Can a person with a Kansas ccl marry a convicted felon?

[crawel]

I was having a conversation with my girlfriend this morning and she asked if I could legally marry a convicted felon and keep my ccl? I did a search but found nothing. Would like some information on this if anybody has the facts. Thanks

 

[Armed_and_Safe]

I dont know about the Kansas CCL, I don't see how they can punish you and take something from you for what someone else did. But on the other hand if you keep a gun in the house technically he/she (not sure who is marrying who) would be a felon in possession. So even though I think you could keep your permit it would be kinda useless because you could not keep a weapon without taking the risk or sending your new significant other away for a very long time.

 

[G274me]

I would think that if one gets married to a convicted felon and they live together then there can not be any guns in the house. Because if there are guns in the house, then the felon would be in possession of a gun and would therefore be breaking the law.

Now there could be some loop holes around this but I'm not sure. I would have them call there local LEO and ask. Every state is different about this. You can also look up your states gun laws and find out what it says about restricted persons and see what it defines possession as.

 

[Scott Sager]

I'm guessing that your best resource in this matter would be your local sheriffs office. It seems to me that if you restricted her access to your weapon, whether it be locking it away or on your person, it would not be any different than having children in the house. Just a guess.

 

[B2Tall]

Yes you can. The only thing the gun owner has to do is make sure the felon doesn't have access to functioning firearms while they (the permit holder) is not around. In other words if you leave the house and the felon is there, the guns have to be locked up. Somebody else's criminal record does not negate your rights.

I'll sum it up by quoting (more or less) G. Gordon Liddy: "Being a convicted felon, I'm not allowed to own guns. Needless to say my wife has a very large collection".

 

[rlkraatz]

Concealed Carry married to a Felon

I would not ask a leo. They do not seem to be that versed on the law do the lack of retraining as laws change.

I would contact a lawyer that specializes in 2nd amendment.

 

[Treo]

I'm guessing that your best resource in this matter would be your local sheriffs office. It seems to me that if you restricted her access to your weapon, whether it be locking it away or on your person, it would not be any different than having children in the house. Just a guess.

Never, ever , under any circumstance do you ask a cop for legal advice. If the answer is that important to you pay the consult fee and ask a lawyer

 

[Armed_and_Safe]

Now there could be some loop holes around this but I'm not sure. I would have them call there local LEO and ask. Every state is different about this. You can also look up your states gun laws and find out what it says about restricted persons and see what it defines possession as.

This is a federal law and you would have to comply with both State and federal law. Since they are infact prohibited persons by federal law State law really doesn't matter because they would be in violation of federal law by default.

This sounded like a hypothetical question but if it is not or becomes reality later just like any legal matter I would suggest contacting a lawyer to make sure. But I am almost 100 percent sure that the felon would be in violation of the law if the gun is in the house no matter which state you live in.

 

[B2Tall]

This is a federal law and you would have to comply with both State and federal law. Since they are infact prohibited persons by federal law State law really doesn't matter because they would be in violation of federal law by default.

This sounded like a hypothetical question but if it is not or becomes reality later just like any legal matter I would suggest contacting a lawyer to make sure. But I am almost 100 percent sure that the felon would be in violation of the law if the gun is in the house no matter which state you live in.

The felon would not be in violation as long as the gun owner were present or the guns were locked up one way or another. Either would be OK. This was a federal ruling from a long time ago.

 

[Armed_and_Safe]

The felon would not be in violation as long as the gun owner were present or the guns were locked up one way or another. Either would be OK. This was a federal ruling from a long time ago.

Could you cite the case please? I am not questioning your word just curious to see it.

I think I saw a case before that said the opposite. Even if the owner was there unless it was on there person the felon still had access to it. And locking it up, if it was a key lock unless the key is locked some how then the felon is in possession of the key (can keep going in circles here) and if a combination lock there is no way the felon can prove he didn't know the combination. The last part really bugged me because the felon wouldn't have to prove anything the burden of prof lies with the prosecution.

I tried looking for the case I was reading before but could not find it, if you could point me to one that says otherwise please do so. Like I said that combination part really got to me and I couldn't believe it when I read it.

 

[B2Tall]

Could you cite the case please? I am not questioning your word just curious to see it.

I think I saw a case before that said the opposite. Even if the owner was there unless it was on there person the felon still had access to it. And locking it up, if it was a key lock unless the key is locked some how then the felon is in possession of the key (can keep going in circles here) and if a combination lock there is no way the felon can prove he didn't know the combination. The last part really bugged me because the felon wouldn't have to prove anything the burden of prof lies with the prosecution.

I tried looking for the case I was reading before but could not find it, if you could point me to one that says otherwise please do so. Like I said that combination part really got to me and I couldn't believe it when I read it.

To be honest with you I'm not going to go hunting it down. I first learned of this back in the 80s and recently read something about it again when researching something else. I'm just relating prior information. Off the top of my head I can't tell you where to look. As others have pointed out, if it's that important then a 2A lawyer should be consulted.

 

[Deserteagle]

I would not ask a leo. They do not seem to be that versed on the law do the lack of retraining as laws change.

