Firearms Owners Against Crime
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
THIS STORY is about every man and any man. Countless individuals call me when they are wrongfully denied their Second Amendment rights. Few have the courage, time or money to fight City Hall.
Here is one who did. In 1998, Greg DuPont - an honorably discharged soldier - was convicted of D.U.I. in Massachusetts. He hurt no one. That conviction meant DuPont could not own firearms. To regain his civil right in 2005, DuPont petitioned the Massachusetts Firearms Licensing Review Board (FLRB). The FLRB's action resulted in "his right to possess a firearm therefore is fully restored in the Commonwealth." Clear, right?
DuPont moved to Nashua in 2007. He applied for and was issued a pistol/revolver license and an armed security guard license. DuPont disclosed the 1998 conviction. In 2010, renewal of the security guard license met with denial. Appeals followed. Just before trial in 2011, the Department of Safety offered DuPont an agreement: It would not revoke or deny renewal of the license based on the 1998 conviction if DuPont waived his claim for lost wages. DuPont promptly took the deal: He had been jobless for months.
In 2013, DuPont sought a federal firearms license. A Nashua Police Department background check "discovered" the 1998 conviction, which DuPont had disclosed since 2007. Nashua revoked DuPont's pistol/revolver license and the Department of Safety, on the advice of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), refused to renew DuPont's security guard license.
Both Nashua and the Department of Safety insisted that DuPont was ineligible to own firearms, contrary to the decision from the Massachusetts FLRB. Safety officials used a letter from a BATFE official who claimed that the FLRB could not restore DuPont's civil right to be armed.
Apparently, no one bothered to read Massachusetts laws. Instead, they relied on the letter, which rested on gross factual errors. DuPont - his income slashed because he could not work as an armed security guard - sought judicial review in 2013. Judges sided with the government. DuPont appealed to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
In 2015, the high court ruled Massachusetts had correctly restored DuPont's civil right to keep and bear arms.
But what about people who don't have the time or money to fight for their rights?
These officials' negligence slashed DuPont's income and burdened him with tens of thousands of dollars of debt for legal services. One New Hampshire Supreme Court appeal was done gratis and for the other DuPont was billed only a fraction of the cost. DuPont must forevermore disclose the revocations to employers. Some won't want to hire him, instead saying "Where there's smoke ..."
It would be in the best New Hampshire tradition of kindly governance, were the agencies - whose employees' mindless actions so damaged DuPont - to make DuPont whole. We can only hope.
Attorney Penny Dean of Concord is a criminal defense attorney and firearms enthusiast who represented DuPont during his case.
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20150301/OPINION02/150309987/0/SERVICES