Why does a DUI strip you of your 2A rights?

[BFit70]

I'm sorry but this is going to be a rant. I apologize if this is in the wrong section. I got charged with DUI in December, and just got done with all the court dates last Monday. Fines, loss of my drivers license for 60 days and 6-12 months of probation. All completely reasonable to me, I abused my driving privilege and deserve to have that suspended. But the part that really gets me is that I am not allowed to purchase, shoot, possess or otherwise come in contact with a firearm, and this includes hunting. I have to have a relative hold all of my guns until the probation process is over. I can understand this for a violent criminal (I still don't fully support it, but I understand it) but why am I lumped in with violent criminals and gang members? It seems unconstitutional that the government can take away part of the bill of rights from a first time non violent offender. Limiting the right I could see, but completely suspending it seems wrong.

Sorry for the rant but I had to get that off my chest. Looks like I'm going to have to aim for a late goose season return to hunting.

[Pagoda240]

Not trying to be a dick, but 95% of the time getting a DUI shows a lack of self control that I think someone owning a gun should have.

[IIIIIREPOIIIII]

Not trying to be a dick, but 95% of the time getting a DUI shows a lack of self control that I think someone owning a gun should have.

^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^


Posted from Pafoa.org App for Android

[BFit70]

I understand what you are saying, but I still don't think it should be completely suspended for 6 months to a year. Maybe limit it to non semi automatic weapons, or suspend my LTCF, but I'm not even allowed to shoot my bow. Thats excessive in my mind.

[brsims]

Are you being permanently stripped of your Second Amendment Rights? You did state you are looking forward to a late goose season return to hunting. So I'm thinking that instead of a permanent suspension of right to bear arms as a result of you DUI, you are instead suffering a temporary restriction, much like the temporary restriction upon your driving privileges. Might be a good time to consider which is more important to you, your right to keep and bear arms, or your wish to climb behind the wheel while under the influence.

If I sound a bit hard assed, I have what I feel to be good reason. I used to drive OTR truck, and have helped clean up an unfortunate number of crash scenes brought about by a driver who had one too many, but still thought he was good to drive because he had gotten away with it before. Therefore, I no longer have any sympathy at all for anyone who gets popped for DUI. The information on how dangerous this activity is to the individual and other innocents has been around for far too long.

[Curmudgeon]

You're not prohibited because of the DUI, you're prohibited as part of the agreement you entered into when you agreed that 6-12 months of probation (including no weapons) sounded better than 6-12 months in jail.

I guess if the whole probation package turns out to be unacceptable, you could always try county jail.

[Boots_DE]

Since you asked...

I assume you know that when you drink you should not drive. But you did.

I also assume you know that when you drink you should not handle firearms.

So, when drinking, why should anyone believe you would make a better choice with handling firearms than you did with driving a car?

The DUI shows you make irresponsible choices when drinking. That is why your access to firearms is part of the equation, and that fact should have been obvious to you before you took the first drink.

[knight0334]

You're not prohibited because of the DUI, you're prohibited as part of the agreement you entered into when you agreed that 6-12 months of probation (including no weapons) sounded better than 6-12 months in jail.

I guess if the whole probation package turns out to be unacceptable, you could always try county jail.

Yup..

Probation is generally in lieu of jail. The bad thing about probation is, if you screw up - your overall terms can reset to day 1.

IE: You have 1 year of probation. You serve 364 days without a screwup, on day 365 you violate probation = your probation and/or jail time can reset to day 1. ...do it all over again.

Parole is also in lieu of jail, but having had served some. Parole is an early release. If you screw up under parole it only resets to the last day of what you have served.


If you take the probation route, you are agreeing to the terms of probation instead of serving straight jail time. So, you are giving up your rights willingly.

[BFit70]

I knew this wouldn't be a popular subject, but I had to get it out somewhere.
To answer some questions, yes it's only a temporary suspension for the 6-12 months that I am on probation. I did agree to the probation over jail time, but I might have fought it instead of taking ARD if I had known that this would be a stipulation of the probation. The risk of 48 hours in jail might have been worth it had I lost the case.

And I understand not getting behind the wheel if I've been drinking, but there needs to be a better way to determine your BAC Level before you make the decision to get behind the wheel. I took my time drinking, stopped after 5 beers, drank water and have my self an hour and a half before I got behind the wheel, and I still was over the limit, and I'm a big guy too. I wasn't slurring words, didn't feel at all light headed, or tired. I'm not trying to say that I'm not at fault, I messed up and I admit it, but there needs to be a way to find out if you're over the magic number the state puts out there.

[FNG19]

It seems unconstitutional that the government can take away part of the bill of rights from a first time non violent offender. Limiting the right I could see, but completely suspending it seems wrong.

Not only do you not have the self-control to not drink and drive, you also apparently know nothing about the Constitution. Before you call something "unconstitutional", you'd best understand what it says. To whit:

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Bold is mine. You were deprived of liberty via due process of law. You were given a fair and speedy trial, presumably by a jury of your peers, and were found guilty.

Frankly, you're lucky you're not in jail. You got off easy. You should be behind bars.

Were I you, I would spend the next several months pondering how badly your negligence could've wound up for the people around you and how lucky you are that A) you didn't murder someone else with your thoughtless stupidity, and B) that you didn't kill yourself in the same act. Then ask yourself -- are you really responsible enough to own a gun? Do you have the maturity to handle it?

And, while you're at it, consider just how thoughtless it is to whine about it on a gun forum, where you're liable to get zero sympathy.