Question about DUI

[DocHoliday]

A family member of mine got denied on his background check because he has two DUIs on his record. What is the chances he wins his appeal? He has no other offenses on his record.

 

[Ambu]

Does he have the felony conviction?

2 DUIs within a certain period of time is a felony.

However, someone on this board repealed their DUI felony and had it overturned I believe

 

[KW730]

IC 35-47-1-2
"Alcohol abuser"
Sec. 2. "Alcohol abuser" means an individual who has had two (2) or more alcohol related offenses, any one (1) of which resulted in conviction by a court or treatment in an alcohol abuse facility within three (3) years prior to the date of the application.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.

If that applies, or if he has a felony then he will not win on appeal.

 

[churchmouse]

If your lawyer is worth his fee the felony will be reduced to a misdemeanor at the end of the probationary period. Compliance to all stipulations and fees paid and the felony should be reduced as a matter of record.

 

[panderson]

My friend also had 2 DUIs on his record. Both were within 5 years of each other which was a felony (last one was in 2010). He had some provision (not sure if this was part of his plea agreement or if it is standard) that if he stayed out of trouble for a year that it would be dropped down to a misdemeanor. He had to have his lawyer file some paperwork with the court but it eventually was downgraded. He just applied for his LTCH so we will see what happens. If your friend had a lawyer I would ask him to check to see what he can do.

Churchmouse beat me to it.

 

[churchmouse]

Going through this with my smarter than I am son right now.

 

[snorko]

Quote:
IC 35-47-1-2
"Alcohol abuser"
Sec. 2. "Alcohol abuser" means an individual who has had two (2) or more alcohol related offenses, any one (1) of which resulted in conviction by a court or treatment in an alcohol abuse facility within three (3) years prior to the date of the application.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.

If that applies, or if he has a felony then he will not win on appeal.

The above is Indiana code, correct? would that apply to a NICS check?

 

[JB357Mag]

Does he have the felony conviction?

2 DUIs within a certain period of time is a felony.

However, someone on this board repealed their DUI felony and had it overturned I believe

Yup, me.

See this:

House Bill 1033

Jimmy

 

[KW730]

Quote:
IC 35-47-1-2
"Alcohol abuser"
Sec. 2. "Alcohol abuser" means an individual who has had two (2) or more alcohol related offenses, any one (1) of which resulted in conviction by a court or treatment in an alcohol abuse facility within three (3) years prior to the date of the application.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.


The above is Indiana code, correct? would that apply to a NICS check?

Yes, it is Indiana code. I don't see how it would affect the purchasing of a firearm when they ran the check, but ISP will not issue a license unless the definition of proper person (as defined under IC) is met in full. Being classed as an alcohol abuser voids any possibility of being found a proper person.

Edit: I should state that everything I have posted was on the assumption that we were talking about a LTCH application. I now notice the OP did not mention anything about a license and may be talking about a firearms purchase.

 

[snorko]

Yes, it is Indiana code. I don't see how it would affect the purchasing of a firearm when they ran the check, but ISP will not issue a license unless the definition of proper person (as defined under IC) is met in full. Being classed as an alcohol abuser voids any possibility of being found a proper person.

Edit: I should state that everything I have posted was on the assumption that we were talking about a LTCH application. I now notice the OP did not mention anything about a license and may be talking about a firearms purchase.

I assumed he was speaking about a NICS check

 

[DocHoliday]

It was on a purchase

 

[CitiusFortius]

A family member of mine got denied on his background check because he has two DUIs on his record. What is the chances he wins his appeal? He has no other offenses on his record.

This may be unpopular, but I personally hope he loses. Anybody too stupid to not call a cab or get a DD shouldnt have the right to carry.

If he got caught twice, he probably did it a dozen other times when he didnt get caught.

As far as Im concerned, drunk drivers should be charged with attempted manslaughter.

 

[black label]

This may be unpopular, but I personally hope he loses. Anybody too stupid to not call a cab or get a DD shouldnt have the right to carry.

If he got caught twice, he probably did it a dozen other times when he didnt get caught.

