Felons might be allowed to have guns in Louisiana (1 Viewer)

[St. Widge]

The Louisiana legislature as lobbied to do so by the NRA.

It was a Constitutional Amendment passed by a vote of the citizens of LA, not the legislature.

 

[St. Widge]

Thoughts on this snafu? I'm sure they'll just clean up the statues.

What I think is really interesting about the Amendment, by the way, is that it arguably means that all citizens of LA have a right to carry concealed weapons. In fact, the below WWL TV article mentions that law against carrying concealed weapons is being challenged, but has not been rule on by a Judge yet.

http://www.wwltv.com/news/eyewitness/mikeperlstein/State-gun-crime-law-ruled-invalid-199435841.html

 

[St. Widge]

I think the Judge loses this one. Convicted felons already have other "fundamental rights" stripped from them. Rights given to them in the U.S. Constitution and Louisiana Constitution, yet nobody is arguing they should have the right to vote, or while on probation at least, that they have the right to protection against illegal search and seizure laws.

As to having to changed the law to affect only violent felonies, the law already only applies to certain felonies such as violent crimes and drug crimes. On most other felonies, if the person is not on probation or parole, then the law restricting possession of a firearm does not apply.

Yeah, they are just going to have to make sure that the laws are "narrowly tailored" to meet a compelling state interest in order to pass strict constitutional scrutiny. But, given the LA legislatures history of terribly worded laws, that might not be so easy for them.

 

[wizard1183]

A convicted felon is not allowed under ANY circumstances to possess or own a firearm UNLESS he pardons the governor for that right back, or asks the courts to grant him his rights back which depends on the felony. I'm not certain even if you expunge it from your record that your rights are released back. Maybe an actual lawyer can chime in? But what I've stated is for Louisiana.

 

[Saint77]

I don't know about that. My wifes cousin just got off of 6 months house arrest because he was hunting and a convicted felon. I know his fekon was not for a violent or gun related crime. He can vote, just not for President and that was only until he was off of probation. All the laws are screwed up when it comes to this felon thing. If you get a simple felony then you should be allowed to live like anyone else once you comleted your probation period. That is the main point of probation, to make sure you can stayt out of trouble and once you have proven as much then you should be allowed to live like everyone else.

I happen to agree with this. I struggle with it somewhat, but in truth if you serve your time, do your obligations, and a non violent offender, I dont see why you cant live like the rest of us. Of course, if you've been convicted multiple times that goes out the window.

 

[coldseat]

It was a Constitutional Amendment passed by a vote of the citizens of LA, not the legislature.

Then the citizens where short sighted with their vote and propagandized to do so by the NRA (although I doubt it took much propaganda with many voters) out of some misplaced fear that Obama was going to take away all of their guns.

Either way, this is what happens when laws and constitutional amendments (in this case) are rushed and reactionary. Unintended consequences.

There was nothing wrong with the laws that were in existence, why create an amendment?

 

[St. Widge]

A convicted felon is not allowed under ANY circumstances to possess or own a firearm UNLESS he pardons the governor for that right back, or asks the courts to grant him his rights back which depends on the felony. I'm not certain even if you expunge it from your record that your rights are released back. Maybe an actual lawyer can chime in? But what I've stated is for Louisiana.

That was the law. The New Constitutional Amendment has made the law Unconstitutional. Or at least one Judge has said so so far.

 

[St. Widge]

Then the citizens where short sighted with there vote and propagandized to do so by the NRA (although I doubt it took much propaganda with many voters) out of some misplaced fear that Obama was going to take away all of their guns.

Either way, this is what happens when laws and constitutional amendments (in this case) are rushed and reactionary. Unintended consequences.

There was nothing wrong with the laws that were in existence, why create an amendment?

Well, never underestimate the short sightedness of the LA voter. But, I doubt the NRA had to do much to push this law in LA. It's a highly conservative state, especially when it comes to things like guns. Although I'm sure some of it had to do with the overstated fear that Obama was going to get very restrictive gun laws passed. That's why the Amendment was created. It's not that they thought the current laws were a problem, they feared that new laws would be more restrictive and they wanted to make sure those laws would not be Constitutional in LA.

