have the civil rights we have, and you deign it "irresponsible" to counsel against just laying down and taking it from some tin horn bureaucrats? Owning guns and shooting requires money. Getting the sports package on cable TV takes money. Cruises and ski vacations take money. Just because the suggestion requires the individual to spend money doesn't make the advice less sound.
          There are ways to get legal help on the cheap and as I said, the successful civil rights lawsuit results in the recoupment of attorneys fees. And as a practical matter, as stated above by others, the licensing people with very few exceptions back down at a $250 letter from an attorney threatening a civil rights action, rather than requiring a full blown court case.
          This is a BS answer full of internet bravado. In the real world, you'll find that lawyers don't come cheap, and that while the county will be glad to drag its heels racking up your legal bills, the county will magically drop their case before any possibility of it going against them, leaving you holding the bag and perhaps with tens of thousands in debt. Without a judgement in your favor (which will NEVER happen, both because the courts here won't support you, AND because nobody will let it get that far), you'll never be able to recuperate a dime of those legal fees, but good luck living in your dreamland.

          Additionally, this is not even legally a civil rights issue. This has been covered in the courts time and again, and they've upheld the "good moral character" provision every time. So, if you do get denied, and you do manage to get your rights restored in court, you'll still have a second mortgage on your house to pay off all on your own. And we're not talking a forgoing just a cruise and ski vacation kind of money if you try to (and will fail to) make a civil rights case out of it. The absurdity of this argument runs so deep that I can hardly present a reasonable response to it.

          Still, I'm not suggesting the OP throw in the towel, but I agree with the posts that raise the point that it will be an uphill battle. And if a denial is returned, that hill becomes far steeper.

          One problem I see here is that some of the advice is not quite nuanced enough. Some say to listen to the PLB and pull your application if they suggest it. Some say to forge on, regardless. I don't think either is necessarily the right answer. For starters, the PLB actively discourages applications, and will look for ANY opportunity to get someone to pull their app. You can rest assured that is the advice they will give in this situation. But if they do suggest that you hold your application for a year or two, then maybe they're giving you solid advice.

          Here's my advice. Keep a log of all of your interactions with the PLB. They might come in handy one day. Record every time you were there, every person you spoke with, and any book number and pages of their ledger that you made entries into (and be sure to make a ledger entry every time you're there, or else you're wasting your time there).

          And good luck with your application.

          Comment


            #20
            Absolutely ridiculous that this is the state of affairs in NY
            Take a young person shooting.... Take 2 or more if you can...

            Comment


              #21
              Was your DWI recorded as a felony or misdem?

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by -vanguard- View Post
                Was your DWI recorded as a felony or misdem?
                🤦🏻*♂️

                Comment


                  #23
                  I would like to thank those of you who took a lot of time to provide detailed responses. I am, and have always been, a staunch supporter of our civil rights but I am also a realist - it sounds like there are no definite answers here. The one thing I am optimistic about is that no one has said, from their experience or knowledge, this one incident in my past is an automatic disqualification.

                  Based upon the advice here I will follow along with my original course of action (direct and candid honesty explaining and accepting responsibility), make a record of all my interactions at the department, and listen to what they have to say. If their advice is to wait another year or two, I’ll roll with that. If their advice is to walk away completely I will definitely consult with an attorney before giving up completely. It sounds like being flat out denied is extremely detrimental and should be avoided unless I want to spend several thousands on legal fees.

                  Once again, I can’t thank you all enough for your feedback. I will provide updates as I go along in order to inform and possibly help someone in a similar situation in the future.


                  Comment


                    #24
                    Case law has allowed issuing agents a free hand in obstructing our right
                    Take a young person shooting.... Take 2 or more if you can...

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Keep us updated!

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by rlitman View Post

                        This is a BS answer full of internet bravado. In the real world, you'll find that lawyers don't come cheap, and that while the county will be glad to drag its heels racking up your legal bills, the county will magically drop their case before any possibility of it going against them, leaving you holding the bag and perhaps with tens of thousands in debt. Without a judgement in your favor (which will NEVER happen, both because the courts here won't support you, AND because nobody will let it get that far), you'll never be able to recuperate a dime of those legal fees, but good luck living in your dreamland.

                        Additionally, this is not even legally a civil rights issue. This has been covered in the courts time and again, and they've upheld the "good moral character" provision every time. So, if you do get denied, and you do manage to get your rights restored in court, you'll still have a second mortgage on your house to pay off all on your own. And we're not talking a forgoing just a cruise and ski vacation kind of money if you try to (and will fail to) make a civil rights case out of it. The absurdity of this argument runs so deep that I can hardly present a reasonable response to it.

