Possession of ammunition is a felony for felons?

Status
Not open for further replies.

.cheese.

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
3,808
I ran across an interesting case today. I didn't realize until checking the statute that in Florida at least, possession of ammunition by a convicted felon is illegal. Guns I knew, but the ammo aspect was new to me.

That just seemed somewhat over the top - a way to charge somebody twice for the same crime.

Weird.
 
Well maybe it was just the next conclusive step. I mean why own ammo if you can't own a gun? Paperweights lol. Better off banning both than having an officer say "ok you own ammo, wheres the gun?"
 
They've missed a bet. They should have had a statute against a felon owning primers. Another for owning the case. And the powder. And the bullet. As well as the gun. Don't forget the holster. There have to be some felons that use holsters.

Six felonies they could charge a felon with.

Don't worry for they'll work their way down to you and me. Felons can't own guns. We don't need to ban guns! All we need to do is to figure ways to make all the gun owners into felons.
 
Don't worry for they'll work their way down to you and me. Felons can't own guns. We don't need to ban guns! All we need to do is to figure ways to make all the gun owners into felons.
Unfortunately many are blind to this, and buy into the whole "we just need stricter laws, not restrictions on law abiding citizens" argument. Which is often just a reactive defensive deflection. It sounds good, and it promotes our rights.
However supporting the turning of every minor thing into several serious crimes as a way to defend our rights is not very smart.

It is just a matter of time in such an environment that a minor mistake, say perhaps improper storage, transportation of (firearm), or walking through the doorway of the wrong building with your CCW and bam, you are on the other side of the law.
Suddenly all those minimum sentences, dozens of enhancements, and loss of several rights, resulting in you being sent to some for profit prison that treats you awful and never paroles you because you make them money will suck.
You wanted to be tough on crime, because you knew you would never be one of those criminals, but with the laws filling books that require a whole lifetime profession to read through it could turn on you one day.

But hey, you took that gun through the wrong doorway. You did the crime (crimes, can't forget how the same action can be charged as 20 different things.) :neener:
Holding criminals accountable for what they do and what punishments they should recieve, and citizens having the means to defend themselves not be infringed on by government are two seperate issues. Combining them is a mistake.

England once had the death penalty for all violent crime, and life in prison for many non violent crimes. They still had crime.
By the time they were settling Australia you could get many years for even the slightest offense. Just being occused of petty theft of something inexpensive by a landowner could result in a long prison sentence. Hard labor many died from during such sentences etc.
I remember one case where two poor pre-teen girls made another girl take off some of her clothes because they liked the clothing. That was technicaly robbery, so both little girls were sentenced to death.
Yet England still had lots of crime then.

So defend gun rights. But remember that handing too much power over your rights to government by supporting tons of strict laws and punishments is not a good policy either.
Or it won't be long before much of the population is a criminal convicted of one minor offense or another, with a loss of many rights. What good are guaranteed rights if they no longer apply to anyone the government does not want them to?

For all you know simply having most firearms may one day in of itself be a major criminal offense, like it is in the UK. You sure wouldn't be proud of supporting increasingly harsh penalties and enhancements that add up to much of your life behind bars just for being found with a gun then would you?
Oh right, you will never ever even possibly commit any crime, even those that don't exist in law yet. :neener:
 
I guess it should stand to reason that since we have the right to bear arms, ammunition is included with that right, then the same logic must be applied to those that don't have the right....

BTW, I am for non-violent felons being able to own firearms...
 
I ran across an interesting case today. I didn't realize until checking the statute that in Florida at least, possession of ammunition by a convicted felon is illegal. Guns I knew, but the ammo aspect was new to me.
It is a federal law.
 
All we need to do is to figure ways to make all the gun owners into felons.

And that right there is what we have to watch for. Slowly making the average gun owner a criminal in some way.

BTW, I am for non-violent felons being able to own firearms...

I dunno. Drug dealers can be non-violent. So can people with drug addictions. Etc etc.
 
It is just a matter of time in such an environment that a minor mistake, say perhaps improper storage, transportation of (firearm),

I've already seen it happen and go to court.

It is a federal law.

So I guess the Florida statute just mirrors the federal law? I'll look into that later today. I thought it was cited as a FL §. If it is, do they just rewrite that portion annually to mirror federal law?
 
A few years ago a man was charged with being a felon in possession of ammunition for having a 44.cal round made into a key chain the fact it didn't have a primmer and their was no powder in the case didn't matter to the prosecutor luckily it did to the judge who threw it out. The prosecutor was a nut case, he told the police that when they stopped a car of any reason to add as many things to the ticket as possible, I once got a ticket for 4 miles over the speed limit and for having a tire with to little tred, and my license plate lite was out. Their was another person in court that day for not having a light on the back of his bike and a separate ticket for wearing earphones while ridding a bike. The prosecutor lost his reelection bid by a huge margin.
 
