Cali man has guns confiscated over pot arrest 40 years ago

[breakingcontact]

Long forgotten pot bust, bureacratic screwup prompt agents to seize California man's guns | Fox News

 

[PhulesAu]

So.... These are some of the people telling us, you have nothing to fear. register you arms, it is for your protection.

 

[TX69]

Uhmmm doing drugs makes you stoopid and at that time a felon lol.

 

[Acera]

Glad he got them back............

 

[Renegade]

Glad he got them back............

He needs to get rid of them as his possession is still illegal under Federal Law.

 

[zx9rt1]

It will only get worse down the road.

 

[AcidFlashGordon]

He needs to get rid of them as his possession is still illegal under Federal Law.

?????

But it turned out that amid all the cross-checking of databases, no one caught that Merritt's pot bust was downgraded to a misdemeanor, making him a legal gun owner.

 

[M. Sage]

You know what you have to go through to get your guns back from the cops in California? It's ridiculous.

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/legr.pdf

Unfortunately, they won't find that the firearms were stolen even though the were.

 

[Renegade]

?????

Merritt was a convicted felon, according to their records.

Convicted felons cannot buy or possess guns under Fed Law.

It turned out that the outdated felony code on the printout—11910 – was for a pot possession charge which has since been downgraded in California law

Later, CA laws changed to make it a misdemeanor.

But Fed Law on gun possession does not care what the penalty is now, it is what it was when you were arrested. His answer to 4473/11c, must be "Yes".

 

[M. Sage]

I don't know. It sounds like he as arrested under a felony but the charge he was convicted for was reduced at the time. Is it common for felony convictions to carry a $100ish fine and a couple of weeks in jail?

 

[Renegade]

I don't know. It sounds like he as arrested under a felony but the charge he was convicted for was reduced at the time. Is it common for felony convictions to carry a $100ish fine and a couple of weeks in jail?

That is just the way I read it.

If he really was convicted of a misdemeanor, how did they get felony on his record? And if felony was on his record (even if incorrect), Wouldn't every BG Check since 1970 show it up?

Article leaves more questions than answers.

 

[M. Sage]

That is just the way I read it.

If he really was convicted of a misdemeanor, how did they get felony on his record? And if felony was on his record (even if incorrect), Wouldn't every BG Check since 1970 show it up?

Article leaves more questions than answers.

Either way, I chalk it up to the complete incompetence that's par for course in California's government.