# Should a drug arrest keep you from owning a gun?



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

Hopefully this won't get locked as being political but.....

A Cleveland judge ruled that a person convicted of a minor drug offense can own a gun to protect themselves. I tend to agree with the judge on that. He ininterpreted two recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings to mean that state laws banning gun from criminals are intended for felonies not misdemeanors. I don't believe the law was meant to prevent a person who got caught with a joint from ever owning a gun. Felons yes. A kid with a joint no. Why should a drug misdemeanor be different than any other misdemeanor such as shoplifting?


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

Snake,
can you clarify. You state that the judge interpeted law as meaning that banning guns is intended for felonies and not misdemeanors. You also say "why should a drug misdemeanor be different than any other misdemeanor".

Are you saying that a drug misdemeanor prevents someone from owning a gun but any other misdemeanor does not? Just asking to clarify.

As far as your question, I don't think the type of misdemeanor should dictate gun ownership rights.


----------



## stanimals2 (Mar 20, 2011)

I worked for the department of corrections for almost 9 years and I have to agree with the judge. Back in the 80,s when the war on drugs got tuff there were so many people sent to prison that should have been on parole and treatment at worst. That whole thing is responsible for a large part of prison over crowding in Ohio. Anyway I think some minor NON VIOLENT and first offense crimes should be exempt from the law. Just my worthless 2 cents,

Stan


----------



## starcraft67 (Jul 4, 2004)

I do believe that the difference between misdemeanor and felony drug possession is the quantity. A joint is a lot different than a pound, if they can prove intent to sale. If your charged with a felony,then you lose your right to bear arms (legally).


----------



## gobrowntruck21 (Jan 3, 2009)

Hasn't stopped me...

Let me explain a little; in '99 when I was young and dumb in college, I got what I like to call a party ticket - underage possession/consumption of alcohol and possession of a "joint". I paid my fine and went home the same night. 

Since then I've gotten a good job, a wife and daughter, 1 and 3/4 dogs, and a white house with a picket fence. John Law hasn't seen me since. But because of the ill-conceived wording of the law, I cannot own/possess a firearm - not to hunt with, target shoot, for personal protection, nada. What a joke.

I will say, thanks to the law, I've gotten really good with my bow. But it sure has been a pain all these years climbing the trees to retrieve my arrows from those squirrels. There's gotta be an easier and legal way...


----------



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

boatnut said:


> Are you saying that a drug misdemeanor prevents someone from owning a gun but any other misdemeanor does not? Just asking to clarify.
> 
> As far as your question, I don't think the type of misdemeanor should dictate gun ownership rights.


Yes, if your convicted of possension of a drug you are banned from owning a gun. In Ohio the law denies gun ownership right to all felons and fugitives, the mentally ill ( if they know about them I guess), chronic alcoholics and drug offenders of any kind


----------



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

gobrowntruck21 said:


> Hasn't stopped me...
> 
> Let me explain a little; in '99 when I was young and dumb in college, I got what I like to call a party ticket - underage possession/consumption of alcohol and possession of a "joint". I paid my fine and went home the same night.
> 
> ...


You may be in luck....I imagine there wil be appeals and more appeals... I'll see if I can find the linkk to the Plain Dealer article...

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/04/judges_ruling_may_permit_guns.html


----------



## gobrowntruck21 (Jan 3, 2009)

Snakecharmer said:


> You may be in luck....I imagine there wil be appeals and more appeals... I'll see if I can find the linkk to the Plain Dealer article...


Restoration of Rights - HB 45/54 should be in the House this week. That will change the law to a felony drug conviction barring ownership of firearms.


----------



## Jigging Jim (Apr 3, 2010)

I'm just glad that I have not made any mistakes to lose my Gun Rights (privileges).


----------



## gobrowntruck21 (Jan 3, 2009)

Jigging Jim said:


> I'm just glad that I have not made any mistakes to lose my Gun Rights (privileges).


Rights and privileges are completely different. But yes, it's funny how a somewhat petty mistake can haunt you for a long time.


----------



## Bucket Mouth (Aug 13, 2007)

The real problem here is that big brother feels that they have the right to regulate what adults do to their own bodies. If big brother ever gets out of the dictatorship of personal choices they impose, we would all be better off.

So, my answer is no, a drug arrest shouldn't keep you from owning a gun, seeing as how I don't believe there should be such a thing as a drug arrest to begin with. The war on drugs is a total failure, both financially and culturally.


