Convicted Felon Question

Status
Not open for further replies.
While the technical answer may be "legally, yes", a prohibited person is prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition.

And, possessing means "control of or over". IF the felon has access or the POTENTIAL for access, then they are considered to be in "possession".

This comes up often with people asking if their spouse/SO who is prohibited can live in the house with them, if they have a gun(s).

The usual answer is "yes" but the guns (and ammo) must be secured (locked up) and the prohibited person cannot have, or be able to get the key/combination.


I'm not a lawyer, and for a definitive answer, you should hire one (so that the specific situation and all Fed & State laws are considered), but I would expect the same rules to apply to a place of employment.


I doubt any establishment that sells guns & ammo would hire a prohibited person, to work on their premises, due to the risk of accidently violating the laws. And its not only a risk to the prohibited person, but to the employer (or spouse, who ever the gun owner is) because if they fail to secure the arms, to the degree demanded by the law, they are at risk of criminal charges themselves. (aiding and abetting / providing a firearm to a prohibited person).

Intent doesn't matter, what matters is physical reality.

If, for example, (in the home with a prohibited person) the guns are in a safe, and the key is on your keyring, in your pocket, then all is well. BUT, if its on the same ring as your car keys, house keys, etc., AND you hang your keyring on a peg by the kitchen door, where anyone in the house could grab it, then you are NOT securing the firearms from the prohibited person, in the eyes of the law.

The prohibited person doesn't have to DO anything, (like take the keys), but if they COULD, then the law is being violated.

There are a number of good people, who became prohibited persons due to some degree of "felony stupid" behavior (often in their younger adult lives) who are now carrying the burden of a "momentary lapse of reason" for the rest of their lives.

I understand that there is a mechanism in the law to allow prohibited persons to petition a court to have their status changed. From what I hear, while it exists, the govt is not properly funding it.

To be certain, get a lawyer, but in general I'd say a prohibited person won't be able to get a job someplace that sells guns & ammo, because of the risk to the employer, they won't be hired.
 
44 AMP said:
I understand that there is a mechanism in the law to allow prohibited persons to petition a court to have their status changed. From what I hear, while it exists, the govt is not properly funding it.
The federal goverment has not funded the rights restoration program for many years, so if the conviction was a federal felony, the person is basically out of luck.

But not all convictions are federal. I would surmise (with no numbers to back this up) that a lot more people are prohibited due to state criminal convictions than due to federal convictions. And most states have a means to have firearms rights restored. The criteria and process, of course, are different for each state. Anyone seeking to have a firearms prohibition removed should engage an attorney to advise them.
 
I think anyone in the gun selling business would make sure anyone they hire passes the same background check that a gun purchaser has to pass. It would protect them in case there were issues in the future.
 
This convicted person has done his or her time in jail...they have paid the price of the crime but.......i Honestly advice against it.

certain jobs have this level of trust and integrity needed....
Lets say "would you give a former bank robber a job at a bank" the Answer is Hell No
 
The actual question was not "Can a prohibited person work in a gun shop," it was:

Steve4102 said:
Can a convicted felon with prohibited person status work in an establishment that sell firearms and ammunition?

Almost all Walmarts still sell ammunition, and some (not any near me) still sell firearms (I think). While it would be difficult to work in a gun shop without having access to ammunition, in Walmarts the ammo (at least the ammo out front) is locked up. If the person doesn't work in the Sporting Goods department and doesn't have the key, he or she doesn't have access.

Disclaimer: I don't know how Walmart stores ammo in the back room.
 
Some more info.

This is not a "gun Shop" it is a small out in the sticks store that sells groceries, gas, fishing equipment, live bait, firearms and ammunition. The business is stand alone and is about 2000 sq. ft.

The ammunition is not locked up, you can take what you want off the shelf and bring it to the cashier (the prohibited person). Firearms are behind a counter, but they are not locked up. To inspect a firearm, the cashier (prohibited person) takes them out of the rack and hands them to you.
 
As the owner/employer in that establishment, I'm background checking my employees or I'm securing the guns for sale in some greater fashion than is described.
 
Aquila Blance said:
and some (not any near me) still sell firearms (I think).

Sadly, and in spite of its continued vacillation on the issue, WalMart remains the highest volume firearms retailer in America... which implies, in the world, I should think.
 
“Almost” everyone deserves a second chance and I’m not saying convicts should be allowed to work but not in a gun store or a bank. It will make me sleep better if I’m the owner of the establishment.
 
Steve4102 said:
This is not a "gun Shop" it is a small out in the sticks store that sells groceries, gas, fishing equipment, live bait, firearms and ammunition. The business is stand alone and is about 2000 sq. ft.

The ammunition is not locked up, you can take what you want off the shelf and bring it to the cashier (the prohibited person). Firearms are behind a counter, but they are not locked up. To inspect a firearm, the cashier (prohibited person) takes them out of the rack and hands them to you.
I am not an attorney, but my opinion is that a prohibited person should not be employed in such an establishment.

From the Gun Control Act of 1968:

(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.

------

(h) It shall be unlawful for any individual, who to that individual's knowledge and while being employed for any person described in any paragraph of subsection (g) of this section, in the course of such employment --

(1) to receive, possess, or transport any firearm or ammunition in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce; or

(2) to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

In other discussions, our moderator, Frank Ettin, who is a licensed attorney, has noted that "possession" does not equate to "ownership." If I lend you my sledge hammer, you possess it while you are using it but it's still my sledge hammer. The same applies to firearms. A clerk in a retail establishment where firearms and ammunition are out in the open, unsecured, would have "constructive possession" of the firearms and ammunition -- they are right there, and he can access them at any time. I don't see this as being any different from a prohibited person living in a house with a [legal] gun owner. In that situation, the guns and ammunition must be stored in a locked safe or cabinet and the prohibited person may not have the combination or key to the safe or storage cabinet. I see no reason why this would be viewed differently.
 
