Denied PA LTCF, Florida?

[1988 Olds]

Hey guys.

I am a current LTCF holder, this question pertains to my brother. About 3 years ago my brother was a drug user. He was never arrested or caught doing drugs by the police but there was one time my parents called and had the cops come out and he went into rehab under his own power. My parents and me took him there and checked him in. He has now been clean for 2 years this past May. A few months ago he applied for his LTCF and was denied due to being admitted to rehab. I was unaware that this would be on his record and prevent him from getting his LTCF in PA. So I was wondering is this something that FL looks at as well or should he be able to get a Non-resident License. I can understand if a lot of you feel he should not be able to own/carry a gun but if you personally knew him you would see he has really changed his life around.

Also he has never attempted to buy a gun in PA. I assume that buying a gun and a LTCF are similiar processes so he would be denied buying a gun as well.

[9orangeletters]

Hey guys.

I am a current LTCF holder, this question pertains to my brother. About 3 years ago my brother was a drug user. He was never arrested or caught doing drugs by the police but there was one time my parents called and had the cops come out and he went into rehab under his own power. My parents and me took him there and checked him in. He has now been clean for 2 years this past May. A few months ago he applied for his LTCF and was denied due to being admitted to rehab. I was unaware that this would be on his record and prevent him from getting his LTCF in PA. So I was wondering is this something that FL looks at as well or should he be able to get a Non-resident License. I can understand if a lot of you feel he should not be able to own/carry a gun but if you personally knew him you would see he has really changed his life around.

Also he has never attempted to buy a gun in PA. I assume that buying a gun and a LTCF are similiar processes so he would be denied buying a gun as well.

Sounds like the "character clause". I'm just wondering where he applied for the license?

Also, I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think going to rehab is going to exclude you from owning or buying a firearm, but I could be wrong. If you can buy the gun legally, I don't see why you should be excluded from carrying it.

[ByblosHex]

Hey guys.

I am a current LTCF holder, this question pertains to my brother. About 3 years ago my brother was a drug user. He was never arrested or caught doing drugs by the police but there was one time my parents called and had the cops come out and he went into rehab under his own power. My parents and me took him there and checked him in. He has now been clean for 2 years this past May. A few months ago he applied for his LTCF and was denied due to being admitted to rehab. I was unaware that this would be on his record and prevent him from getting his LTCF in PA. So I was wondering is this something that FL looks at as well or should he be able to get a Non-resident License. I can understand if a lot of you feel he should not be able to own/carry a gun but if you personally knew him you would see he has really changed his life around.

Also he has never attempted to buy a gun in PA. I assume that buying a gun and a LTCF are similiar processes so he would be denied buying a gun as well.

Illegal use or addiction to any controlled bustance is a federal Prohibiting factor that permenant makes it a felony to possess ammuntion or firearms. With or without charges or conviction it doesn't matter. He used illegal drugs and it can be proven so if he was in possession of firearms or ammunition in the US he would be comitting a felony. I'm not a lawyer, just posting the law as it is written.

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person:

(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

(2) who is a fugitive from justice;

(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

(4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution;

(5) who, being an alien:

(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States;or

(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26));

(6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;

(8) who is subject to a court order that:

(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate;

(B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child;and

(C) (i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child;or

(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury;or

(9) who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition;or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

(h) It shall be unlawful for any individual, who to that individual's knowledge and while being employed for any person described in any paragraph of subsection (g) of this section, in the course of such employment:

(1) to receive, possess, or transport any firearm or ammunition in oraffecting interstate or foreign commerce;or

(2) to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

[Kurt_D]

Illegal use or addiction to any controlled bustance is a federal Prohibiting factor that permenant makes it a felony to possess ammuntion or firearms. With or without charges or conviction it doesn't matter. He used illegal drugs and it can be proven so if he was in possession of firearms or ammunition in the US he would be comitting a felony. I'm not a lawyer, just posting the law as it is written.

I'm not so sure that HAVING used or HAVING been addicted to a controlled substance should be permanently, federally disqualifying - as much of a stigma is applied to their use.

