Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-08-2018, 11:11 PM
covfefe covfefe is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 2
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default I was held for a 5150, but the PFEC shows I'm clear?

Hello Calgunners,

I'm looking for some advice on a situation that started almost a year ago now (last November) when I mentioned some thoughts of suicide to a hospital worker. Very quickly I found myself being held up in a psychiatric ward for about 66 hours before my father convinced them to release me against recommendation. At discharge, I was made to sign documents acknowledging that I had been held for a 5150, and therefore forfeit my gun rights for a five year period.

Planning to contest this, I submitted a PFEC to the BOF 6 months after it had happened. Now, a couple days ago, they finally sent a response to me, where they indicated that I am clear to purchase firearms and possess firearms. At first, I wondered if maybe the PFEC was not able to detect 5150s, but a couple days after mine arrived, my girlfriend's came in. She had been held for a 5150 four years ago, and her PFEC indicates that she cannot purchase or possess firearms still, as one would expect.

I'm now quite confused on what my next action should be- I was going to contest the 5150 with the evidence I had put together as to me being a stable law abiding citizen (psychology followups, attending 12 step meetings [I'm not an addict but just went to prove a point to my parents], etc). However, my guess is the hospital never filed the paperwork, which means me submitting the document requesting a court hearing will not go through.

I feel a bit stuck, as I still don't feel legally safe going to gun ranges to shoot with my dad, which is one of those things I would like to do sooner than later (he is aging and diabetic), considering I signed a document acknowledging the 5150, but I cannot request a hearing as the 5150 was never filed, and the BOF says I can purchase and possess.

What would you guys recommend? The steps I've currently taken have been to contact the facility that held me (they have not responded after 8 days), and my primary healthcare provider (the hospital who sent me to the psychiatric ward) for the medical records.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-08-2018, 11:14 PM
kygen's Avatar
kygen kygen is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: The People's Socialist Republic of Los Angeles
Posts: 3,174
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

I honestly have no idea, but hopefully everything works out in your favor. Is the hospital/psych ward local enough to pay a visit to and speak to someone about this?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillhouse700 View Post
I have to wait until all the info is in before I make a statement. Obviously the family dogs had it coming.... other than that, waiting on more info.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-09-2018, 9:23 AM
Dirk Tungsten's Avatar
Dirk Tungsten Dirk Tungsten is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: the basement
Posts: 1,104
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Maybe seek the advice of a legal attorney rather than a board full of strangers.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-09-2018, 11:31 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 815
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Tungsten View Post
Maybe seek the advice of a legal attorney rather than a board full of strangers.
+1.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-09-2018, 11:34 AM
hermosabeach's Avatar
hermosabeach hermosabeach is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 11,970
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Lawyer time. It’s not going to be in expensive.
__________________




“Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.”
— Neil deGrasse Tyson

- If the Democrats thought for one seconds that Illegals were voting republican, You'd see the Border Wall from Space! - Abe Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-09-2018, 12:02 PM
Kevfin's Avatar
Kevfin Kevfin is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: California
Posts: 287
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

As others have said, this is an issue that a competent gun law attorney should handle. It is too important to traed this path by yourself or with the assistance of forums on the internet.

If I were Supreme Commander of Earth, things would be a lot easier.

Good luck.
__________________
The race is not won to the swift or the strong, but to the one who endures until the end.

Safety Rule #1:
1) Treat all tweakers like they are loaded
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-09-2018, 12:54 PM
edgerly779 edgerly779 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: canoga park, ca
Posts: 10,925
iTrader: 85 / 100%
Default

Use attorney you signed away your rights so good luck. Pay for a background investigation.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-11-2018, 10:49 AM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Hi covfefe

My guess is you had good health insurance at the time you were detained. There was a reason that facility wanted to involuntary detain you.

Thoughts of committing suicide do not rise to the level of CA W&I Code 5150:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ectionNum=5150

Thought policing is beyond dangerous to individual liberty. Mental health facilities would be overflowing with people who have no intention of harming themselves but might say something to the effect of, "I'm so stupid I could kill myself," because he didn't buy Amazon stock at its IPO. If someone overheard him and called thought police, he could be taken 5150, assuredly so if he were to have good health insurance.

