I believe that @Beck was talking about the way things are, not what the Federal law is/may be. Those two are not always the same thing. I do get though, and I imagine you'll remind him, that in the legal forum, we're only supposed to discuss reality when it coincides with the law.
Can a Convicted Felon Go to a Firing Range Strictly as a Observer? No Handling or Firing.
- Thread starter IJ1981
- Start date
- Status
Saying that Misprision of a Felony is not always detected or prosecuted by the Goverment is like saying that sometimes robbers are not charged.
you're probably right, but my answer remains the same. I would go to the PO to discuss the issue, rather than hoping a crack team of knuckleheads from the internet is going to steer me right. For some reason, I would never take a poll on the internet to ask people what they think my legal options are.
Has it not been established that there was likely no parole here?
The person needs to consult a qualified attorney who is barred in Federal Court.
Poll?
The initial question stated, "He wants to take his Dad to the range with him without breaking his parole." yes, asking the forum if he's breaking the law, would be taking a poll of people's opinions on what they think the legalities are. I agree, consulting a qualified attorney would be highly advised.
Yes, and it has since been explained that he would not have parole officer in a Federal case.
No. Asking a question does not constitute taking a poll. We do have a way of conducting polls here.
dogtown tom
Member
Exactly this.
The "OUR police don't recognize federal law" only works as long as it takes for Barny Fife to enter the arrest into NCIC. If the perp was a prohibited person, and the arrest involved a firearm, then every LE agency in the country knows he violated federal law.
Silly statements like: "Some states like Indiana, for example, will not permit state, county, or municiple law enforcement to enforce federal law regarding 2A issues... if the felony is non-violent." actually do the gun community a disservice. It makes a claim that some states magically have laws that their state legislature believes render federal law moot. It's not about 2A friendly. It's about being ignorant of the US Constitution and the Supremacy Clause.
AGAIN, AGAIN, AGAIN.....states don't enforce federal law. Doesn't matter if its federal firearms laws or as my Governor has discovered, federal immigration law. I'll repeat....states don't enforce federal law. Period. Never have.
Last edited:
excellent.
Definition of a poll: noun. a sampling or collection of opinions on a subject, taken from either a selected or a random group of persons, as for the purpose of analysis.
Just because someone didn't push the poll button in your forum, doesn't mean it doesn't meet the definition of a poll. I gotta get back to work. I have no more time for this.
dogtown tom
Member
But he could be under "supervised release", essentially the same thing as "parole".
Federal probation has existed since 1909, while supervised release has only existed since 1987, when it replaced federal parole as a means for imposing supervision following release from prison.
Yeah, it does. Definition of "Poll"
As has been discussed. And there would be no parole officer.
Not really. Proper polls are structured to provide a basis for analysis.
The OP posed a question. Some of the reponses could be used for analysis of opinion; some asked for clarification; and some provided explanation. Polls do not facilitate that. They summarize the opinions.
At THR, we do have polls, identified as such.
I think this idea of someone who is a convicted felon on parole going to a gun range is dubious at best. i am not sure of why it is so important to do so that a person on parole would take the chance or pay the expense of getting a legal opinion, which may not be the interpretation of the law that is understood by a particular law enforcement officer. As someone else here stated a range is a place where it could be argued that possession of a gun is possible by the felon. I see a lot of downside and very little upside.
Last edited:
dogtown tom
Member
Yet you continue to miss the fact that "parole" was replaced by "supervised release"......and I even spoon fed you the link.
And yes, there are Federal Probation Officers who supervise those released before their term of incarceration has ended. While the OP did say that the person in question hasn't had to report in a number of years, that doesn't mean there was no Federal PO. Undoubtedly there was.
Yeah, really. If you read the definition you know why "not really" isn't correct. I can "poll" the family in my car on where we want to eat. No series of preliminary or qualifying statements are needed. "Where do y'all want to eat?" If three out of four want Chili's....Chili's wins the POLL. No in depth analysis is needed. No structure is required.
All that is required.
So does my example of the hungry family.
Sigh. "Polling" is merely asking a question. The "Poll" you refer to is a THR feature that allows forum visitors to select a response and the forum software compiles the responses.
You know, like asking a question and instead of responding with a "yes", the respondent clicks the little radio button next to "yes".
Double_J
Member
I have been reading this for a while and holding back thinking cooler heads would prevail. I will state I am a former Aerospace Quality Engineer with MRB authority (that means the FAA can put me in jail and fine the snot out of me for my decisions). I have read countless policies, procedures, and legal regulations during my time and I have to make sense of them.
My stance on this matter it two-fold. The responsible parties should consult a licensed, qualified attorney AND they should consult the "Supervised Release Agent" whomever that might be, whether it is a probation /parole officer (title notwithstanding) or the responsible judge for further guidance. I know the Federal system doesn't do parole as we have stated before, but if the felon is not in jail and is still "under confinement" by supervised Release he must abide by ALL of the various rules he is bound by. This means there might be a rule against going to a gun range at all, or being around certain situations.
