HCP Revoked

[threeshot]

And then again, you could piss off someone and they pay an attorney to take out a restraining order and you can never again get an hcp.

The TN HCP qualifications read:

Shall not be currently the subject of any order of protection

So if you pissed someone off to the point that they fill out the forms, file the forms with the county clerk, a trial date will be set where both parties attend, then the trial to determine if restraining order should be issued.

Assuming you prove that there is no need for the restraining order to the judge, you can proceed with getting your HCP. Go ahead and get copies of the judge’s verdict in your favor.

Also you can make a restraining order against the person that filed against you as documentation of harassment.

So this will delay certain individuals from getting their HCP if they can prove they are not harassing, abusive, etc. However for those people who are committing acts of harassment, abuse (physical or mental), threatening, etc, we certainly do not want them with HCP.

[Guest dotsun]

Assuming you prove that there is no need for the restraining order to the judge, you can proceed with getting your HCP. Go ahead and get copies of the judge’s verdict in your favor.

However for those people who are committing acts of harassment, abuse (physical or mental), threatening, etc, we certainly do not want them with HCP.

I agree completely about the latter, it's the proving of the former that I have a problem with. I can easily imagine going through a divorce and the ex stating that you're threatening her. Prove that you're not. It just seems like a really easy way to screw up someone's life.

[Guest SUNTZU]

A must have for everybody, digital recorder, ear bud. The ear bud microphone records the phone conversation, the digital recorder comes with a neck lanyard and records just fine through clothing. The recorder is available at most office supply chains, the ear bud is available at Radio Shack. About 100.00 for both.

EDIT: This recorder has a usb attachment so recordings can be downloaded directly to your computer. Then you can burn cd's for lawyers, etc.

Edited February 8, 2008 by SUNTZU
Further information.

[Fallguy]

So if you pissed someone off to the point that they fill out the forms, file the forms with the county clerk, a trial date will be set where both parties attend, then the trial to determine if restraining order should be issued.

Just to clarify, there is a difference between an "Order of Protection" and a "Restraining Order"

In certain casses an judge can issue an ex parte Order of Protection which means the other person does not have to be present when it is issued. These are only valid for a short period of time and then both parties have to appear before the judge to extend the order.

A judge can issue a restraining order not only prevent you from coming around someone, but from other activities as well. If you violate that order a warrant will be issued for your arrest and you'll have to appear before the judge again. An officer can arrest you with out a warrant on an Order of Protection if he had reasonable belief that you violated it.

As far as I know HCP are only affected by Orders of Protection, not Restraing Orders.

...and +1 on a digital recorder if you ever think you may need to prove what was said later. I know on the OpenCarry board I'm on most consider it standard equipment.

[Guest dotsun]

I didn't know that Fallguy, thanks for the clarification.

[threeshot]

Thanks Fallguy. I guessing that the restraining order would be covered elsewhere in the qualifications. Maybe:

Shall not have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as defined in 18 U.S.C.A. 921 (33);

OR

Applicants shall not currently be under indictment or information for any criminal offense punishable by a term exceeding one (1) year;

[strickj]

SUNTZU you can record conversations face to face if you have the permission of at least one person present during the conversation,ie;that means you.if you record a telephone conversation you must have the verbal permission of all parties present during the conversation.

Now I dont know what would happen in court if you pulled that out to prove your ex is lying.It may be acceped by the court but I guess it could also be thrown out if you could not prove you had permission

[Fallguy]

SUNTZU you record a telephone conversation you must have the verbal permission of all parties present during the conversation.

I think that is only true in some states. I have always been under the impression only one (you) have to consent in TN. I could be wrong though. I will try to check in a little.

[Guest TN.Frank]

And now ya'll know why I'm against ANY law that keeps a Citizen(felon or not) from owning a firearm. As a rule a felon is going to ignore the laws anyway so the laws only hurt honest people like your son-in-law and others that happened to do something "stupid" when they were young and then they've got to pay for it for the rest of their life by being denied the Right to own firearms for their own and their families protection.

[Fallguy]

I think that is only true in some states. I have always been under the impression only one (you) have to consent in TN. I could be wrong though. I will try to check in a little.

Here it is T.C.A. 39-16-601Parts(a)(4) & (a)(5)

(4) It is lawful under §§ 39-13-601 — 39-13-603 and title 40, chapter 6, part 3 for a person acting under the color of law to intercept a wire, oral or electronic communication, where the person is a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception.

(5) It is lawful under §§ 39-13-601 — 39-13-603 and title 40, chapter 6, part 3 for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication, where the person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to the interception, unless the communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the constitution or laws of the state of Tennessee.

Here is the law about cell phones and cordless phones T.C.A. 39-13-604 Part((1)

( (1) A person commits an offense who, without the consent of at least one (1) party to a communication, intentionally records or disseminates a communication transmitted between two (2) cellular radio telephones, a cellular radio telephone and a landline telephone, or a cordless telephone and a cellular radio telephone.

It looks like according to Part ((2) it looks like it would be illegal to disseminate the recording between two cordless phones or a cordless phone and a land line phone.

(2) A person commits an offense who intentionally disseminates a communication transmitted between two (2) cordless telephones or a cordless telephone and a landline telephone, if such dissemination is not authorized by a court order.

[strickj]

I guess thats why a cell phone recorder will only record one side of the conversation

[Guest SUNTZU]

If you are one of the parties, you have your own consent. This law, IMO, is covering scanners that pick up cell phone transmissions. Recording those and disseminating without approval of one of the parties is illegal.

b (1) Recording your ex, or whatever purpose you are recording someone on the other end of the phone, is perfectly legal, as you are one of the parties on the communication.

b (2) This would be picking up/intercepting a transmission when you are not one of the parties, i.e. scanner.