Declaring alcoholism a disease has created exponential growth in treatment centers. As a disease (Alcoholism isn't a disease. There is no pathogen that causes it. There is no such thing as an alcoholism gene. Alcoholism is almost always symptomatic of an underlying problem; e.g., wife cheating on husband while he's working.) treatment centers have been green lighted to fleece health insurance companies to the tune of at least 20k for treatment. Insurance companies mitigate that cost by increasing premiums on the rest of us. Worse, treatment centers have bastardized the definition of alcoholic. According to AA, if you have a glass of wine every night with dinner, which is actually healthy, it considers you to have a drinking problem and need treatment. What AA is really saying is you're a candidate for fleecing your health insurance company for 20k for a condition that does not exist. Making worse abominable, AA's success rate is a gratuitous 17%. Alcoholics stop drinking when they decide to stop drinking.

The correlation is mental condition isn't necessary for treatment. Health insurance is. I personally know a woman who was not and is not an alcoholic. He ex-husband duped her into committing herself for inpatient alcohol treatment. He had set her up to take their kids in their pending divorce, and was going to use her alcohol treatment commitment as proof of her being a negligent mother. A couple days after her confinement, a psychiatrist examined her. He told her that she'd didn't have a drinking problem, she had a marriage problem, and her insurance didn't cover inpatient marriage problem treatment. Her mom had to come up with 20k to pay for completely unnecessary treatment.

There's big $$$ in mental health treatment. My guess is the majority of circumstances, access to a person's health insurance is the primary motivation.

If a hard core alcoholic without health insurance were to try to get into Betty Ford, how successful would he be?

Were I you, I'd try to get the episode expunged as factually incorrect.

Last edited by EMP3; 09-11-2018 at 10:54 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-11-2018, 12:16 PM
Skip_Dog's Avatar
Skip_Dog Skip_Dog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 1,016
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

If you are 100% sure what you signed was a 5150 you need to talk to an attorney. If you are unclear of what you signed and the PFEC came back good to go maybe they did not file it. If you believe you are not stable enough to own a gun I suggest you try air soft. Good luck with everything. If I were you I would talk to an attorney.
Is your father willing to take you to the range after all this?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-11-2018, 12:27 PM
sakosf's Avatar
sakosf sakosf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,209
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by covfefe View Post
Hello Calgunners,

I'm looking for some advice on a situation that started almost a year ago now (last November) when I mentioned some thoughts of suicide to a hospital worker. Very quickly I found myself being held up in a psychiatric ward for about 66 hours before my father convinced them to release me against recommendation. At discharge, I was made to sign documents acknowledging that I had been held for a 5150, and therefore forfeit my gun rights for a five year period.

Planning to contest this, I submitted a PFEC to the BOF 6 months after it had happened. Now, a couple days ago, they finally sent a response to me, where they indicated that I am clear to purchase firearms and possess firearms. At first, I wondered if maybe the PFEC was not able to detect 5150s, but a couple days after mine arrived, my girlfriend's came in. She had been held for a 5150 four years ago, and her PFEC indicates that she cannot purchase or possess firearms still, as one would expect.

I'm now quite confused on what my next action should be- I was going to contest the 5150 with the evidence I had put together as to me being a stable law abiding citizen (psychology followups, attending 12 step meetings [I'm not an addict but just went to prove a point to my parents], etc). However, my guess is the hospital never filed the paperwork, which means me submitting the document requesting a court hearing will not go through.

I feel a bit stuck, as I still don't feel legally safe going to gun ranges to shoot with my dad, which is one of those things I would like to do sooner than later (he is aging and diabetic), considering I signed a document acknowledging the 5150, but I cannot request a hearing as the 5150 was never filed, and the BOF says I can purchase and possess.

What would you guys recommend? The steps I've currently taken have been to contact the facility that held me (they have not responded after 8 days), and my primary healthcare provider (the hospital who sent me to the psychiatric ward) for the medical records.
Best advice has already been given and that is to an consult an attorney. I would suggest refraining from posting any details about what happened to you at this point.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-11-2018, 1:50 PM
P5Ret P5Ret is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Ebay
Posts: 4,357
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
Hi covfefe

My guess is you had good health insurance at the time you were detained. There was a reason that facility wanted to involuntary detain you.