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

Bucket Mouth said:


> The real problem here is that big brother feels that they have the right to regulate what adults do to their own bodies. If big brother ever gets out of the dictatorship of personal choices they impose, we would all be better off.
> 
> So, my answer is no, a drug arrest shouldn't keep you from owning a gun, seeing as how I don't believe there should be such a thing as a drug arrest to begin with. The war on drugs is a total failure, both financially and culturally.


i would love to find out how many inner city crimes are drug related. i would say that a HUGE percentage of inner city issues are drug related. if you think "drug arrests" are not needed, tell that to people that just got robbed by a crackhead looking for money to get his next fix. or the conveneint stores getting knocked over by junkies every other month. lets not forget about the murders. i remember a few years back a house full of college students getting executed, prob because they didnt pay for their drugs. yeah, its a non-issue.

as far as the original question, if its not a felon, then it shouldnt be an issue. unless you are a repeat offender. then i would say it should be. maybe like a 3 strikes and your out type deal. repeated drug offenses, even if minor should result in loss of gun ownership rights.

just glad i dont have to worry about this, never have, never will be into drugs.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Sorry, I guess I'll take the other side.

I would support a restriction on gun ownership after a "few" 2-3 drug arrests.

One offense could mean "young and dumb", more would indicate the potential of reckless behavior to me.

What someone elects to do with their own body doesn't concern me at all until it effects me or my family. So when or if someone else's choices effect me through passed on higher costs, drug or alcohol related crime and a larger tax burden on me to support someones personal choice, then I have a problem with "personal choice".


----------



## spfldbassguy (Mar 23, 2009)

If convicted of a felony then no guns for you,that's how it should be. A minor drug offense or misdemeanor shouldn't bar anyone from owning a firearm in my opinion. Like others have already stated,if it's a reoccurring thing then they lose that right also.



Bucketmouth you are totally correct in stating the the "War on Drugs" has been a total failure on all fronts. It hasn't helped one bit to me. There's still marijuana,crack,heroin,coke,meth,etc,etc readily availiable on the streets. There's people locked up for long times that woulda been better suited to get treatment instead of hard time. The goverment has thrown billions upon billions of dollars at the "War" and the results don't justify it.


----------



## fishintechnician (Jul 20, 2007)

lordofthepunks said:


> i would love to find out how many inner city crimes are drug related. i would say that a HUGE percentage of inner city issues are drug related. if you think "drug arrests" are not needed, tell that to people that just got robbed by a crackhead looking for money to get his next fix. or the conveneint stores getting knocked over by junkies every other month. lets not forget about the murders. i remember a few years back a house full of college students getting executed, prob because they didnt pay for their drugs. yeah, its a non-issue.
> 
> as far as the original question, if its not a felon, then it shouldnt be an issue. unless you are a repeat offender. then i would say it should be. maybe like a 3 strikes and your out type deal. repeated drug offenses, even if minor should result in loss of gun ownership rights.
> 
> just glad i dont have to worry about this, never have, never will be into drugs.



I think what you are talking about and the op are talking about are two totally different things. Marijuana and crack are way different and as such are represented as such in our judicail system. marijuana is a schedule two in our system and everything else is a schedule 1 which means that if you get busted with pot in ohio as long as it is not over 120 grams you will get a misdemeanor ticket, go to court pay a fine and lose your license for 6 months.Any ohter drug you will be charged with a flony and you will most likely go to prison/jail depending on the amount.

So this being said when was the last time you heard someone getting shot,robbed or totallying a car because they were on marijuana? I know Im probabaly starting a storm here but so be it. I do agree that it is all illegal and there should be a punishment for it but I dont agree that it should keep you from owning a gun. Hell in other states you can get a card saying that you can legally posses and use marijuana for medical reasons, whys this? Because it does no real harm other than maybe causeing the munchies but here in our great state if you get caught with it you are the worst of the worst and now cant own guns its a joke. Hopefully the poster who posted about the house bill will keep us up to date on what happens with it.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

fishintechnician said:


> I do agree that it is all illegal and there should be a punishment for it but I dont agree that it should keep you from owning a gun.


How about a drivers license?


----------



## FISNFOOL (May 12, 2009)

"So this being said when was the last time you heard someone getting shot,robbed or totallying a car because they were on marijuana?"


