This is from a Navy recruiter and how it affects recruiting in regard to the Lautenberg Amendment. ALL DV convictions bar an applicant from joining the military.If you had shared a household with your sister then according to law you can't have federal approval. This confuses me since most folks have, at some time, shared a household with their siblings. I'd recommend asking a lawyer.
It appears to me that he stole...err...used the list from this page (without attribution): http://addbalance.com/gun_rights_misdemeanor_domestic_violence.htmHelpmeplease, interesting list on the lautenburg. Can you provide a source?
All of which means I am not federally banned because the "crime" was committed against my sister.What is commonly called the "Lautenberg Amendment" is codified in 18 USC where most of the federally disqualifying circumstances are.
Specifically, the definition of domestic violence is defined in 18 USC 921(a)(33)
(33)
(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (C),[2] the term “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” means an offense that—
(i) is a misdemeanor under Federal, State, or Tribal [3] law; and
(ii) has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon, committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim.
This is correct. Federally, you must it must meet one of those relationship tests. The Michigan rule would cover you if you were in the same household, but as you note, after eight years, it doesn't apply anymore.All of which means I am not federally banned because the "crime" was committed against my sister.
I object to your use of sarcastic punctuation.All of which means I am not federally banned because the "crime" was committed against my sister.
I'm sure you'll get over it sir.I object to your use of sarcastic punctuation.
Oh, come on...we all know that assault and battery isn't a REAL "crime" if it's your sib.I object to your use of sarcastic punctuation.
Well, I'm sure she'll get over it, sir.Oh, come on...we all know that assault and battery isn't a REAL "crime" if it's your sib.
Of course not especially when all I did was shove her. BTW I'm a woman too.Oh, come on...we all know that assault and battery isn't a REAL "crime" if it's your sib.
Sure - because who would consider a shove to be assault & battery, right?Of course not especially when all I did was shove her.
When the signatures worked on this forum (for me), I had a note stating (I'm paraphrasing) that the gender pronouns were used for convenience only and that the advice applies regardless of the gender of the folks involved.BTW I'm a woman too.
Neither do mine, and I don't give a damn what you think or object to. Have a great day!Sure - because who would consider a shove to be assault & battery, right?
When the signatures worked on this forum (for me), I had a note stating (I'm paraphrasing) that the gender pronouns were used for convenience only and that the advice applies regardless of the gender of the folks involved.
In other words, I don't really care if you're a man or a woman, my answers don't change.