Thoughts of committing suicide do not rise to the level of CA W&I Code 5150:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ectionNum=5150

Thought policing is beyond dangerous to individual liberty. Mental health facilities would be overflowing with people who have no intention of harming themselves but might say something to the effect of, "I'm so stupid I could kill myself," because he didn't buy Amazon stock at its IPO. If someone overheard him and called thought police, he could be taken 5150, assuredly so if he were to have good health insurance.

Declaring alcoholism a disease has created exponential growth in treatment centers. As a disease (Alcoholism isn't a disease. There is no pathogen that causes it. There is no such thing as an alcoholism gene. Alcoholism is almost always symptomatic of an underlying problem; e.g., wife cheating on husband while he's working.) treatment centers have been green lighted to fleece health insurance companies to the tune of at least 20k for treatment. Insurance companies mitigate that cost by increasing premiums on the rest of us. Worse, treatment centers have bastardized the definition of alcoholic. According to AA, if you have a glass of wine every night with dinner, which is actually healthy, it considers you to have a drinking problem and need treatment. What AA is really saying is you're a candidate for fleecing your health insurance company for 20k for a condition that does not exist. Making worse abominable, AA's success rate is a gratuitous 17%. Alcoholics stop drinking when they decide to stop drinking.

The correlation is mental condition isn't necessary for treatment. Health insurance is. I personally know a woman who was not and is not an alcoholic. He ex-husband duped her into committing herself for inpatient alcohol treatment. He had set her up to take their kids in their pending divorce, and was going to use her alcohol treatment commitment as proof of her being a negligent mother. A couple days after her confinement, a psychiatrist examined her. He told her that she'd didn't have a drinking problem, she had a marriage problem, and her insurance didn't cover inpatient marriage problem treatment. Her mom had to come up with 20k to pay for completely unnecessary treatment.

There's big $$$ in mental health treatment. My guess is the majority of circumstances, access to a person's health insurance is the primary motivation.

If a hard core alcoholic without health insurance were to try to get into Betty Ford, how successful would he be?

Were I you, I'd try to get the episode expunged as factually incorrect.
If you don't think someone saying that he has had thought's of suicide warrant's a hold you'd be wrong. Since none of us know what the OP said and it very well could have been along the line's of I've been thinking about killing myself lately. I don't think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would not think that that rises to the level of a danger to self. It's a long held belief among many in the mental health field that someone expressing that they have had thought's of suicide is a cry for help. Ignoring that cry is potentially far worse than answering it.

Not too sure how the long diatribe on alcoholism is relevant, since the OP never once said anything about it. Said he attended a 12 step program to prove he wasn't an addict to his parents.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-11-2018, 4:23 PM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

P5Ret,

OK.

Thinking is one thing. Developing a plan is another. A thought alone won't do it. There has to be an indication of danger to one's self; e.g., "I'm going to overdose on meds when I get home."

Thoughts are not dangerous. Acting on thoughts or developing a plan to act on a thought is.

BTW, maybe W&I 5150 has changed. But were that the case, it'd be codified.

If the facts as presented by the OP are authentic, my guess he was involuntarily detained by hospital staff. A cop wouldn't take on thought alone. Were it otherwise, cops would be tied up their entire shifts taking people with thoughts 5150.

If you were unable to detect the nexus between alcohol treatment facilities and mental health facilities, I can't help you.

If a thought completes elements of 5150, then were to to have a glass of wine every night with dinner, you'd need alcohol abuse treatment.

If you have access to the California Peace Officer's Legal Sourcebook, it might clarify this for you.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-11-2018, 4:24 PM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sakosf View Post
Best advice has already been given and that is to an consult an attorney. I would suggest refraining from posting any details about what happened to you at this point.

^^^this is excellent advice^^^
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-11-2018, 5:37 PM
P5Ret P5Ret is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Ebay
Posts: 4,357
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
P5Ret,

OK.