As far as Im concerned, drunk drivers should be charged with attempted manslaughter.

So should people that use cell phones while driving.

 

[04DarkShadowGT]

So should people that use cell phones while driving.

While both imo are pretty very serious, a DUI is much worse. Driving drunk you knowingly are risking your and others lives, it impairs your ability to drive and make decisions the entire time, not just a the 30 seconds you are sending a text. Both can be deadly and I have no issue if the offender is charged with a crime in either instance.

I agree to some extent to the guy above. If you have two or more DUIs I have no issue with your LTCH being revoked or if you are no longer a "proper person" Once is a mistake, two or more is a pattern of bad judgement.

 

[LarryC]

While both imo are pretty very serious, a DUI is much worse. Driving drunk you knowingly are risking your and others lives, it impairs your ability to drive and make decisions the entire time, not just a the 30 seconds you are sending a text. Both can be deadly and I have no issue if the offender is charged with a crime in either instance.

I agree to some extent to the guy above. If you have two or more DUIs I have no issue with your LTCH being revoked or if you are no longer a "proper person" Once is a mistake, two or more is a pattern of bad judgement.

I disagree, I think statistics will prove that the use of a cell phone causes more accidents and fatalities. The fact that a person who has 2 or more drinks and is driving home carefully (usually on back roads) does not make him more dangerous that a person going 70 on I65 veering into traffic while on a cell phone. - NO I don't drink and drive - In fact I have not drank more than 2 beers or 2 mixed drinks or 2 glasses of wine per year in the last 5 years (and did not drive after any).

 

[PistolBob]

This may be unpopular, but I personally hope he loses. Anybody too stupid to not call a cab or get a DD shouldnt have the right to carry.

If he got caught twice, he probably did it a dozen other times when he didnt get caught.

As far as Im concerned, drunk drivers should be charged with attempted manslaughter.

Thanks for that. I think a lot of us are thinking the same thing.

 

[black label]

Thanks for that. I think a lot of us are thinking the same thing.

So if someone makes a mistake in their younger years, they should be punished for it the rest of their lives. It must be great to have lived such a righteous life, or to have never been caught. Are you the same person, as you were when you were 18 years old.


This attitude amazes me especially during this time. Let's decide who can and and cannot own a gun, based on what you believe. Drunk driving,no you can't own a gun. Talking on a cell phone or texting while driving, which has been proven to be just as dangerous, yes you can own a gun.Why is that because you do it and you don't want to take your own guns away.

So tell me Feinstein, who else should be stopped from buying a firearm, based solely on your beliefs?

No I don't have DUIs, nor do I drink, but I believe people can redeem themselves. And I am talking misdemeanor DUIs.

 

[black label]

While both imo are pretty very serious, a DUI is much worse. Driving drunk you knowingly are risking your and others lives, it impairs your ability to drive and make decisions the entire time, not just a the 30 seconds you are sending a text. Both can be deadly and I have no issue if the offender is charged with a crime in either instance.

I agree to some extent to the guy above. If you have two or more DUIs I have no issue with your LTCH being revoked or if you are no longer a "proper person" Once is a mistake, two or more is a pattern of bad judgement.

So when talking on a cell phone or texting while driving, you are not knowingly risking your own life and other lives? The phone made you pick it up?

So I guess the liberals are right, the guns did do it.

 

[KLB]

So when talking on a cell phone or texting while driving, you are not knowingly risking your own life and other lives? The phone made you pick it up?

So I guess the liberals are right, the guns did do it.

Agreed. Especially in an age where the limit for DUI falls and falls. DUIs are more about revenue than stopping accidents. Being tired while driving is more dangerous than most people that would qualify for a DUI.

 

[SERparacord]

This may be unpopular, but I personally hope he loses. Anybody too stupid to not call a cab or get a DD shouldnt have the right to carry.

If he got caught twice, he probably did it a dozen other times when he didnt get caught.

As far as Im concerned, drunk drivers should be charged with attempted manslaughter.

I think they should have their eyes poked out, but that's just my opinion.