Re: Restoring firearm rights in Washington

More | Report Post

On 11/02/08, Wetdog wrote:

> Yes, that's the opinion I was referring to. My offense was of course drug related...simple possession
> of marijuana (<1/10th gram). It was a felony back then, but today would be a slap on the wrist.
> Again, the big issue for me is, what does "Full and Unconditional" mean? Logically, how could a
> pardon be unconditional if it weren't predicated upon a finding of rehabilitation? It's too bad the
> Washington State Legislature hasn't done some houscleaning with respect to such obviously vague and
> confusing language.

The "unconditional" language is not really what will control. The fact that the pardon specifically
says you may possess a firearm seems to indicate that the pardon is based on a finding of
rehabilitation. That is what I would argue. "Full and unconditional" is generic language and you can
find case law that interpreters it in many ways. On the other hand, the language saying you may possess
a firearm is not ambiguous.

Also, consider and point out to an attorney in Washington State that that opinion cites to the concealed
carry law not the possession law. That opinion may not have any bearing on a simple application to own
a firearm after receiving a pardon.