Thinking is one thing. Developing a plan is another. A thought alone won't do it. There has to be an indication of danger to one's self; e.g., "I'm going to overdose on meds when I get home."

Thoughts are not dangerous. Acting on thoughts or developing a plan to act on a thought is.

BTW, maybe W&I 5150 has changed. But were that the case, it'd be codified.

If the facts as presented by the OP are authentic, my guess he was involuntarily detained by hospital staff. A cop wouldn't take on thought alone. Were it otherwise, cops would be tied up their entire shifts taking people with thoughts 5150.

If you were unable to detect the nexus between alcohol treatment facilities and mental health facilities, I can't help you.

If a thought completes elements of 5150, then were to to have a glass of wine every night with dinner, you'd need alcohol abuse treatment.

If you have access to the California Peace Officer's Legal Sourcebook, it might clarify this for you.
So did you not read the part where the OP said "I mentioned some thoughts of suicide to a hospital worker", or are you just skipping over that part? Depending upon who the hospital worker was, that person may or may not have the authority to place someone on a hold. Although I'm pretty certain that once he said that it got kicked up to someone who could, and evidently did.

This is not about thought police or anything like that, the plain and simple fact based on the OP's own words is that he said something. I'm not sure where you came up with this concept that some type of action or planning needs to take place, and that a cop wouldn't take on thought alone. Because I have never seen or heard anyone say that planning or action was necessary, and I have personally taken people 5150 who have stated that they have though about suicide or harming them self.

I can also recall an incident where a watch commander over ruled an FTO who wanted the trainee to take someone on a 5150 after the guy made the statement similar to "that he did not want to live like this any longer and everyone would be better off if he was gone". The watch commander ordered the trainee and FTO to arrest him for 11550 H&S. Two days later I took the report when mom found him hanging from the bathroom drain pipe in the garage. So yeah expressing those though's should be acted upon.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-13-2018, 7:45 AM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

P5Ret,

I've read everything you wrote. You are 100% wrong.

Were you able to figure out the nexus between 5150 & alcoholism? It did require critical thinking skills. It's all about $$$. I there's no $$$ to be stolen, an alcoholic ain't an alcoholic and a person who's a danger to himself does not display symptoms of 5150. According to AA, a priest has an alcohol problem because he has wine with every mass. And you buy that? Please tell me that you don't vote.

Only two professionals have authority to 5150: cops and physicians. Only hospital staff was mentioned. My bet was his health insurance status was confirmed before a physician talked to him.

Were you to THINK about the implications of what you've defended, you'd know the danger of it.

If your mom were to tell her neighbor that death would be better than pain she suffers, should she go 5150 for her thoughts? She never said that she was going to kill herself and divulged a plan. She merely expressed the thought that death would be preferred to her chronic pain. And you'd be willing to visit her at ETS???

I ain't sure how you passed FTO. I'd sure hate to see you show up at a call. It'd be FUBAR'd in a New York second.

Check this out, genius: I was at ETS when I overheard a mental health professional tell a woman that her involuntary commitment was due to contempt a cop and not because she was a danger to herself. I watched the psychiatrist talk to her less than five minutes before telling her that she was not nor was she ever a danger to herself. I actually felt sorry for her. That cop was a disgrace to professional law enforcement. He later left on a medical. He was obviously incompetent, which is what you've defended. I'm sure he used a medical to avoid monthlies and then termination.

I'm sure you'd defend your kid's involuntary commitment for an expressed thought that he had no intent of acting upon.

Dude, your votes enslave rugged individualists, Americans who believe in maximum individual liberty and minimal government.

When we're in shackles, how will your rationalized THOUGHTS have caused our enslavement.

Here's a FACT for you: when a person has resolved suicide as his only way out, he'll do it, and there's next to nothing that can be done to prevent it.

I know that you're the type that has to be be right and have the last word. Go for it. Talking reason and logic with one who's devoid of it is an exercise in futility.

