So far.
Printable View
no one likes a tattletale
Or they are present in their home, and since they are both married...registered to their wives.
Tell them to get off their asses and get their record expunged and their 2A rights reinstated. One of my employees has done it, and I know others that have, it's not that difficult. IMO if you've served your debt to society and turned your life into a productive one instead of a destructive one, you should be able to own firearms, but you should do it the right way. This of course comes with the exception of murderers and pedophiles as you shouldn't get a second chance on either case IMO and should never see the light of day either.
Or they have been pardoned, or had their rights restored to them through due process.
I'm guessing you will be getting a visit soon. Just so you know there are LEOs on here. Unless you don't like these guys if so where do you work, I would like to be "very gainfully employed" since those two guys you just narked out probly will be going away soon.
Lol glwt
If they are "With us" I`m cool.I know that sounds like I`m condoning felons in possession..our problems are going to be greater than that..The Kenyan means to foment insurrection..thus the spending to achieve the (Cloward -Piven) outcome. Amnesty for more illegals, medicare, medicade expanded roles. bancruptcy...on and on..My 4th Grt Grand Pa fought in the southern campaign for American independence.. (we`ve been here since the late 1600`s) I love this country and bemoan her demise..
Bloomberg , Soros, finance Obama, Hickenlooper..other Marxist`s they are in control ..be ready!
The process varies depending on the state in which the offense occurred . . . and BATFE does not always recognize restoration of rights anyway. Some states automatically restore all rights as soon as the sentence is completed, some 10 or 20 years later, some require a pardon from the governor, a few require applying to the judge who sentenced them, and some don't restore rights at all (or deny 99% of pardon applications). IIRC, the concept of "prohibited persons" is fairly recent (1968) and unique to the United States. In my opinion it is contrary to the constitution and constitutes double jeopardy or extralegal persecution. If someone is dangerous, but needs to be released, subject them to court supervision indefinitely with "no firearms" a condition of their parole. If someone has completed a sentence for a minor offense that occurred 30 years in the past, they should not risk federal prison because their son wants a .22 rifle to shoot cans.