PICS background check denial confusion with M2

[GunLawyer001]

Phil,
I understand what you are saying and I will remember that in the future. But, if a person is denied by PICS, and they ARE truly clueless on why they would be denied, and the fact that PICS will not tell them or the FFL why, how does the person find out what the PSP/PICS used to deny them? How else can the denied person find out that information so they can make an informed decision on what to do next?

I do a "due diligence" process in about an hour, over the phone, and I provide a written legal opinion which should shelter most folks from a charge of willful falsehoods if I ever turned out to be wrong.

I don't mention that often, because it looks like self-dealing when I warn about all the folks criminally prosecuted for false statements for sending in the Challenge Form, since I'd be telling them "don't send in the form, pay me money first". But the truth is, I'd make a LOT more money defending someone from multiple false statements charges, than I make for an hour of due diligence. So roll the dice and take your chances, pay up front or pay later at sentencing time. It's a fact that the Challenge Form is a risky gambit.

[Xringshooter]

I don't think I would consider it self dealing, because I believe people really don't know where to turn if they are denied and they rely on the FFL to guide them. I think that, in many cases, the FFL doesn't know any better than to direct the customer to do the challenge form, thinking that (unfortunately), the PSP will treat them fairly. I guess it falls into the same "don't talk to the police if you don't have to". Pay the money and have a good "Gunlawyer", ask the questions for you. Thanks for the insight, now I have something solid I can explain if a customer falls into that crevice.

[High Mileage Jim]

Panther 12,

I believe you answered your own question. You plead guilty to a crime that had a maximum sentence of 2 years. Yet, you answered *no* to the question asking you if you were ever charged with a crime having a sentence of mote than 1 year. That*s the reason for your denial.

[GunLawyer001]

Panther 12,

I believe you answered your own question. You plead guilty to a crime that had a maximum sentence of 2 years. Yet, you answered *no* to the question asking you if you were ever charged with a crime having a sentence of mote than 1 year. That*s the reason for your denial.

Actually, the form (and the statutes) modify that question; it's in the instructions at the end of the 4473, in the fine print. If the crime is classed as a "misdemeanor" by the state, then it doesn't count under that clause unless the max sentence is more than TWO years. It's very confusing to most folks.

Misdemeanors 2 years or less can still be prohibiting under some circumstances, but they have to allow for 2 years and a day or more under that clause (922(g)(1) I believe). Under other clauses, they can be prohibiting if they involved domestic violence or drugs, for examples.

[PAMedic=F|A=]

Actually, the form (and the statutes) modify that question; it's in the instructions at the end of the 4473, in the fine print. If the crime is classed as a "misdemeanor" by the state, then it doesn't count under that clause unless the max sentence is more than TWO years. It's very confusing to most folks.

Misdemeanors 2 years or less can still be prohibiting under some circumstances, but they have to allow for 2 years and a day or more under that clause (922(g)(1) I believe). Under other clauses, they can be prohibiting if they involved domestic violence or drugs, for examples.

Ad to that, most (many) don*t have misdemeanor*s that last longer the. A year, let alone two. So someone from outside of the Commonwealth, or just who has a general impression of the law, maybe unaware that a crime with a 6 months sentence in NY is prohibitive here, if the crime occurred here.

[JenniferG]

OP needs to at least have the question and answer with GL in order to keep himself on this side of the jailhouse door and not let the state bankrupt him over some confusing words on a form.

[57springer]

In addition, I have not seen a reply in this thread suggesting consulting a firearms attorney like Gunlawyer or SigForLife. Thinking you can join this forum seeking free advice to resolve this matter could be a fools errand.

I don't get it either. If I had any doubt what so ever There was an incident in my past. I would not even consider filling out a 4473 without using an attorney . Just plain stupid.

[Walleye Hunter]

I don't get it either. If I had any doubt what so ever There was an incident in my past. I would not even consider filling out a 4473 without using an attorney . Just plain stupid.

Call me stupid then, I got my Criminal Access and Review without the expense of a lawyer and took it to see the sheriff about my LTCF.

[GunLawyer001]

Call me stupid then, I got my Criminal Access and Review without the expense of a lawyer and took it to see the sheriff about my LTCF.

To be fair, the sheriff has to tell you why you're being denied an LTCF, but PICS doesn't. And few folks are criminally prosecuted for failing a PICS check through the sheriff's office.

The 4473 gets you prosecuted, there's no 4473 for an LTCF. And a Challenge Form gets you prosecuted, you don't need one of those if the sheriff is denying you himself, only when he runs PICS and you are denied, at which point the sheriff is unable to override PICS and issue the LTCF.

[57springer]

Call me stupid then, I got my Criminal Access and Review without the expense of a lawyer and took it to see the sheriff about my LTCF.

But you did do your OWN check , I am referring to these guys who just roll the dice, they are STUPID !!!!