Last edited by EMP3; 09-23-2018 at 7:21 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-15-2018, 1:24 AM
eta34's Avatar
eta34 eta34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,036
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

OP, ignore the ridiculous thread jack here. As was mentioned earlier, a firearms lawyer may be your best bet. He/she has likely dealt with situations similar to yours, as I assume they deal with firearm right restoration on a regular basis. And continue to put your mental health as a high priority.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-22-2018, 8:13 AM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eta34 View Post
OP, ignore the ridiculous thread jack here. As was mentioned earlier, a firearms lawyer may be your best bet. He/she has likely dealt with situations similar to yours, as I assume they deal with firearm right restoration on a regular basis. And continue to put your mental health as a high priority.

Hi eta34,

I keep reading of firearms lawyer, but no one has yet been able to define firearms lawyer. This is the ONLY forum of which I'm aware that uses the term.

I'd look for a criminal defense attorney with actual trial experience. My guess is that those whom are referred to as firearms lawyers have hearing experience, but lack actual trial experience. Lawyers without actual trial experience almost always resort to citing case law. Criminal defense attorneys cull BS and get to grist. They'll look for that with can be disputed and will cite jury instructions. They know how the game is played & don't have to impress (digress) with court opinions.

I know more than a few lawyers with a lot of hearing experience but have never tried a single case. A couple are alumni of the top of top tier law schools. I'd never hire one to try a case. I'd hire a former public defender or DDA who has tried dozens, over a hundred criminal trials. And they refer to themselves as criminal defense attorneys, not firearms attorneys.

Keep in mind that a firearm cannot be charged with a crime; hence, I have no idea why a firearm would need a lawyer. Only people are charged with crimes, and some crimes involve firearms as instrumentalities. But the gun ain't on trial. The defendant is. He needs a criminal defense attorney.

BTW, while there MIGHT be deviation from this, cases involving legitimacy of firearms laws are legal hearings. They're not trials. There's a HUGE difference between hearings & trials. I've never heard of a firearm as a defendant.

Here's some helpful advice that was told me to me by a criminal defense attorney who has tried well over two (possibly over three) hundred criminal trials including internationally covered trials: ALWAYS ask a lawyer you might what to hire how many cases he has tried, not hearings, actually tired, bench & jury trials. If he tells you he has courtroom experience, look elsewhere. A janitor who cleans a courtroom can claim he has courtroom experience. You're looking for criminal trial experience.

A good way of finding a topflight criminal defense attorney is asking three (or more) criminal defense attorneys whom they'd hire were their kids arrested. If the same name keeps popping up, I'd look into him. Another albeit less reliable way of determining criminal defense attorney status is watching who people with a whole lotta $$$ hire when they find themselves charged with crimes. Prosecutors and judges KNOW who the best criminal defense attorneys are.

Now, please define firearms lawyer for me. I honestly have no clue of what a firearms lawyer is.

Last edited by EMP3; 09-22-2018 at 8:15 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-22-2018, 9:43 AM
ajb78's Avatar
ajb78 ajb78 is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 868
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
Hi eta34,

[snip]
Now, please define firearms lawyer for me. I honestly have no clue of what a firearms lawyer is.
Defense and/or civil rights attorney who specializes in firearm law would be my first guesses. There are several who advertise on here, usually at the bottom of the page. If the op wants recommendations he could post their location, and several names will come up.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-22-2018, 2:24 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,337
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
Hi eta34,

I keep reading of firearms lawyer, but no one has yet been able to define firearms lawyer. This is the ONLY forum of which I'm aware that uses the term.

I'd look for a criminal defense attorney with actual trial experience. My guess is that those whom are referred to as firearms lawyers have hearing experience, but lack actual trial experience. Lawyers without actual trial experience almost always resort to citing case law. Criminal defense attorneys cull BS and get to grist. They'll look for that with can be disputed and will cite jury instructions. They know how the game is played & don't have to impress (digress) with court opinions.

I know more than a few lawyers with a lot of hearing experience but have never tried a single case. A couple are alumni of the top of top tier law schools. I'd never hire one to try a case. I'd hire a former public defender or DDA who has tried dozens, over a hundred criminal trials. And they refer to themselves as criminal defense attorneys, not firearms attorneys.