"I understand that there is a mechanism in the law to allow prohibited persons to petition a court to have their status changed. From what I hear, while it exists, the govt is not properly funding it."

I know a few states do restore firearms rights, Arizona being one of them but the FBI background people REFUSE to recognize that restoration. I have a neighbor with that situation. He even has a CCW permit but can't buy a new gun from an LGS unless it's one that uses the permit instead of the background check. (legal in AZ BTW)
Paul B.
 
felony is not the only exclusion. the misdemeanor crime of simple assault (just saying I will kick your butt qualifies for this) or simple battery (grabbing your arm even if non violently satisfies this) will strip you of your 2nd amendment rights if a domestic partner just makes the claim/accusation against you (guilty until proven innocent), and you will have to prove yourself innocent in court before you get your gun rights back.
 
JERRYS. felony is not the only exclusion. the misdemeanor crime of simple assault (just saying I will kick your butt qualifies for this) or simple battery (grabbing your arm even if non violently satisfies this) will strip you of your 2nd amendment rights if a domestic partner just makes the claim/accusation against you (guilty until proven innocent), and you will have to prove yourself innocent in court before you get your gun rights back.
Never actually read the Form 4473 have ya?:rolleyes:
You should.
 
Never actually read the Form 4473 have ya?
You should.

its obvious that you've never arrested anyone for "domestic violence" and watched the process.

does section 11h no longer apply?
 
Last edited:
JERRYS. its obvious that you've never arrested anyone for "domestic violence" and watched the process.
No, I haven't and even if I had I wouldn't have made the statements you wrote above. But I HAVE READ the Form 4473 and instructions, so I think I have an understanding of what can prohibit a person from buying a firearm.:rolleyes:


does section 11h no longer apply?
Of course it does. But you mentioned NOTHING in your post about restraining orders did you?;)




So.....since you still have the belief that what you wrote is actually valid lets break it down:
JERRYS. felony is not the only exclusion.
No kidding.:rolleyes: The Form 4473 asks the buyer/transferee questions 11a through 12d2 of which an answer of "Yes" to any one is a prohibiting response.





the misdemeanor crime of simple assault (just saying I will kick your butt qualifies for this) or simple battery (grabbing your arm even if non violently satisfies this)
Wrong.
In Texas for example "simple assault" can be charged for:
Minor injuries to the victim, Class A misdemeanor. up to one year in jail and $4,000 in fines
Verbal threat was made against a sports official or referee, Class B misdemeanor.up to 180 days in jail and $2,000 in fines
Only involved threatening or touching? Class C misdemeanor. up to $500 in fines
But in no case does that "simple assault" result in more than a year in jail.

But......simple assault on a public servant or family member could bump that simple assault to a third degree felony. (punishable by up to ten years) Most other states are similar. (many states including Texas, do not differentiate "assault" and "battery"....it's considered the same crime)


If you have been charged or indicted for a crime punishable by no more than a year if convicted, then you are not otherwise prohibited. So being charged with "simple assault" does not prohibit you from acquiring or possessing firearms.

A misdemeanor CONVICTION is only prohibitive if the judge could have imprisoned you for more than one year. You need to understand the difference between CRIME and what you are CONVICTED of.



will strip you of your 2nd amendment rights if a domestic partner just makes the claim/accusation against you (guilty until proven innocent), and you will have to prove yourself innocent in court before you get your gun rights back.
Horsehockey.
1. "Claim/accusation" isn't the same as being charged or indicted. You would be surprised how many victims of a domestic violence incident never pursue charges. Simply saying "he/she hit me" to the police officer responding to a disturbance doesn't carry much weight unless there is evidence or witnesses to back it up. In some jurisdictions the state may pursue DV charges if the victim refuses.
2. An order restraining the person from contact with the domestic partner must be obtained from a court. The police don't issue restraining orders, judges do.
3. Innocent until proven guilty is still the law of the land. Meaning the prosecution (the state) must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime.
"guilty until proven innocent"? The Supreme Court disagrees.;) as does anyone who has watched more than two episodes of Law & Order or Judge Judy.
4. A conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence is prohibitive, even if the maximum penalty is less than one year in jail.
 
So long as the felon does not work the firearms section where said felon comes into possession of firearms or ammunition, I don't think there are restrictions on employment. A general sporting goods store with camping equipment, outdoor equipment, shoes, baseball bats and stuff like that is OK. If it was strictly a gunstore, then I'd say no.

Trinidad State regularly turned down felons who applied to work in the tool room. The tool room employee must be able to handle firearms and ammunition.
 
4V50 Gary said:
So long as the felon does not work the firearms section where said felon comes into possession of firearms or ammunition, I don't think there are restrictions on employment. A general sporting goods store with camping equipment, outdoor equipment, shoes, baseball bats and stuff like that is OK. If it was strictly a gunstore, then I'd say no.
I disagree, as I explained in post #13. If the firearms and/or ammo in a general sporting goods store are not all secured under lock and key so the felon cannot have access to it, then I don't see how working in the store would be any different from a felon living in a house where firearms and ammunition are present. And the rule there is that the guns and ammo must be locked up, and the felon cannot have the key or combination for the lock(s).

If this is a real question rather than hypothetical, I think the OP (or the person affected) needs to consult an attorney who is knowledgeable in firearms law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top