Gun-law changes snare police veteran

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheeBadOne

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
2,217
Location
Nemo sine vitio est
Because of a 1959 arson, a Bucks County officer may lose his job. He seeks an exemption.

A mistake as a youth in the 1950s could cost Upper Southampton police Lt. David Johnson his job.

An arson conviction in 1959 didn't keep Johnson from joining the force in 1966. He even disclosed the conviction when applying for the job.

But since then, gun laws have changed and his felony record makes it illegal for him to carry a firearm. State police notified township officials in August after Johnson applied for access to a state computer network.

If he can't carry a gun, Johnson, 62, can't fulfill his duties as a police officer. He was put on unpaid leave Aug. 4 and forced to use up vacation days until his case is resolved in Bucks County Court. He has petitioned for relief from the state's Uniform Firearms Act. A hearing is scheduled Friday.

"Here I am 44 years later, and it's coming back to haunt me," Johnson said.

If Johnson's case follows the course of several others, the county court will grant his petition. But that may not be the end of it. State police have been diligent in appealing gun-law relief cases, two of which are awaiting decisions by the state Supreme Court.

"It's not because we have a particular problem with these people," said Joanna Reynolds, assistant counsel for the state police. "We're just trying to enforce federal law. Until the Supreme Court comes out with a decision, we're going to keep appealing these cases."

Johnson was 18 when he got into trouble in his Frankford neighborhood in Philadelphia. He said he and another teenager set fire to boxes that were piled up behind a store. Handwritten court records, which have become nearly illegible, list it as a dwelling fire. No one was injured.

Johnson served no jail time but was put on 10 years' probation, which was later reduced to five years. He said the incident changed the course of his life.

"It woke me up," he said. "It made me think I better get my life straight."

Johnson was honest in listing the felony on his application to the Upper Southampton police force in 1966, said Chief David Schultz, who promoted Johnson to lieutenant three years ago.

"He's a good man," Schultz said.

Bucks County District Attorney Diane Gibbons is reviewing Johnson's case as required by law. She noted that arson wasn't listed as a disabling offense under the state's gun law until about 1995. Before that, Johnson wasn't violating the law, she said.

"I understand from others that he's been a fine officer for nearly 40 years," Gibbons said.

Johnson said he wasn't aware of the change in the law. He found out through a letter from the township that arrived at his home in Bensalem when he and his family were on vacation in August. The township was notified after Johnson sent his fingerprints to state police to get access to a state computer network.

Unlike others who have sought relief from gun laws, Johnson has half the battle won. Though the federal Gun Control Act prohibits felons from having guns, it exempts police officers with felonies, except in cases of domestic violence. The federal exemption allows officers like Johnson to carry a gun in the line of duty.

The problem for him is that Pennsylvania law doesn't exempt police officers.

Reynolds said state police aren't likely to oppose Johnson's petition. She said they have taken a hard line in cases in which courts have granted relief from both state and federal laws, believing that state courts can't grant relief of the federal law.

The case of Walter Grogan of Upper Black Eddy was expected to set the precedent, but Grogan died last year before the Supreme Court could rule. State police, which performs background checks on those buying guns and applying for gun permits, challenged a decision in Commonwealth Court that granted Grogan relief from state and federal gun laws.

Grogan was banned from gun ownership because of a drunken-driving charge in 1964. DUI is a misdemeanor under state law but it was seen then as a felony by the federal government because it carried a possible three-year prison term.

Grogan's attorney, Alfred Merlie of Jenkintown, said Grogan was charged at 18, paid a small fine and put the matter behind him. It resurfaced when he tried to buy a gun in 1999.

Merlie won an almost identical case in Delaware County, where that case also is on appeal.

So is the case of Byron Stein of Berks County. Stein won in Commonwealth Court but has yet to have his gun rights restored.

"I figure that's going to take another two years, which means I'm going to be close to 60 years old by the time this is resolved," Stein said.

