TN man who received Obama pardon still can't have guns

[billyscott]

Thought I'd open this up for discussion. 

 

http://www.wsmv.com/story/21981557/man-with-presidential-parson-still-cant-have-guns

[Guest carter]

I have mixed feelings about this... was he in prison all this time? or did he just have his record expunged... if it is pardoned, it would seem his record would be wiped clean... and was it a felony? 

[billyscott]

 He got 18 months' probation in December 1960. He received a presidential pardon. The TBI says he cannot have a gun. And yes it's a felony. 

This source tells more of the story.

 

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2013/apr/15/whats-a-pardon-worth/?local

Edited April 15, 2013 by billyscott

[DaveTN]

There was a case working its way through the Tennessee courts of a (GA or AL) guy that had a full pardon from the Governor of his state, the state he was convicted in, and they turned him down in Tennessee for an HCP.

 

A top Tennessee criminal attorney that also specializes in gun cases told my friend you can get all the expungements and pardons you want, but if your convictions was for drugs or violence you won't get your gun rights back.

 

Neither of those things seem to apply in this case, so I guess either they don’t want to, or what the TBI is saying that there is no way to do it is true.

 

 

 

[billyscott]

Yeah Dave there was a case in Georgia involving drug convictions. I don't know if it's settled yet or not. 

[Pain103]

My understanding a Presidential Pardon only applies to federal, military, and superior court of DC. So I guess he and his attorney should have done some more reading prior to doing all that paperwork.

[Oh Shoot]

There was a case working its way through the Tennessee courts of a (GA or AL) guy that had a full pardon from the Governor of his state, the state he was convicted in, and they turned him down in Tennessee for an HCP.

 

A top Tennessee criminal attorney that also specializes in gun cases told my friend you can get all the expungements and pardons you want, but if your convictions was for drugs or violence you won't get your gun rights back.

 

Neither of those things seem to apply in this case, so I guess either they don’t want to, or what the TBI is saying that there is no way to do it is true.

 

I believe that one  worked its way to TN Supreme Court, but they refused it, and let the previous court's decision stand?

 

- OS

[c.a.willard]

Does anyone else find it extreamly ironic that a president that wants to ban certain firearms and expand backgrounds checks would grant a federal pardon to a convicted felon for the purpose of him buying guns.

[JayC]

Just remember his crime, 50+ years ago was over $40.83.  He's never been in trouble since then...  Does this 70-something real poses such a serious threat to soceity that he can't own a firearm?

[c.a.willard]

JayC, i dont personnaly think it should prohibit him from owning a firearm.  Infact i generally hold that only those convicted of violent offenses should be prohibited.  It's just the irony of the situation that i was wanting to point out.

[10-Ring]

The article states that he is prohibited from owning handguns.  Aren't felons prohibited from owning any firearms?  Are they just using the term handguns because they are stupid, ignorant, or trying to be sensational?

[jughead]

JayC, i dont personnaly think it should prohibit him from owning a firearm.  Infact i generally hold that only those convicted of violent offenses should be prohibited.  It's just the irony of the situation that i was wanting to point out.

i whole heartedly agree

[1gewehr]

If they aren't dangerous to society, then they should have 2nd amendment rights.  If they ARE dangerous to society, then WHY THE H3LL are we letting them walk around with us? :shake: :screwy:

[Jonnin]

Just remember his crime, 50+ years ago was over $40.83.  He's never been in trouble since then...  Does this 70-something real poses such a serious threat to soceity that he can't own a firearm?

 

which is what, $300 or more today?   A significant take.

 

Personally, I am ok with the one guy.  Its not HIM.   Its the one who never got caught again but is quite willing to do whatever it takes to get his drugs or money to buy them, or who deals quietly.   I do not want a bunch of criminals armed, *some* of whom may indeed be a danger to someone.   And yes, a 70 year old in good health can do quite a bit of damage. 

[m16ty]

The way I understand the law is it says " if you've ever been convicted of a felony" not "if you are a felon". So the way this layperson sees it, even if you are given a complete pardon that still doesn't erase the fact that you were convicted of a felony (even though you've been pardoned).

 

It's kind of like if you've been married then divorced. Even though you're not married now, if somebody ask you if you've ever been married, the answer would have to be "yes".

[Oh Shoot]

The way I understand the law is it says " if you've ever been convicted of a felony" not "if you are a felon". So the way this layperson sees it, even if you are given a complete pardon that still doesn't erase the fact that you were convicted of a felony (even though you've been pardoned).

 

It's kind of like if you've been married then divorced. Even though you're not married now, if somebody ask you if you've ever been married, the answer would have to be "yes".

 

Yeah, that's always been the reasoning behind it as I understand it.

 

A pardon isn't the same as being found innocent from original trial, or new trial or appeal.

 

- OS

[JAB]

I have heard/read more about this story.  One thing to keep in mind, as I understand it, is that what he did was considered a felony then but the same crime would be a misdemeanor, now.  In other words, a person committing the same crime today would not lose their gun rights.

 

Something else that this article doesn't mention is that this fellow worked a job (I think for TVA) for years which required him to have security clearance.  After explaining the circumstances concerning his arrest/conviction he was allowed to get the security clearance and be employed in that job.

 

I think they are referencing handguns, specifically, because those are the guns he wants to collect.  On an interview with him on the television news, they showed that he already has several old west type gun belts and holsters but that the holsters are, of course, empty.  He wants to be able to buy old west type revolvers to fill those holsters.

 

Of course, there is still a way he could legally do so.  Simply buy black powder, cap and ball 'reproductions'.  Many folks in the Old West would have carried such revolvers both before and after the advent of cartridges.  Wild Bill Hickok is said to have refused to give up his Colt Navy pistols in favor of cartridge revolvers.  Many of the stereotypical aspects of old west gunfights were based in things Wild Bill did, anyhow (such as one of the only documented cases of a stand-up showdown in the street as well as shooting two targets at once with duel-wielded pistols.)  Unless I am mistaken, those are not considered 'firearms' under the law and are perfectly legal for even a felon to own and shoot.

Edited April 23, 2013 by JAB

[DaveTN]

The last court ruling I read, and I will admit that I breezed through it; it appeared they were saying there is nothing in the Tennessee code that allows them to let him have guns.