Man loses his gun rights for asking officer to run license plate number

This is yet another example of why loss of gun rights should not automatically be tied to felonies.
There are all sorts of stupid crimes that are classified as "felonies" today.

A high school assistant principle would ask the school resource officer to run license plate checks for cars improperly parked on campus all the time.

Well, one day he asked the officer to run a check on the license plate on a man dating his ex-girlfriend.

Since this was for personal reasons, rather than actually as part of his job, and since by doing this he allegedly "abused the officer's trust", the assistant principle was charged with a felony,
"criminal use of personal information".

How much do you want to bet he will be offered a plea bargain where if he pleads guilty, he'll be immediately released from prison and won't have to serve any more jail time?

Does anyone here think it is okay for this man to lose his gun rights because he did this?


Further information: The assistant principal's name is Robert Herzog and he worked at Cooper City High School
"Broward assistant principal arrested, accused of illegally obtaining personal info", Scott Travis, South Florida Sun Sentinel, April 04, 2022

 

Of course not. It was not a violent crime.

 

Then what did he need that information for?

 

Absolutely deserved. He abused his position of authority, and what he did is stalking. What else is he capable of? Domestic violence? Kidnapping? People that are convicted of domestic violence lose their gun rights, and it looks like he was well on his way...

 

On its face, it doesn't seem like a harmless ask. But when you get the details - that he was looking for info for personal reasons - it gets a little more murky. As @dharbert stated, he may well have used the information he wanted for illegal and, perhaps, violent purposes. In the case of guns, I think we should all take the 'better safe than sorry' approach. But I don't believe he needs to serve prison time for this.

 

He had no need for that information. I don't know why he wanted it.

 

It's a felony to ASK a police officer for information he isn't legally allowed to give?

 

Yes! I do think it's ok. He abused his (government) position for personal reasons. **** him.

 

I'm afraid that I must disagree.

A person should not be punished for crimes that he might commit.

Should someone be punished for hiring a Private Investigator for finding the same information?

 

Cops running a plate must have a legitimate excuse for doing so IE probable cause of a crime or violation.
They can't just run plates for friends that want to stalk people.

That's a fair felony.

That being said, I don't think a felony should disqualify you from gun ownership if you've served your sentence. Before anyone starts clutching their pearls and moaning: If they're that dangerous, don't let them out of prison.

 

I get that. But he did break the law...the discussion is whether or not it is a serious enough issue for punishment (or even arrest). I think motivation is not a reason to arrest, but should be taken into account when determining punishment.

 

If the individual asking for information on the new boyfriend made it clear that he had criminal intent, then I can understand his losing his 2A rights. However if all he did was ask for information I think that a felony charge is too severe.

Briefly put, I don't think that all felony convictions should result in loss of 2A Rights.

 

Why would dude lose his gun rights?

 

Felony charges are defined as punishable by imprisonment. I think if you commit a crime that is punishable by imprisonment, then you shouldn't have the right to own a gun.

 

If you're too dangerous to own a gun, you should never be let out of prison.

 

That's quite a leap. Do you think that convicted felons should be allowed to own guns?

 

How so?
The person is the threat to society not the gun -- the gun just sits there.
if a person is too dangerous to be trusted with a gun, then he is too dangerous to be trusted with a knife or a baseball bat or whatever..
That is, he cannot be trusted to walk free in society.
Thus:
If you're too dangerous to own a gun, you should never be let out of prison.

 

I am fine with gun rights being lost while doing one's sentence, but after the sentence is complete, all one's constitutional rights should be restored

 

yes, and if someone is so dangerous they need to be on a "list", they should never be released from prison too

you can't punish people after they are done with the sentence, the punishment is given during sentencing, want a longer sentence, that is the place to do it

 

There are reasons that I would say people shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, but doesn't need to be in prison. Mental incompetence is a good example. They don't need to be in prison, but they shouldn't be allowed to own a gun.

In this case, the guy was asking information for personal reasons. If someone is going to those lengths to find out information about a person now dating his ex, I think he shows that he could be a danger. I have lots of exes, but feel no need to investigate their current GFs.

 

if they live on their own and care for themselves, they should have the same rights you and I do

now, if they are wards of the state, I would agree

when one is a ward of the state, the State is like their parents, the parents decide then

I do agree that crimes of passion are all too common, but still not enough to take away our rights forever - when the sentence is completed, that is the end of it

 

Asking the cop to run the search on a rando IS the crime and he clearly evidenced the criminal intent to commit that crime.
Full stop.

 

I'm afraid we disagree on this, FreshAir. Which is fine of course. I think that mental incompetence is a good reason to deny someone the right to own a firearm. People with documented anger mismanagement are other candidates.

 

If they are a danger, then thy are a danger, period.
A dangerous person is dangerous regardless if he has legal access to a gun.

 

He will very likely be convicted of a "felony".

Even before he has actually been convicted, his gun rights have still been temporarily taken away.
The law automatically does this.