Keep in mind that a firearm cannot be charged with a crime; hence, I have no idea why a firearm would need a lawyer. Only people are charged with crimes, and some crimes involve firearms as instrumentalities. But the gun ain't on trial. The defendant is. He needs a criminal defense attorney.

BTW, while there MIGHT be deviation from this, cases involving legitimacy of firearms laws are legal hearings. They're not trials. There's a HUGE difference between hearings & trials. I've never heard of a firearm as a defendant.

Here's some helpful advice that was told me to me by a criminal defense attorney who has tried well over two (possibly over three) hundred criminal trials including internationally covered trials: ALWAYS ask a lawyer you might what to hire how many cases he has tried, not hearings, actually tired, bench & jury trials. If he tells you he has courtroom experience, look elsewhere. A janitor who cleans a courtroom can claim he has courtroom experience. You're looking for criminal trial experience.

A good way of finding a topflight criminal defense attorney is asking three (or more) criminal defense attorneys whom they'd hire were their kids arrested. If the same name keeps popping up, I'd look into him. Another albeit less reliable way of determining criminal defense attorney status is watching who people with a whole lotta $$$ hire when they find themselves charged with crimes. Prosecutors and judges KNOW who the best criminal defense attorneys are.

Now, please define firearms lawyer for me. I honestly have no clue of what a firearms lawyer is.
Assuming that you are correct and that firearms attorneys are not experienced with trials but are only good for hearings, that is just what a resolution of the op's problem is likely to turn upon; a hearing or hearings. It is unlikely that a trial will be needed when all material facts will be undisputed; the ultimate fact being if the OP was on a valid 5150 hold. Generally, trials are only needed when material facts are disputed.

Last edited by Chewy65; 09-22-2018 at 2:26 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-22-2018, 6:46 PM
jdg30's Avatar
jdg30 jdg30 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Bernardino County
Posts: 1,052
iTrader: 41 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by covfefe View Post
Hello Calgunners,

I'm looking for some advice on a situation that started almost a year ago now (last November) when I mentioned some thoughts of suicide to a hospital worker. Very quickly I found myself being held up in a psychiatric ward for about 66 hours before my father convinced them to release me against recommendation. At discharge, I was made to sign documents acknowledging that I had been held for a 5150, and therefore forfeit my gun rights for a five year period.

Planning to contest this, I submitted a PFEC to the BOF 6 months after it had happened. Now, a couple days ago, they finally sent a response to me, where they indicated that I am clear to purchase firearms and possess firearms. At first, I wondered if maybe the PFEC was not able to detect 5150s, but a couple days after mine arrived, my girlfriend's came in. She had been held for a 5150 four years ago, and her PFEC indicates that she cannot purchase or possess firearms still, as one would expect.

I'm now quite confused on what my next action should be- I was going to contest the 5150 with the evidence I had put together as to me being a stable law abiding citizen (psychology followups, attending 12 step meetings [I'm not an addict but just went to prove a point to my parents], etc). However, my guess is the hospital never filed the paperwork, which means me submitting the document requesting a court hearing will not go through.

I feel a bit stuck, as I still don't feel legally safe going to gun ranges to shoot with my dad, which is one of those things I would like to do sooner than later (he is aging and diabetic), considering I signed a document acknowledging the 5150, but I cannot request a hearing as the 5150 was never filed, and the BOF says I can purchase and possess.

What would you guys recommend? The steps I've currently taken have been to contact the facility that held me (they have not responded after 8 days), and my primary healthcare provider (the hospital who sent me to the psychiatric ward) for the medical records.
From what I understand about what you have posted, there is nothing preventing you from buying a gun or shooting a gun, so go do it. If you try and buy a gun and are rejected, you will be out $35 and know the answer.

It's kind of weird that you and your girlfriend have both been held for 5150, but whatever.....

If you are not psychotic and are given a green light to buy a firearm, then buy one if that's what you wish. Not sure what the problem is.

BTW, it's totally stupid to kill yourself and you have much more to live for than taking your own life. Look at the big picture and all the opportunity you have to be great in life. All suicide does is hurt those who love you and waste your entire life.