This para:

(3) who IS an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)) (bolding/color is mine)

Puts it in the present tense, not the past. But that still may not get around the character catch-all that "9orangeletters" mentioned. That one is always unpredictable but possibly appealable.

Need an attorney's interpretation.

[ByblosHex]

I'm not so sure that HAVING used or HAVING been addicted to a controlled substance should be permanently, federally disqualifying - as much of a stigma is applied to their use.

This para:

Puts it in the present tense, not the past. But that still may not get around the character catch-all that "9orangeletters" mentioned. That one is always unpredictable but possibly appealable.

Need an attorney's interpretation.

I dont disagree with your opinion, but the law remains. I was told that whenever tense is used in law it can usually be interpreted to include past/present/future tenses as well. Much like how when law mentions Him/He it also means She/Her.

I could be wrong though. Im not a lawyer.

[1988 Olds]

Yea I assumed since he hasn't been using for 2-2.5 years he would now be able to get his LTCF since he voluntary went to rehab. He was never forced or assigned to go. I didn't think it would even stick on his record. I'd love for my brother to be approved for his FL non-resident but I don't want to see him do the training and spend all the money to get denied.

[tl_3237]

I dont disagree with your opinion, but the law remains. I was told that whenever tense is used in law it can usually be interpreted to include past/present/future tenses as well. Much like how when law mentions Him/He it also means She/Her.

I could be wrong though. Im not a lawyer.

Most statutes have a contruction section that delve into these questions. For US Code its 1 USC §1. Excerpted:

§ 1. Words denoting number, gender, and so forth
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise—
words importing the singular include and apply to several persons, parties, or things;

words importing the plural include the singular;

words importing the masculine gender include the feminine as well;

words used in the present tense include the future as well as the present;

...

I tend to agree that past use with a significant 'clean' period would not be a disqualifier.

[twency]

I'm not so sure that HAVING used or HAVING been addicted to a controlled substance should be permanently, federally disqualifying - as much of a stigma is applied to their use.

This para:
"(3) who IS an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)) (bolding/color is mine)"

Puts it in the present tense, not the past. But that still may not get around the character catch-all that "9orangeletters" mentioned. That one is always unpredictable but possibly appealable.

Need an attorney's interpretation.

In other words, to quote an Arkansas-licensed attorney (whose law license was subsequently suspended) "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

Seriously though, while I'm also not a lawyer, I agree that the plain language of the federal statute appears to only refer to present-tense addiction. The PA LTCF character clause is a separate matter, is others have noted.

[Greywolf]

Illegal use or addiction to any controlled bustance is a federal Prohibiting factor that permenant makes it a felony to possess ammuntion or firearms. With or without charges or conviction it doesn't matter. He used illegal drugs and it can be proven so if he was in possession of firearms or ammunition in the US he would be comitting a felony. I'm not a lawyer, just posting the law as it is written.

Except that the law as written uses the present tense: "IS."

If the brother is now clean, and has never been convicted of a felony and has never been involuntarily committed to a mental health institution, he is NOT prohibited under Federal law from possessing firearms. He also should not be prohibited from obtaining a LTCF.

I dont disagree with your opinion, but the law remains. I was told that whenever tense is used in law it can usually be interpreted to include past/present/future tenses as well. Much like how when law mentions Him/He it also means She/Her.

I hope whoever told you that is not a lawyer, because if he/she is a lawyer, he/she should be disbarred. Words have meaning, and words in laws especially have meaning. If a law says "is," it cannot be construed to also include "was" and "will be."

[9orangeletters]

Except that the law as written uses the present tense: "IS."

If the brother is now clean, and has never been convicted of a felony and has never been involuntarily committed to a mental health institution, he is NOT prohibited under Federal law from possessing firearms. He also should not be prohibited from obtaining a LTCF.


I hope whoever told you that is not a lawyer, because if he/she is a lawyer, he/she should be disbarred. Words have meaning, and words in laws especially have meaning. If a law says "is," it cannot be construed to also include "was" and "will be."

I dunno man, post #7 seems pretty cut and dry with the verbiage.