Ok-Survey406 t1_jccvepp wrote on March 15, 2023 at 10:36 PM

Reply to comment by KlounceTheKid in Man sues highway patrol, says arrest was unlawfully based on expunged marijuana charge. by LeeOblivious

I don’t support the police. This is not a noteworthy incident in my opinion.

The patrolman arrested him because he didn’t believe his documentation was sufficient. Was it sufficient? I don’t know. The article doesn’t elaborate. The bill that restored gun rights to felons is only 1.5 years old. Bureaucracies are notoriously bad/slow about updating systems/databases/ policies procedures. It’s also possible they’ve not encountered this situation much.

Did they fuck up? Most likely. It’s still notoriously hard to sue a government entity. You need proof they knowingly violated a well established law. I don’t think that’s the case here.

SansSheriff_MO t1_jcg095j wrote on March 16, 2023 at 3:49 PM

>The bill that restored gun rights to felons is only 1.5 years old.
>
>You need proof they knowingly violated a well established law.

So how many years after enactment does a law become "well established"?

Edit to add: This may not be noteworthy to you right now, but the precedent it could set is noteworthy. If an officer believes your proof is fake, what's to stop them from charging and arresting you? Who determines what is fake? Will these "fakes" start to pop up more? How will the number of "fakes" across various races be affected? Will we start to see more BIPOC citizens getting arrested for alleged fakes, even if they're just as credible as the expungement record Joe Bob showed the officer a half hour earlier? This needs to be viewed as a possible infringement on a person's second amendment rights.