 

[Saint77]

Well, never underestimate the short sightedness of the LA voter. But, I doubt the NRA had to do much to push this law in LA. It's a highly conservative state, especially when it comes to things like guns. Although I'm sure some of it had to do with the overstated fear that Obama was going to get very restrictive gun laws passed. That's why the Amendment was created. It's not that they thought the current laws were a problem, they feared that new laws would be more restrictive and they wanted to make sure those laws would not be Constitutional in LA.

In the vien of rushed legislation, NY rushed their reactionary gun legislation through in the wake of Newtown, that they effectively banned all State LEO from having magazines larger then 7 rounds because they forgot to add a provision.

 

[St. Widge]

In the vien of rushed legislation, NY rushed their reactionary gun legislation through in the wake of Newtown, that they effectively banned all State LEO from having magazines larger then 7 rounds because they forgot to add a provision.

Yeah, both sides in this need to step back and take a deep breath. Reactionary laws are rarely ever well written. As far as the LA law, while it sounds bad to let felons have guns, I'm really not sure that it matters. As some have noted, not all felons are violent and beyond that, the ones that are violent and have committed crimes using a gun in the past, are not likely follow the law and not have a gun anyway. I mean, they already committed felony using a gun. They don't seem to have an issue with braking the law. Still, the law does allow cops to arrest them if they happen to find them with a gun during a routine stop so, I guess it's a good idea in the end.

 

[LSSpam]

In the vien of rushed legislation, NY rushed their reactionary gun legislation through in the wake of Newtown, that they effectively banned all State LEO from having magazines larger then 7 rounds because they forgot to add a provision.

Mississippi almost passed a personhood legislation that would have inadvertently banned fertility treatments and possibly endangered birth control pills. Well I say "almost", thankfully we weren't that stupid and it did get defeated by a reasonable majority, but that it even came up is shocking,

So much for "deliberative assembly".

 

[LSSpam]

Yeah, both sides in this need to step back and take a deep breath. Reactionary laws are rarely ever well written. As far as the LA law, while it sounds bad to let felons have guns, I'm really not sure that it matters. As some have noted, not all felons are violent and beyond that, the ones that are violent and have committed crimes using a gun in the past, are not likely follow the law and not have a gun anyway. I mean, they already committed felony using a gun. They don't seem to have an issue with braking the law. Still, the law does allow cops to arrest them if they happen to find them with a gun during a routine stop so, I guess it's a good idea in the end.

Illegal Gun Purchases Attempted At Majority Of U.S. Firearms Retailers, Survey Says

Given the volume of people who attempt to illegal purchase guns, evidently purchasing them through normal channels remains a viable option. And if so many try and get denied, obviously some have to occasionally succeed.

According to a study done in 2011, it's upwards of 40k known by gun retailers, so you can assume a smaller number above that that succeed.

Similar to buying cigs or alcohol vs buying pot, going to the black market is expensive, dangerous, and greatly increases your exposure to arrest. It's also a lot less available. I would say actively prosecuting and tightening gun buying registration seems like a far more effective plan to reduce gun violence then silly things like arguing over a 9 vs 10 magazine limit, or fixating on nebulous definitions of "assault guns" when handguns make up by far the majority of gun crimes in the US.

And that's a lot less invasive of the rights of law abiding citizens.

 

[St. Chris]

A convicted felon is not allowed under ANY circumstances to possess or own a firearm UNLESS he pardons the governor for that right back, or asks the courts to grant him his rights back which depends on the felony. I'm not certain even if you expunge it from your record that your rights are released back. Maybe an actual lawyer can chime in? But what I've stated is for Louisiana.

That was the law. The New Constitutional Amendment has made the law Unconstitutional. Or at least one Judge has said so so far.

Both of these comments are incorrect to some extent. A convicted felon in Louisiana can possess a firearm if the felony is not listed in the statute regarding felon in possession of a firearm. (See statute below) It is not necessary to get a pardon. If you are on probation or parole, regardless of the felony, it would violate the probation or parole, but it is not a new crime. This is not just since the amendment was passed. It has been like that for several years. (At least since 1998 because I have that criminal code in front of me right now).

