Army vet denied 2A-rights because of marijuana possession 42 years ago

[rambone]

TOMBALL, TX -- Ron Kelly, a 59-year-old retired U.S Army soldier, tried to purchase a .22 caliber rifle at a Wal-Mart in Tomball, Texas. The veteran failed the FBI’s background check because he was charged with marijuana possession — in 1971. Rights denied!

Even though he spent 20 years firing tanks, cannons, and machine guns working for the U.S. Army, he is denied "permission" to purchase a gun by the FBI.

The only blemish on his record happened while he was in high school, 42 years ago. He was convicted of possessing the forbidden marijuana plant.

He appealed the decision, and received a letter from the Department of Justice. NO. PERMISSION FOR RIGHTS DENIED.


Man had succesful 20-year military career, so why can't he buy a gun?

​

 

[mrjarrell]

Well, I don't see that he should be accorded any extra Rights due to his military service, but his Rights should not be denied for possession of a plant. Just more ludicrous drug war nonsense. Hell, it wasn't even a felony. He should approach the state government and see about getting his record expunged to restore his Rights. Then again, it's Texas. He's probably lucky they haven't hunted him down and killed him.

 

[Trigger Time]

Well he certainly deserves more respect due to his service than an obama welfare and free phone recipient. No not more rights though. This govt is a sham. So he cant buy a gun from a store big whoop. By law he isnt unable to own guns. Go buy off an individual. **** the disgraceful and criminal doj!

 

[45calibre]

How can he be denied for it? NICS clearly says that you will be denied if you have been charged with possession of a controlled substance within the past year. It makes no sense. I Have also been charged with possession of mariajuana years ago and the most trouble i have had was getting a delay, i have never been denied.

 

[CathyInBlue]

The hangup is prolly in the "convicted of a crime for which you could have been sentenced to more than one year (366+ days) in jail" part. Plead guilty to pot possession while the state says the max sentence is 18 months matters, even if you are actually sentenced to only 2 months suspended, you lose all firearm ownership rights in perpetuity. Next year, with legal reform to lower that to a maximum of 12 months, and your neighbor is convicted, sentenced, and serves the full dozen for the exact same crime, your neighbor can get their firearm ownership rights back.

It doesn't make sense. It's the government. It doesn't have to.

 

[KG1]

Well, I don't see that he should be accorded any extra Rights due to his military service, but his Rights should not be denied for possession of a plant. Just more ludicrous drug war nonsense. Hell, it wasn't even a felony. He should approach the state government and see about getting his record expunged to restore his Rights. Then again, it's Texas. He's probably lucky they haven't hunted him down and killed him.

I think the point is that he was good enough to handle all sorts of heavy arms on behalf of the military but now after 20 yrs. of that he's all of a sudden declared not proper as a private citizen to even buy a stinking .22 cal rifle from Wally world.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

No one seemed to know how the FBI could have even known about such an old conviction.

LOL, yeah right. I see a lot of this now that the older convictions are being computerized.

PCR should solve it.

 

[BogWalker]

I thought it had to be a felony to lose any rights.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I read about this last week, I assumed it was on INGO. Are you guys slacking or what?

 

[Jerchap2]

Well, in addition to objecting to the slang "prolly" that Cathy used -- assume it means "probably" and you are too lazy to spell out the word -- this sucks, and is wrong. I am not a lawyer (thank God), but common sense would say that such an insignificant crime by a teenager should not negate a long service to his country in the military. I also feel strongly that servicemen should have preference in a number of areas for a number of reasons. Only a few percent volunteer to serve, protect, and defend our country and give up everything -- including their lives -- and with that comes special privileges, IMHO.

 

[Cavman]

The US GOVERNMENT saw fit to let him carry arms and be responsible for millions of dollars worth of fire arms and equipment. Now that he's out the same government does not see him fit for something he did as a teenager? Hope this guy can get his rifle. It's not right.

 

[LPMan59]

 

[GunnerDan]

The guy should just purchase a weapon from an individual, no NICS check, so basically telling the government to F*** off!

Gunner

 

[Bunnykid68]

The guy should just purchase a weapon from an individual, no NICS check, so basically telling the government to F*** off!

Gunner

This ^^^^ how difficult is it to find someone with a 22 for sale