Don't worry for they'll work their way down to you and me. Felons can't own guns. We don't need to ban guns! All we need to do is to figure ways to make all the gun owners into felons.

Many people, even gun owners don't know about this law. It doesn't say it here but I believe that there can not be a gun or ammo (owned by anyone) in a house where the "criminal" lives.

THE LAUTENBERG DOMESTIC CONFISCATION LAW
Analysis by Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
(703)321-8585


WHAT DOES THE LAUTENBERG LAW DO?
The Lautenberg Domestic Confiscation provision was signed into law on September 30, 1996, as section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion of the omnibus appropriations bill. It adds to the list of “prohibited persons” persons convicted of a “… misdemeanor involving domestic violence.”

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE A “PROHIBITED PERSON”?
If you become a prohibited person, you can never again own or acquire a firearm of any type. The only exception is if you are subsequently pardoned or otherwise have your criminal record expunged.

WHAT IS A MISDEMEANOR?
A misdemeanor is a crime carrying a potential penalty of as little as one day in jail, irrespective of whether the person serves actual jail time. In other words, the law imposes a lifetime gun ban on offenses which, in many cases, are very minor in nature.

WHAT TYPE OF MISDEMEANOR CONVICTION WOULD CAUSE ME TO BECOME A “PROHIBITED PERSON”?
The Lautenberg language defines “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” to include a misdemeanor that involves “the use or attempted use of physical force” against a family member. Hence, any actual or attempted violence against a spouse or son or daughter would certainly, if prosecuted successfully as a misdemeanor, subject you to a lifetime gun ban. In many jurisdictions, spanking your kids could result in a conviction which would prohibit you from ever again owning a firearm.

WOULD THE MISDEMEANOR HAVE TO INVOLVE VIOLENCE OR ATTEMPTED VIOLENCE?
No. We have seen that a misdemeanor involving violence (however slight) or attempted violence against a spouse, son, or daughter would certainly be covered. But the definition of “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” goes on to include “the threatened use of a deadly weapon.” Thus, a threat against a family member would also subject the offender to a lifetime gun ban, even if the threat were joking or the person making the threat did not have the wherewithal to carry it out.

DOES THE NEW LAW APPLY TO PAST CRIMES?
Yes. A misdemeanor committed fifty years ago would still subject an individual to a lifetime gun ban, even if he or she has lived a happily married life with the “victim” during the intervening period.

HOW LONG DOES A “PROHIBITED PERSON” HAVE TO TURN IN ALL HIS OR HER FIREARMS?
The law provides for no grace period. Technically, any newly created “prohibited person” is currently in danger of a felony conviction.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
It means that, if you are a “prohibited person” and you are convicted of possessing a firearm, you will be guilty of a felony which could subject you to a $250,000 fine and a ten year prison sentence.

WHAT ABOUT POLICEMEN AND SOLDIERS?
There is no exemption for law enforcement officials or members of the armed services. These persons, if they have been convicted of even minor misdemeanors against their spouses, will have to be disarmed and fired.

WHAT ABOUT BATTERED WOMEN WHO DEFENDED THEMSELVES?
There is no exemption for battered women who received minor misdemeanor convictions after they used force to defend themselves against their battering spouses. There are many battered women who fall into this category. They will now be unable to use firearms to protect themselves against their abusive and threatening husbands, even if they feel that their lives are endangered.

WHAT ARE THE LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE LAW?
Because the law now imposes lifetime gun bans on persons who, in some cases, have engaged in no actual violence or attempted violence, it will only be a matter of time before anti-gun activists try to impose lifetime guns bans in non-domestic situations of minor misdemeanors involving violence (such as fist fights). Ultimately, an effort to impose a lifetime gun ban on all persons convicted of misdemeanors will be made.
 
Possession of ammunition by convicted felons is against the law...it's also an instant parole violation. That goes for being in the same car with the stuff , ect.

This probably will get flamed by some members, but if the individual has been 'clean' for some time he/she can get their rights back.

If you like firearms, stay clean like the rest of us!

If you do the crime...suffer the consequences!
 
I support this law, I don't think violent felons should be allowed to own guns or ammo.


WHAT ABOUT BATTERED WOMEN WHO DEFENDED THEMSELVES?
There is no exemption for battered women who received minor misdemeanor convictions after they used force to defend themselves against their battering spouses. There are many battered women who fall into this category. They will now be unable to use firearms to protect themselves against their abusive and threatening husbands, even if they feel that their lives are endangered.
They can't have a gun because they defended themselves? That's just outrageous!
 
s law is often used for the genius crooks who manage to ditch the gun but overlook spare mag or odd rounds
 
Last edited:
Regular updates to federal firearms law can be found here. www.gunlaws.com/gloaup.htm

Funny thing is black powder is excluded unless they can find evidence of other components for making a bomb. Hard not to find in any average household with a garage or basement shop and a few basic hand tools.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top