                        Still, I'm not suggesting the OP throw in the towel, but I agree with the posts that raise the point that it will be an uphill battle. And if a denial is returned, that hill becomes far steeper.

                        One problem I see here is that some of the advice is not quite nuanced enough. Some say to listen to the PLB and pull your application if they suggest it. Some say to forge on, regardless. I don't think either is necessarily the right answer. For starters, the PLB actively discourages applications, and will look for ANY opportunity to get someone to pull their app. You can rest assured that is the advice they will give in this situation. But if they do suggest that you hold your application for a year or two, then maybe they're giving you solid advice.

                        Here's my advice. Keep a log of all of your interactions with the PLB. They might come in handy one day. Record every time you were there, every person you spoke with, and any book number and pages of their ledger that you made entries into (and be sure to make a ledger entry every time you're there, or else you're wasting your time there).

                        And good luck with your application.
                        In the real world, attorneys have backed off the licensing police with letters putting the counties on notice that the applicant is ready to proceed to vindicate their client's rights. It happens routinely. Without the expense of filing a lawsuit. Further, there are attorneys who are now presently pursuing litigations against the counties over 2nd Amendment deprivations and they have succeeded in getting inane policies rescinded. The "pink gun" case, and the confiscations without recourse to a hearing issues have succeeded to final decisions in favor of gun owners as against Nassau Co. Others are now in the works. So, the concept that you CAN stand up to the bureaucrats in the PLB is far from internet bravado.

                        The NY case law as to "good moral character" is invariably pre-Heller and has little precedential value since gun ownership pre-Heller in NY was a privilege rather than a right. A handgun in the home is a civil right now and any approach to secure that right is by definition a "civil rights issue".

                        As far as legal expenses, the litigation involved(assuming it even is theoretically necessary) is not going to result in a trial but a motion, which is far less expensive. Everyone's economic situation is different, however, getting a motion filed and before a US judge is not second mortgage level expensive. In addition, there are local, state and national organizations that will support the appellate process financially and with assigned counsel. A 2A disqualification over a single non-felony DWI would make an attractive precedent setting issue worthy of legal aid from pro civil rights groups. But if you are not willing to start the process of standing up, then one will never find out, and tyranny prevails. The legal process is a viable option for some, and may not be for all, but to argue that taking up the fight is an "absurdity" smacks of defeatism.

                        Lastly, what are you proposing one do with a log of interactions with the PLB?
                        Ballistic: "Grif... You are my legal eagle spirit animal...."

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by Grifhunter View Post

                          In the real world, attorneys have backed off the licensing police with letters putting the counties on notice that the applicant is ready to proceed to vindicate their client's rights. It happens routinely. Without the expense of filing a lawsuit. Further, there are attorneys who are now presently pursuing litigations against the counties over 2nd Amendment deprivations and they have succeeded in getting inane policies rescinded. The "pink gun" case, and the confiscations without recourse to a hearing issues have succeeded to final decisions in favor of gun owners as against Nassau Co. Others are now in the works. So, the concept that you CAN stand up to the bureaucrats in the PLB is far from internet bravado.

                          The NY case law as to "good moral character" is invariably pre-Heller and has little precedential value since gun ownership pre-Heller in NY was a privilege rather than a right. A handgun in the home is a civil right now and any approach to secure that right is by definition a "civil rights issue".

                          As far as legal expenses, the litigation involved(assuming it even is theoretically necessary) is not going to result in a trial but a motion, which is far less expensive. Everyone's economic situation is different, however, getting a motion filed and before a US judge is not second mortgage level expensive. In addition, there are local, state and national organizations that will support the appellate process financially and with assigned counsel. A 2A disqualification over a single non-felony DWI would make an attractive precedent setting issue worthy of legal aid from pro civil rights groups. But if you are not willing to start the process of standing up, then one will never find out, and tyranny prevails. The legal process is a viable option for some, and may not be for all, but to argue that taking up the fight is an "absurdity" smacks of defeatism.

                          Lastly, what are you proposing one do with a log of interactions with the PLB?
                          Agreed on all counts. As for logging interactions with the PLB, in my own experiences it has come in handy correcting mistakes they've made on my paperwork. I understand they're only human, and I'm fine with that, except that when they make mistakes (and they do), we're the only ones ever held accountable.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X