You should have confidence in yourself and your potential, move on in life with a positive attitude, and buy a gun and go shooting with your dad before it's too late since the government has said there is nothing holding you back from doing so.

Last edited by jdg30; 09-22-2018 at 6:53 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-23-2018, 7:10 AM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajb78 View Post
Defense and/or civil rights attorney who specializes in firearm law would be my first guesses. There are several who advertise on here, usually at the bottom of the page. If the op wants recommendations he could post their location, and several names will come up.
This does not answer my question.

Since firearms cannot become party to any legal action, what is a firearms attorney?

Last edited by EMP3; 09-23-2018 at 7:12 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-23-2018, 7:16 AM
ajb78's Avatar
ajb78 ajb78 is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 868
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
This does not answer my question.

Since a firearms cannot become party to any legal action, what is a firearms attorney?
Would you consult a family law attorney if you were changed with a firearm violation, or would you consult someone who lists firearms as a specialty?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-23-2018, 7:16 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 5,857
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
what is a firearms attorney?
An attorney who is well-versed on firearms law and laws related to firearms ownership.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-23-2018, 7:17 AM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
Assuming that you are correct and that firearms attorneys are not experienced with trials but are only good for hearings, that is just what a resolution of the op's problem is likely to turn upon; a hearing or hearings. It is unlikely that a trial will be needed when all material facts will be undisputed; the ultimate fact being if the OP was on a valid 5150 hold. Generally, trials are only needed when material facts are disputed.

I didn't write that firearms attorneys are not experienced with trials. That statement includes the entire population of attorneys who call themselves firearms attorneys.

You are correct: the OP will need an attorney who has demonstrable experience overturning another injustice committed within one of many CA marsupial menageries.

Thought crimes, papers to travel: we're less free than people of the former Soviet Union.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-23-2018, 7:18 AM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor McRifle View Post
An attorney who is well-versed on firearms law and laws related to firearms ownership.
Have you ever heard of a legal case in which a firearm was party to it?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-23-2018, 7:24 AM
EMP3 EMP3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor McRifle View Post
An attorney who is well-versed on firearms law and laws related to firearms ownership.

In criminal cases where a firearm was used, it was an instrumentality of the crime and evidence at trial. However, a human being, not a gun, would be tried.

A criminal defense attorney would be responsible for legal strategy that's favorable for his client.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-23-2018, 7:28 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 5,857
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
Have you ever heard of a legal case in which a firearm was party to it?
No, but I've heard of legal cases involving firearms law and laws related to firearms ownership

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
In criminal cases where a firearm was used, it was an instrumentality of the crime and evidence at trial. However, a human being, not a gun, would be tried.

A criminal defense attorney would be responsible for legal strategy that's favorable for his client.
But that human being would want a criminal defense attorney who is well-versed on firearms law and laws related to firearms ownership. Hence the need for a firearms attorney.

And before you continue with this inane line of reasoning, I'll tell you that I tried 156 cases before stepping away from the practice of law. If I were in the OP's shoes, I would want to consult with a good firearms attorney.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh


Last edited by Mayor McRifle; 09-23-2018 at 7:36 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-23-2018, 7:29 AM
ajb78's Avatar
ajb78 ajb78 is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 868
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
In criminal cases where a firearm was used, it was an instrumentality of the crime and evidence at trial. However, a human being, not a gun, would be tried.

A criminal defense attorney would be responsible for legal strategy that's favorable for his client.
And a criminal defense attorney who is not well versed in CA firearms law will be of little to no use. Have you read through the relevant P.C. sections? If not, that would be a good start, so that you can familiarize yourself with how complicated & convoluted the laws are here.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-23-2018, 8:13 AM
ajb78's Avatar
ajb78 ajb78 is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 868
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMP3 View Post
In criminal cases where a firearm was used, it was an instrumentality of the crime and evidence at trial. However, a human being, not a gun, would be tried.

A criminal defense attorney would be responsible for legal strategy that's favorable for his client.
There are victimless criminal cases, such as AW possession/manufacturing, that would be better handled by someone who specializes in firearms law. A general criminal defense attorney will most likely not know all intracies of the relative P.C. to provide a suitable defense.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 5:43 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.