Recording a conversation someone is having with you over the phone is legal. You cannot record and disseminate an intercepted transmission.

This is my interpretation. Any lawyers/judges in the house?

Edited February 8, 2008 by SUNTZU
opinion

[Fallguy]

SUNTZU I think you are basically right. 39-16-601 has to do with recording a face to face conversation or a telephone conversation....and as you said as long as "you" consent it is fine.

Also I think that you are right that 39-16-604 has to do with using a scanner to pick up those conversations.

[threeshot]

And now ya'll know why I'm against ANY law that keeps a Citizen(felon or not) from owning a firearm. As a rule a felon is going to ignore the laws anyway so the laws only hurt honest people like your son-in-law and others that happened to do something "stupid" when they were young and then they've got to pay for it for the rest of their life by being denied the Right to own firearms for their own and their families protection.

I think we all agree that HCP holders need to be model citizens. Lowering the HCP qualifications in my opinion is a poor idea. The volume of negative news regarding shootings means that the HCP holders need to show the anti-gun groups why the HCP citizens should be allowed to carry a firearm.

Making a mistake during your life journey can have negative consequences that can last a lifetime depending on the crime.

I understand your point that a convicted felon may choose to obtain a firearm illegally. However, I cannot condone any law that would allow felons to legally purchase firearms.

[Fallguy]

I have to agree more with TN.Frank in that if you are in this land, you should be able to own and carry a firearm period.

If all were armed the guys who wanted to bad would not last long with a bunch of good guys armed and able to put them in their place quick.

[Guest dotsun]

I guess I'm in the middle of you guys on this, I'd be willing to allow non violent felons to own and carry.

[Guest jp79]

I guess I'm in the middle of you guys on this, I'd be willing to allow non violent felons to own and carry.

+1

Before Clinton pulled the funding for it. There was a department in the ATF that would restore your rights if it was determined that you are now and upstanding citizen.

There are so many laws now that constitute a felony its ridiculous. Just cause someone made a mistake on their taxes should not disqualify them from being able to protect their family 20 years from now.

After a certain point the law needs to be willing to forgive a mistake or a bad judgment call after enough time has past to show that person really is an upstanding citizen.

[towerclimber37]

I think we all agree that HCP holders need to be model citizens. Lowering the HCP qualifications in my opinion is a poor idea. The volume of negative news regarding shootings means that the HCP holders need to show the anti-gun groups why the HCP citizens should be allowed to carry a firearm.

Making a mistake during your life journey can have negative consequences that can last a lifetime depending on the crime.

I understand your point that a convicted felon may choose to obtain a firearm illegally. However, I cannot condone any law that would allow felons to legally purchase firearms.

I disagree.

who constitutes what is a felony? suppose I had to defend myself in my home in Washington,DC and I had to shoot someone? guess what...by their laws, I am now a felon because I didn't have a weapon in a disassembled state.

the 2nd amendment didn't say the right for model citizens to keep and bear arms. It says the right of the people..that includes all sorts.

while I agree that violent/sexual/repeat offenders shouldn't have firearms, chances are that they do anyway..so the laws are useless...it doesn't deter them from obtaining a firearm. what it DOES do, is disarm someone who's made mistakes in the past.

just my 2 cents

[Guest jackdog]

I agree with tower on this. There are certain felonies that just don't make any sense to keep someone from having his second amendment rights.

[Guest james.richesin@comcast.ne]

Hey Everybody,

It just so happens I was the first person in the State of Tennessee (according to my attorney), to go to court to get my HCP back after revocation. I had my permit for 6 months whenever it was revoked. The Dept. of safety could not tell me why it was revoked, but my attorney found out that the disposition of a 5 year old case was not entered, thereby rendering my permit invalid. My ex-wife had me charged with reckless endangerment, which I was found innocent of. Anyway, I call the sheriffs dept., county court clerk, and a detective I know and it seems no one knows who is supposed to enter the disposition. I go to court, and the judge blasts me and the state lawmakers for tying up his docket with this type of thing. It turns out he didn't know who was supposed to enter the disposition either. Anyway I got my permit back but it cost me $250 to do so.

[molonlabetn]

Hey Everybody,

It just so happens I was the first person in the State of Tennessee (according to my attorney), to go to court to get my HCP back after revocation. I had my permit for 6 months whenever it was revoked. The Dept. of safety could not tell me why it was revoked, but my attorney found out that the disposition of a 5 year old case was not entered, thereby rendering my permit invalid. My ex-wife had me charged with reckless endangerment, which I was found innocent of. Anyway, I call the sheriffs dept., county court clerk, and a detective I know and it seems no one knows who is supposed to enter the disposition. I go to court, and the judge blasts me and the state lawmakers for tying up his docket with this type of thing. It turns out he didn't know who was supposed to enter the disposition either. Anyway I got my permit back but it cost me $250 to do so.

Jeez, sounds like you got the run-around... Congrats on getting it back, it was worth it.

Welcome to TGO!

[Guest jackdog]

Good for you Molon, Golly i just love happy endings, and hey you have a first place now

[molonlabetn]

Good for you Molon, Golly i just love happy endings, and hey you have a first place now

???

I'm not the one who got my permit back...

[Mike.357]

You mean you still don't have your permit back ML?

I think your status as administrator is now in question here

[molonlabetn]

You mean you still don't have your permit back ML?

I think your status as administrator is now in question here

I never lost it