Denied CHL - Looking for feedback on lawyers' recommendation

[Hawaiian]

The OP got in trouble 15 years ago. Give him a break. I did alot of stupid stuff when I was young also.

 

[Heywood]

I have no advice, but I will say, in defense of the op. some people with more than a few brawls in their past can change. I speak from experience. The DUI thing is a much bigger deal than a fight or two from the standpoint of a local judge here, I don't know if that is what your hang up is.

 

[rick benjamin]

Sheriff said no to a CC license.
Open carry may scare away clients.
DUI apparently can't be expunged.

Choices that seem to remain:
Expunge the convictions-arrests then try for CC again
Move to another county and try again
Carry (concealed) without the license (don't tell anyone)

 

[pdxRealtor]

I'm trying to stay out of trouble so concealed carry without the license is not an option. Thats a crime.

So is open carry depending on exaclty where you are and how you're moving (auto vs walking vs atv). Kind of hard to keep it all straight between all the rules of each city/county.

Add in the lack of knowledge a lot of police officers have and IMO open carry in the tri county area is just asking for trouble. Rememebr even an arrest due to a misunderstanding will haunt you potentially forever.

I thought about another county, I have an address in WAshington cnty, but thats not the route I really want to take.

One option you did not mention was appeal the sherrifs decision. At least one of three well known gun rights attorneys tells me its very likely I'll win.

The other two did not say it was unlikely, we never discussed it at length. Their initial suggestion was expunge and reapply. So, thats what we discussed at length.

Unfortunately for me it was the third attorney I spoke with who thought the appeal process was a good route. So I didn't even think to question the first two attorneys about that option like I would have had I known what the third attorney told me.

That was the sole purpose of this thread. Get opinions on the difference of opinions the attorneys had.

As soon as my LEDS report shows up I will be talking to all three again.

 

[4Freedom]

You do not have a felony or any domestic violence convictions and they denied you a CHL? Somehow, I feel Big Brother is just looking for an excuse to keep guns out of our hands. I suppose felons forfeit their 2nd Amendment rights, but you are not a felon, am I correct? A minor scuffle with a bouncer over 10 years ago denies you your freedom as an American citizen? I think that is overkill, although our government has been looking for any excuse to deny us our freedoms. In their eyes, we are all violent aggressors for merely owning guns or carrying them at all.

 

[pdxRealtor]

Not a felon. No domestic violence. Just a wild child without the proper guidance to make better choices many years ago.

 

[The B]

I think your typical "felon" is gonna be much more trustworthy with a gun than someone with a long history of anger, disregard, and alcoholism.

 

[4Freedom]

I think your typical "felon" is gonna be much more trustworthy with a gun than someone with a long history of anger, disregard, and alcoholism.

Having a history of anger, disregard and alcoholism should not deny one their constitutional freedoms. In my opinion, people who text and drive on their cell phones pose a greater threat to the public considering how many more people are killed in car accidents than by guns. I think those people should lose their right to own cell phones before a person who was in a minor scuffle over 10 years ago should lose the right to own or carry a gun.

As far as alcohol abuse, unless it has resulted in arrests that would strip you of your gun rights, such as violent felony as a result of alcohol abuse, I don't see how that alone should be ground for you to lose your rights to own and carry a gun.

I never said freedom was completely a great thing, but I am more worried about the government deciding who is worthy and not worthy to own and carry a gun. Today they may say anybody who was in a fight in their past shouldn't carry a gun. Tomorrow, they may say anybody who criticizes the president is not trustworthy to own a gun.

I'm the kind of guy who trusts my fellow citizen more than a bloated bureaucracy.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I think your typical "felon" is gonna be much more trustworthy with a gun than someone with a long history of anger, disregard, and alcoholism.

Preach it!
The price of tea in china is always an interesting topic.

 

[The B]

Preach it!
The price of tea in china is always an interesting topic.

Have you been waiting to use that phrase all day?

 

[Mikej]

Have you been waiting to use that phrase all day?

LOL....Really! I did!

 

[jim97701]

I guess I don't understand your denial for a CHP? When I was in my 20's I was a dumb azz idiot!. I got a few DUII and DWS infractions (twas more than 2) and was once charged with an assault 4 (No violence, I just put my arm against a persons chest that was trying to block me from passing and moved them aside and told him in no uncertain terms that he had better cease his current actions or pay hell). I was never the recipient of a felony or a DV charge. I am now in my mid 50's and have not had even a parking ticket in over 30 years ( was stopped 2 years ago for speeding but was told by the State Trooper that I had an Impeccable driving record and was given a verbal warning). I applied for and received my CHL 16 years ago with no issues, I just this week dropped off my renewal forms and payment for the next 4 years. My wife also has her CHP, she did have a non violent felony in her 20's that we had expunged, She was also able to get her CHP with no issues and just did her renewal last month, She also has had no tickets in 30 years and is licensed with the State Board of Pharmacy for her job. People do dumb crap when in there 20's but most learn their lessons and become responsible, productive citizens. Unless there is more you're not copping to and you've been above board for the last 17 years as you state I see no reason why you should be denied. My opinion is that the appeal seems in order.

 

[pdxRealtor]

Jim977-

Thx for your input. Much appreciated. Nothing I'm not saying. No reason I can think of to even do that.

I mean, I did come here basically asking for opinions on whether I should spend over a grand now, or under 4-500.00 and wait a few months.

So the most accurate info I can give the more accurate most opinions should be.

What county are you in?

 

[jim97701]

LOL county, Deschutes, Bend Oregon, says that in my location. Hell my wife's expungement wasnt that much! Im thinking we did it ourselves.

 

[jim97701]

What is that 728X90 stuff?

 

[pdxRealtor]

LOL country, Bend Oregon, says that in my location. Hell my wife's expungement wasnt that much! Im thinking we did it ourselves.

Sorry I'm on the mobile phone and didn't see your county.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Have you been waiting to use that phrase all day?

Like a cat, baby! Repent! lol

 

[powersbj]

Having a history of anger, disregard and alcoholism should not deny one their constitutional freedoms.

Its the convictions that remove your rights, and rightfully so. With rights come responsibility, if the individual shows a dangerous disregard driving a car why should we trust them with a CHL?

 

[4Freedom]

Its the convictions that remove your rights, and rightfully so. With rights come responsibility, if the individual shows a dangerous disregard driving a car why should we trust them with a CHL?

Because it is his right and people make stupid mistakes. In my opinion, nobody should be trusted with a CHL, since CHLs are unconstitutional in themselves. If the guy hasn't committed any serious violent crime and has not proven to be mentally ill, then the government should just keep out of his business. Also, if a person gets multiple DUIs they should lose their driving privileges, but not their gun rights. As I said, I have a lot less trust of an overbearing government who constantly needs to protect us from ourselves than I do of my fellow citizen. Rights are not something people should lose easily. A minor bar scuffle or DUI 10 years ago doesn't represent his character today. If nobody suffered long term injuries or death from his past there is no need to keep punishing him. Then we have to remember the more power we give our government to decide who should own or carty a gun the more likely soon none of us will meet the qualifications. Look to Canada up north for example. In Canada only politicians, police and criminals are deemed worthy to carry a firearm.

 

[The B]

Speaking of the "price of tea in China," you guys often fixate on this "should be" and "shouldn't be" when we're talking about what IS.

We don't have constitutional carry... We have the law we have. Change it or accept it... But bubbleguming doesn't really do anything. Neither does trying to circumvent it.