Stein's ban stemmed from a 1963 larceny for which he received probation. He said he was 18 when he and another teenager stole a car for a joyride around Reading.

There was a time when cases like Johnson's would have been handled outside the courtroom. After the Gun Control Act passed in 1968, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms was charged with investigating petitions for relief.

"If the investigation revealed this was a set of circumstances where we believed the person was rehabilitated and worthy of getting rights restored, the person would be given relief," said Special Agent Chuck Higman of the bureau's congressional affairs office. "It was all done administratively."

In the mid-1990s, Congress stopped appropriating funding for those investigations, forcing petitioners like Johnson into the courts.

Five decades after his run-in with the law, court isn't where Johnson wants to be. He said, "I feel like I'm being judged twice here."

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/6941589.htm
 
It's really sad that this LEO is now in danger of losing his job, but he should have to play by the same rules as everyone else. Simply being a good police officer for almost 40 years should not be different than a person that has been a good plumber for almost 40 years.
 
Unlike others who have sought relief from gun laws, Johnson has half the battle won. Though the federal Gun Control Act prohibits felons from having guns, it exempts police officers with felonies, except in cases of domestic violence. The federal exemption allows officers like Johnson to carry a gun in the line of duty.
This is disgusting. No reason one dumb bloke who got caught doing some naughty things when he was a kid should be denied access to guns when another with an identical record is allowed to just because he wants to play cop.

From the article, this guy sounds like a decent officer and I have no problem with him carrying a gun. Sounds like he really turned his life around in the 44 years since he got in trouble. This is a good thing, but it doesn't justify his exemption just because he wants to wear a badge.

Another good story for those of you who support a blanket condemnation of "felons".
 
I don't know of any departments just off-paw that would hire someone with a felony conviction, nor would any regional academy that I'm aware of accept a convicted felon for training.

Anyhoo, anyone who has kept his nose clean for 44 years after one solitary felony conviction should have no problem getting an expunction - peace officer or not.

Does Pennsylvania not have a procedure for expunging your criminal record?

LawDog
 
I wouldn't bet a cigarette butt on that proposition.

Oh. Pennsylvania doesn't have a statute for restoration of civil rights/expungement?

Man, that sucks.

LawDog
 
Just for the record - I don't have any problem at all with this guy being allowed to carry now. My problem is with the whole idea of branding people as felons for life.


And he should not get an exemption just because he's a cop. Change the law, don't treat him as special.
 
It seems that, back in 1959, people who made laws and ran things believed that, every once in a while, somebody could do something wrong, get caught, and be prompted to turn his life around.

No longer.
 
For any Joe Blow, LEO or not....

What happens if the state approves a relief and the feds do not? Can he legally possess firearms in that state, just not outside that state? Or is he still banned across the board?
 
Last I checked there is no provision for the Feds to overrule a State in matters of civil rights restoration.

If your State has restored your civil rights/expunged your criminal record, then the ATF has no grounds to deny you a firearm purchase.

I posted the relevant Federal Law/ATF rule around here a week or so ago.

LawDog
 
An arson conviction in 1959 didn't keep Johnson from joining the force in 1966.

You know, that law came about in 1968, two years after he joined the force!
The story makes it out like this law was some obscure thing that just came up recently. I think everyone, especially those in law enforcement, were well aware of the Gun Control Act of 1968.
He KNEW he was breaking the law, and without a doubt he's put people away for breaking the same law. Where is the sympathy for the people HE arrested for breaking the same law he broke every day?

Keith
 
Civilians are civilians, with one set of laws, soldiers are military, with another set of laws.

LEO are civilians, not soldiers, and so must follow civilian laws.

Thus, a felony conviction means no weapon for civilians, including the LEO.

Good for the goose, good for the gander.

Else, it quickly gets to the "some are more equal than others" situation.

Which is why I oppose the concealed carry for LEO, active or retired, on the federal level. It has to be for all, or for none.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top