Also, if anyone is interested, if you look at paragraph D of the statute, an air rifle would never be prohibited under the statue because it does not fire the projectile with an explosive, but through compressed air.

And for the record, I am a Lousiana attorney and 99% of my practice is criminal defense.

La. Sec. 14:95.1 Possession of firearm or carrying concealed weapon by a person convicted of
certain felonies (Louisiana Revised Statutes

A. It is unlawful for any person who has been convicted of a crime of violence as defined in R.S.
14:2(B) which is a felony or simple burglary, burglary of a pharmacy, burglary of an inhabited
dwelling, unauthorized entry of an inhabited dwelling, felony illegal use of weapons or dangerous
instrumentalities, manufacture or possession of a delayed action incendiary device, manufacture or
possession of a bomb, or possession of a firearm while in the possession of or during the sale or
distribution of a controlled dangerous substance, or any violation of the Uniform Controlled
Dangerous Substances Law which is a felony, or any crime which is defined as a sex offense in R.S.
15:541, or any crime defined as an attempt to commit one of the above-enumerated offenses under
the laws of this state, or who has been convicted under the laws of any other state or of the United
States or of any foreign government or country of a crime which, if committed in this state, would
be one of the above-enumerated crimes, to possess a firearm or carry a concealed weapon.

B. Whoever is found guilty of violating the provisions of this Section shall be imprisoned at hard
labor for not less than ten nor more than twenty years without the benefit of probation, parole, or
suspension of sentence and be fined not less than one thousand dollars nor more than five thousand
dollars. Notwithstanding the provisions of R.S. 14:27, whoever is found guilty of attempting to
violate the provisions of this Section shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not more than seven and
one-half years and fined not less than five hundred dollars nor more than two thousand five hundred
dollars.

C. The provisions of this Section prohibiting the possession of firearms and carrying concealed
weapons by persons who have been convicted of certain felonies shall not apply to any person who
has not been convicted of any felony for a period of ten years from the date of completion of
sentence, probation, parole, or suspension of sentence.

D. For the purposes of this Section, "firearm" means any pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun, machine
gun, submachine gun, black powder weapon, or assault rifle which is designed to fire or is capable
of firing fixed cartridge ammunition or from which a shot or projectile is discharged by an explosive.

 

[St. Widge]

Illegal Gun Purchases Attempted At Majority Of U.S. Firearms Retailers, Survey Says

Given the volume of people who attempt to illegal purchase guns, evidently purchasing them through normal channels remains a viable option. And if so many try and get denied, obviously some have to occasionally succeed.

According to a study done in 2011, it's upwards of 40k known by gun retailers, so you can assume a smaller number above that that succeed.

Similar to buying cigs or alcohol vs buying pot, going to the black market is expensive, dangerous, and greatly increases your exposure to arrest. It's also a lot less available. I would say actively prosecuting and tightening gun buying registration seems like a far more effective plan to reduce gun violence then silly things like arguing over a 9 vs 10 magazine limit, or fixating on nebulous definitions of "assault guns" when handguns make up by far the majority of gun crimes in the US.

And that's a lot less invasive of the rights of law abiding citizens.

I don't disagree. Although, I think it's an open question whether just being a felon makes a person more likely to commit a crime using a gun. I think it's likely true for those who have committed crimes using guns in the past or who were convicted of a violent crime, but not necessarily so for someone who got convicted of possession of marijuana, embezzlement, mail fraud, etc.

And, I'm not sure that guns are more expensive on the black market or not readily available. Guns from retailers are generally new and more expensive than the cheap used guns you can buy on the street. I know it's only anecdotal evidence, but I've talked to people who grew up in New Orleans housing projects and they tell me that you can easily buy a gun on the street for $200 to $300 which is cheaper than any legal retailer.

But, I overall agree that tighter background checks and background checks that are tailored to find out who has a serious mental illness and who is prone to commit violent crimes would be the most effective thing that we can do to stop gun violence. And, I agree that it would be much less invasive on individual rights and less arbitrary.

 

[SaintRob39]

OK so for the attorney in here. If a guy has a third offense (felony) DUI, no wrecks or deaths resulted, would he be able to possess a firearm after probation is served? If so then he must have had some other charge that led to the 6 months house arrest.