• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Gun Ownership by Convicted Felons

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Yurpapichulito

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Alaska & Colorado

I live in Colorado but was convicted of a non-violent alcohol related felony 10 yrs ago in Alaska. As a result I am banned by federal law from ever possessing “any firearm or ammunition." [18 U.S.C. 922(g)]. Last year Alaska restored 2nd Amendment rights to people in my situation. The law is a difficult read for me: http://housemajority.org/item.php?id=item20100622-762

My first question is, does this law restore my rights to possess a firearm automatically or is there some process I must still go through to have it restored?

Secondly, does this still apply to me even though I live in Colorado or does Colorado law trump it because i live here?

Lastly, I understand Federal law provides significant penalties for felons in possession of weapons, unless the felon has his rights restored by the convicting state. They refer to it as "Exceptions to the Federal Prohibitions". Does this mean I can carry a firearm legally, at both state and federal levels, assuming that I met the conditions above?
 


davidmcbeth3

Senior Member
In the federal case Caron v. US the court looked at the state being the controlling party in respect to felony & gun restrictions when dealing with state law:

In sum, Massachusetts treats petitioner as too dangerous to trust with handguns, though it accords this right to law-abiding citizens. Federal law uses this state finding of dangerousness in forbidding petitioner to have any guns.

In Caron, MA allowed certain felons to own rifles but not handguns; SCOTUS ruled that since MA does have gun restrictions for handguns then the federal statue requires a federal prohibition on all guns (an all-or-nothing approach).

Your link provided does not show the actual text of the Alaska bill (and I believe that the Alaska bill would have an effect on you if CO law does not specify that it would not). What effect, if any, would depend on the law passed in Alaska.

Read the Caron case ....

If you have to do anything to restore your gun rights in Alaska would depend on the law passed .. you may not need to do anything.

If it would require an administrative review by the ATF is unknown.
 

cyjeff

Senior Member
Wait a damn minute.

Are you saying that Alaska state law trumps not only Federal law but Colorado state law for a Colorado resident?

Hint... the key words in that last sentence both started with "Colorado".
 

davidmcbeth3

Senior Member
Wait a damn minute.

Are you saying that Alaska state law trumps not only Federal law but Colorado state law for a Colorado resident?

Hint... the key words in that last sentence both started with "Colorado".
States have the ability to write their own laws ; Alaska could make it a criminal felonious crime to have 1/4 oz of pot whereas CO may not see this as a violation to prohibit gun ownership. So if Alaska rules that what the OP did is no longer a barrier to gun ownership then CO may extend this as well. As I said, the OP would need to review CO law.

And the feds defer to the state in respect to state infractions (like they do for certain aspects of employment law). If you read the Caron case this becomes clear. Also, read the Heller case as well. So, I did see a need to review the Alaska law in respect to how it effects the federal code.

Its not a slam dunk for the OP ... but it does offer some intriguing senarios. And this was predicted in the Heller case. I don't know how you can petition for the restoration of civil rights in CO. Perhaps others would chime in.


I basically said that there is a possibility that, due to Alaska changing their gun control laws, that it may have an effect in CO.
 

cyjeff

Senior Member
States have the ability to write their own laws ; Alaska could make it a criminal felonious crime to have 1/4 oz of pot whereas CO may not see this as a violation to prohibit gun ownership. So if Alaska rules that what the OP did is no longer a barrier to gun ownership then CO may extend this as well. As I said, the OP would need to review CO law.
Nope.. you DIDN'T say that.

You talked about Alaska law. Which has absolutely no bearing on a Colorado resident whatsoever. Well, unless that resident visits or moves to Alaska.

And the feds defer to the state in respect to state infractions (like they do for certain aspects of employment law). If you read the Caron case this becomes clear. Also, read the Heller case as well. So, I did see a need to review the Alaska law in respect to how it effects the federal code.
Not for a Colorado resident.

Its not a slam dunk for the OP ... but it does offer some intriguing senarios. And this was predicted in the Heller case. I don't know how you can petition for the restoration of civil rights in CO. Perhaps others would chime in.
State law is state specific. Alaska law does not infer any rights onto Colorado citizens.


I basically said that there is a possibility that, due to Alaska changing their gun control laws, that it may have an effect in CO.
Which would be incorrect. Wrong, even.

Completely. Even if.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top