I would contact a lawyer that specializes in 2nd amendment.

Never, ever , under any circumstance do you ask a cop for legal advice. If the answer is that important to you pay the consult fee and ask a lawyer

Here we go again. No thread can be complete without having at least one anti-cop post...

Apparently it is better to pay the rich (insert expletive here) lawyer some money to tell you what is good for you rather than ask our hard working boys in blue, and/ or do the research on your own if you dont get a solid response from the police. Sure not every cop is an expert on the most confusing laws, but to dismiss them as unknowing and untrustworthy is over the top.

 

[agrippakc]

As always, talk to a lawyer to make sure that you have all the legal specifics figured out. You can marry, it's just a high stakes game that you are playing and there is no margin for error.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Here we go again. No thread can be complete without having at least one anti-cop post...

Apparently it is better to pay the rich (insert expletive here) lawyer some money to tell you what is good for you rather than ask our hard working boys in blue, or do the research on your own.

And if the cop gives you bad information on the phone, do you REALLY think that is going to help your case in court?

Would you ask the oil change guy at Jiffy Lube to rebuild your NASCAR racing engine for you? It's not cop bashing. It's telling the truth about what can be reasonably expected of a person given their profession. How many cases get tossed out of court because the charges were improper? You question two cops about what is legal or illegal and eventually you are going to get a differing opinion on something.

Cops are not legal experts. That's why governments have prosecuting ATTORNEYs. The prosecuting attorney sorts out the evidence the cops give them and decide if their case has enough merit to it to go to court or not. Cops aren't legal experts - otherwise they would have to go to four years of law school to become one.

 

[B2Tall]

As always, talk to a lawyer to make sure that you have all the legal specifics figured out. You can marry, it's just a high stakes game that you are playing and there is no margin for error.

Yeah. If I remember correctly the firearm must either stay in possession of the legal owner or be secured in a way that the felon doesn't have access to it.

 

[Deserteagle]

And if the cop gives you bad information on the phone, do you REALLY think that is going to help your case in court?

Would you ask the oil change guy at Jiffy Lube to rebuild your NASCAR racing engine for you? It's not cop bashing. It's telling the truth about what can be reasonably expected of a person given their profession. How many cases get tossed out of court because the charges were improper? You question two cops about what is legal or illegal and eventually you are going to get a differing opinion on something.

Cops are not legal experts. That's why governments have prosecuting ATTORNEYs. The prosecuting attorney sorts out the evidence the cops give them and decide if their case has enough merit to it to go to court or not. Cops aren't legal experts - otherwise they would have to go to four years of law school to become one.

I never said cops are experts. However, they are required to know the laws in which they are required to enforce. Do all of them know all of the laws? No, its called being human. If cops were that bad at knowing the laws, then we would have rich scumbag lawyers riding around in patrol cars rather than police.

I am more so advocating to do research on laws on your own. But hey this is America, and apparently we shouldnt have to do anything on our own because thats what we have "experts" for. I love "experts" telling me whats best for me, dont you?

 

[B2Tall]

Here we go again. No thread can be complete without having at least one anti-cop post...

Apparently it is better to pay the rich (insert expletive here) lawyer some money to tell you what is good for you rather than ask our hard working boys in blue, and/ or do the research on your own if you dont get a solid response from the police. Sure not every cop is an expert on the most confusing laws, but to dismiss them as unknowing and untrustworthy is over the top.

I've found that most people who dislike LEOs in general do so because a cop had the audacity to "falsely" arrest them for exercising their God-given right to sell drugs or beat their wife or drive drunk etc. etc.

 

[blueribbonman]

Talk to a lawyer.

 

[Unfettered Might]

As always, talk to a lawyer to make sure that you have all the legal specifics figured out. You can marry, it's just a high stakes game that you are playing and there is no margin for error.

Yeah. If I remember correctly the firearm must either stay in possession of the legal owner or be secured in a way that the felon doesn't have access to it.

+1

I remember coming across the same info, but I can't remember where either.

Google is your friend and the cite shouldn't be hard to find for anyone that really wants to know.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I am more so advocating to do research on laws on your own. But hey this is America, and apparently we shouldnt have to do anything on our own because thats what we have "experts" for. I love "experts" telling me whats best for me, dont you?

I am with you on that one. The only caveat being that sometimes the courts have interpreted laws in some strange ways. If it's something not too earth shattering like "when is it OK to drive through a crosswalk with a pedestrian in it", I would say look up the law yourself and be pretty confident in what it says, and if you happen to be wrong, it's a $150 ticket.

If it's something really important that (1) has a high potential of actually being an issue and (2) carries a high consequence of being wrong; then I would say invest in a lawyer who is supposed to have access to and be able to interpret not only what the statute itself says, but what the courts have in the past said what the statute means.

It's up to each individual person to decide for themselves how much of (1) and (2) above applies to their situation.

Personally, with easy access to statutes via the internet, I see no need to ask a police officer anything about what is legal or not, including "when can you drive through a crosswalk with a pedestrian in it"...which is, in Washington, RCW 46.61.235, BTW.