Firecracker Joe Arrested When They Found His Girlfriend's Gun

[TackleTheWorld]

Joe (aka jose) just called me to say he's in handcuffs in Tube D in some jail in Concord.  He says he had an argument with his girlfriend, the police came, found a gun in his house and arrested him.  Joe thinks the charge may be "felon in posession of a firearm". 



Sentencing 12/03, Concord Superior Court, 9:30 am

[error]

Lauren called in the following message to Porc-411.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Tom Sawyer]

That sucks.

Hope that she will say it is her gun.

Such bullshit that convicted felonys automatically loose their right to own a gun. Especially when the "crime" has nothing to do with violence.

[KBCraig]

That sucks.

Hope that she will say it is her gun.

Even if she does claim it, if he knew where it was and it wasn't locked away, they can still pursue him for "constructive possession".

Such bullshit that convicted felonys automatically loose their right to own a gun. Especially when the "crime" has nothing to do with violence.

Yes it is.

[penguins4me]

That sucks.

Hope that she will say it is her gun.

Even if she does claim it, if he knew where it was and it wasn't locked away, they can still pursue him for "constructive possession".

Kinda like being in possession of a shoelace and a semi-auto rifle was "constructive possession" of a machine gun?

[Tom Sawyer]

Anyone know Joe's last name so we can try to make contact?

[TackleTheWorld]

Joe's free again.  A friend bailed him out.  Joe says his girlfriend is still in jail, and he's happy.

[d_goddard]

Such bullshit that convicted felonys automatically loose their right to own a gun. Especially when the "crime" has nothing to do with violence.

Agreed.
And.... rumor has it that NH will attempt to change our laws to be more like Alaska's.
Just think, FTL_Mark would be able to legally own his Mossberg, and Joe would not be harassed.

[firecracker joe]

thanx tackle for giving me someone to call and although they first tried to intimidate me when they realized i wasn't some punk beatin on his girl they were pretty cool (as far as cops go) the fact that they could have dropped me off at the jail instead brought me to station to wait to get bailed. I was arrested by trooper Bruce lawler one of the nicest cops Ive been arrested by but still a player for the other team.My friend Ben who was kind enough to care for my dogs and bail me out got a Breathalyzer when he came to get me lucky for him he had no problem and to top it off the handcuff key broke off in the cuff and they had to call the fire dept. to cut it off. at one point i had 4 stateys standing around me all trying their cuff keys i felt like a cat in a room full of rocking chairs. so now i have arraignment the day before my birthday. HAPPPY FUCKIN B-DAY JOSE. Honesty does not pay if i hadn't told them there was a gun in my safe they never would have known but when the cop asked if there were any weapons in the house i forgot i was a felon . Being a ex pot farmer. Again Lauren i appreciate you being there to talk to while I was handcuffed to the railing in the hall at troop d. thanks bruce the cop who i turned on to fsp.  Jose

[Spencer]

Jose has demonstrated why everyone should think about what they would do if faced with a similar situation.  Prepare yourself for any encounter with the police -- it may never be necessary, but it is better to plan for the worst and hope for the best.  Be polite and NEVER answer police questions.  The police would have needed a warrant to open the safe if Jose hadn't volunteered the information.

Good luck, Jose.

[KBCraig]

And.... rumor has it that NH will attempt to change our laws to be more like Alaska's.
Just think, FTL_Mark would be able to legally own his Mossberg, and Joe would not be harassed.

Alaska doesn't prohibit felons from possessing guns?

Regardless, the feds can (and do) prosecute for this.

[E-ville]

NH needs to become its own nation, and tell the feds to screw off..

[firecracker joe]

I agree with spenser and evile . But just remembered that they never read me my maranda rights does that make a difference and on my bail release they  put my exs birthdate wich is 2 years from mine are these just minor technicalities. Jail does not scare me and in prison im in my element just dont want to lose everything i have worked so hard to get.I also let them know that i am an ed brown supporter and if they had a problem with that then they had a problem with me but that never occured . I have still had worse days so life will go on but everyone should be prepared on how they would react in this situation i had the fortune to see it comming couldd have been a bit worse even news worthy. firecracker joe

[Spencer]

To be prosecuted under federal law, however, the gun OR AMMUNITION must involve interstate commerce.  The best bet is to apply for either a pardon from the governor of the state in which the conviction occurred or follow the requirements to have the conviction nullified / expunged (or whatever the language your state uses) in the state of conviction.

From 18 U.S.C. section 922(g):

It shall be unlawful for any person -
    (1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable
    by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
       
    ***

    to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess
    in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive
    any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in
    interstate or foreign commerce.

Keep in mind that the federal government has a VERY loose interpretation of what "effects interstate commerce."  The "best" example of this is the New Deal era case of Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942), in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution allowed the federal government to restrict the amount of wheat that a person could produce for use on his own farm (i.e., not for sale to anyone) because of the "aggregate effect" that everyone doing so would have on the price of wheat (if demand dropped, then the price might drop, which would apparently destroy the world). 

The following excerpt will make you puke (if you believe in a limited federal government restrained by the Constitution):

[T]his Act extends federal regulation to production not intended in any part for commerce but wholly for consumption on the farm.

***

Appellee says that this is a regulation of production and consumption of wheat. Such activities are, he urges, beyond the reach of Congressional power under the Commerce Clause, since they are local in character, and their effects upon interstate commerce are at most 'indirect.'

***

The Court's recognition of the relevance of the economic effects in the application of the Commerce Clause exemplified by this statement has made the mechanical application of legal formulas no longer feasible. Once an economic measure of the reach of the power granted to Congress in the Commerce Clause is accepted, questions of federal power cannot be decided simply by finding the activity in question to be 'production' nor can consideration of its economic effects be foreclosed by calling them 'indirect.'

***

It is said, however, that this Act, forcing some farmers into the market to buy what they could provide for themselves, is an unfair promotion of the markets and prices of specializing wheat growers. It is of the essence of regulation that it lays a restraining hand on the self-interest of the regulated and that advantages from the regulation commonly fall to others. The conflicts of economic interest between the regulated and those who advantage by it are wisely left under our system to resolution by the Congress under its more flexible and responsible legislative process.

[Kat Kanning]

Joe, that sucks!     What day is your arraignment?