THREE DAYS AGO

Not to beat a dead horse but that is why it was changed from DUI to OVI. The old DUI law referenced alcohol. OVI covers it all.

Saturday, April 2, 2011

DAYTON &#8212; Police are investigating what they believe is a drug deal that resulted in one man being shot several times and then being driven to the hospital by a friend.

The victim, reported to be in his teens, was shot about 6:45 p.m., Saturday at 1067 Salem Ave. and then driven to Grandview Hospital, according to emergency services radio dispatches. His wounds were serious enough he was transferred to Miami Valley Hospital.

Dayton police Lt. Kim Hill said the victim was apparently purchasing marijuana from someone at the Salem Avenue address when he was shot. A male friend, who was waiting in the car at the time of the shooting, drove the man to Grandview Hospital.

The victim was shot in the abdomen and was out of surgery Saturday evening and in intensive care at Miami Valley Hospital, Hill said.


----------



## sploosh56 (Dec 31, 2008)

The war on drugs is a huge failure, to put it simply. Imagine if all of that money over the years had actually been put to something worthwhile to better our country.


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

drugs are illegal, period. no gray area. those laws were put in place for a reason. sure every case is different, but you still broke the law and dont try to BS me, you didnt just smoke one joint/your first joint and get caught RIGHT then, theres about 100% chance the person caught was a habitual user.


----------



## yonderfishin (Apr 9, 2006)

I dont see it being possible for them to judge it on a case by case basis , like this guy is a bad user so he shouldnt own a gun but this one here is ok so we will let him. Even though its a raw deal for some , the law tries to keep guns out of the hands of drug users and pushers , or certain law breakers in general , which is probably a good thing , even though its a crappy deal for some.


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

yonderfishin said:


> I dont see it being possible for them to judge it on a case by case basis , like this guy is a bad user so he shouldnt own a gun but this one here is ok so we will let him. Even though its a raw deal for some , the law tries to keep guns out of the hands of drug users and pushers , or certain law breakers in general , which is probably a good thing , even though its a crappy deal for some.


i agree and i think thats the spirit of the law.


----------



## streamstalker (Jul 8, 2005)

> As of 2011, only two states, Kentucky and Virginia, continue to impose a life-long denial of the right to vote to all citizens with a felony record, absent some extraordinary intervention by the Governor or state legislature.[3] However, in Kentucky, a felon's rights can now be restored after the completion of a restoration process to regain civil rights.[3] Wikipedia


If you can regain the right to vote after a felony conviction, why can't you regain Second Amendment rights after a misdemeanor? Or after a felony, for that matter. The right to bear arms is much clearer in the original drafting of The Constitution than the right to vote, so doesn't it make sense that it should be a right which is more difficult to lose on a permanent basis than the right to vote?


----------



## Trollineye (Oct 20, 2008)

I'm with you Snake and agree that States laws do not trump Federal. Your just hosed because you live in Ohio. 

lordofthepunks, does that mean that 3 speeding tickets will (or should) take away your right to own firearms? They are both misdemeanors.


----------



## cptn_janks (May 30, 2010)

i think thats a stretch. from that article it doesnt say WHY he was shot or what went down. could have been a previous dispute, could have been a robbery, could have been ANYTHING.



FISNFOOL said:


> "So this being said when was the last time you heard someone getting shot,robbed or totallying a car because they were on marijuana?"
> 
> 
> THREE DAYS AGO
> ...


----------



## viper1 (Apr 13, 2004)

Thats life a mix of good and bad choices. Seems there is a lot of people make the good chices so it cant be all that tough. When your a kid they seal mistakes. When your a grownup you know the law..thus you pick your own road. Nothing new for people who choose the wrong paths to make excuses why they are not as bad as others. Sorry if you made the wrong choice but as you say the law is the bottom line. If you don't like it try to change it. Personally I dont want any one using a gun under the enfluence of any thing including pot around me. Probably no worse then beer but many a drunk has killed people. I think the laws are thought out to protect people from there own bad choices. Quote any one you want but the law is the law.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

viper1 said:


> Personally I dont want any one using a gun under the enfluence of any thing including pot around me. Probably no worse then beer but many a drunk has killed people. I think the laws are thought out to protect people from there own bad choices. Quote any one you want but the law is the law.


What about somebody with a gun and a little twichy from too much coffee or a five hour energy drink?


----------



## puterdude (Jan 27, 2006)

I think the OP has his answer.


----------