We in his forum are not privileged to all of the details of any legal agreements between the felon and the State and as such are unable to give clear and concise advice on this matter. We also do not have skin in the game in terms of jail time for either being a felon in possession or providing access to a known felon. I am NOT willing to risk either my freedom or someone 3ls3s freedom based on information from an internet forum when legal matters are at stake. Let the individuals with skin in the ga,e and proper authority make the call.
I am surprised our resident moderators have not chimed in on this yet.
My stance on this matter it two-fold. The responsible parties should consult a licensed, qualified attorney AND they should consult the "Supervised Release Agent" whomever that might be, whether it is a probation /parole officer (title notwithstanding) or the responsible judge for further guidance. I know the Federal system doesn't do parole as we have stated before, but if the felon is not in jail and is still "under confinement" by supervised Release he must abide by ALL of the various rules he is bound by. This means there might be a rule against going to a gun range at all, or being around certain situations.
We in his forum are not privileged to all of the details of any legal agreements between the felon and the State and as such are unable to give clear and concise advice on this matter. We also do not have skin in the game in terms of jail time for either being a felon in possession or providing access to a known felon. I am NOT willing to risk either my freedom or someone 3ls3s freedom based on information from an internet forum when legal matters are at stake. Let the individuals with skin in the ga,e and proper authority make the call.
I am surprised our resident moderators have not chimed in on this yet.
Yes. The question was
"Can a Convicted Felon Go to a Firing Range Strictly as an Observer? No Handling or Firing."
To respond to that as a poll, one would reply"yes" or "no". But since the discusison went into issues of parole violation, parole officers,, supervised release, laws involving felons in possession, consultation with attorneys, and state vs Federal authority, the anwers went far beyond replies to a poll.
I'm sure that the OP preferred a more complete discussion to a simple reply to a poll.
Yes.
That goes without saying.
We can discuss the laws and regulations in general, but no one can responsibly advise anyone on a specific case. That's where legal advice comes in, ant that involves an attorney-client relationship specific to the issue.
I think that recommendation has been made to the OP..
dogtown tom
Member
As far as the original question, YOU didn't read it. That was evident with your first four posts.
I wasn't replying in regards to the thread title, but to your response to this comment by Littlef:
You replied:
Thats just flat wrong sir. "Polling" IS ASKING A QUESTION! Whether THR has a poll feature is irrelevant. Again, "polling" is just asking someone's opinion. Have you ever done political polling? Consumer polling? Public opinion surveys? I HAVE. It's been forty five years since I took that class, but the fact remains the basics of a poll, for any reason, is recording someone's opinion by .........wait for it............asking a question.
The thread title was obviously the question.
Yeah, we have established that.
Arkansas Paul
Member
I don't practice in the federal system and admittedly don't know very much about it, so I won't weigh in on whether he could go or not.
I will weigh in on one idea that must be kept in mind when talking about possession. There is actual possession, which is what we immediately think about when we think of the word. It's when someone is in direct physical control of something. My cell phone is in my pocket. I am in actual possession of it.
But there is also constructive possession, which is about as clear as mud. Constructive possession exists when a person has knowledge that something is there, and has the ability to control it. You do not have to be in actual possession of something to be charged with possession of said item.
To play devil's advocate, suppose he goes and there are guns on a table and someone there who doesn't know he's a felon, says, "You're welcome to shoot anything on the table."
Does that satisfy the "ability to control" the guns? I don't know how the federal system would view such a thing.
Again, not really weighing in with an opinion on whether he could get in trouble for going.
I will say if he were my client, I'd tell him to stay as far away from guns as he possibly could. An ounce of prevention beats a pound of cure.
I will weigh in on one idea that must be kept in mind when talking about possession. There is actual possession, which is what we immediately think about when we think of the word. It's when someone is in direct physical control of something. My cell phone is in my pocket. I am in actual possession of it.
But there is also constructive possession, which is about as clear as mud. Constructive possession exists when a person has knowledge that something is there, and has the ability to control it. You do not have to be in actual possession of something to be charged with possession of said item.
To play devil's advocate, suppose he goes and there are guns on a table and someone there who doesn't know he's a felon, says, "You're welcome to shoot anything on the table."
Does that satisfy the "ability to control" the guns? I don't know how the federal system would view such a thing.
Again, not really weighing in with an opinion on whether he could get in trouble for going.
I will say if he were my client, I'd tell him to stay as far away from guns as he possibly could. An ounce of prevention beats a pound of cure.
That is probably the best course of action.
I hope you guys don't mind if I reach across the Atlantic with my fat stubby finger and hit the lock button now.
- Status