travel to usa with firarms offence

nmjams

Me and a few mates are going to Vegas for a long weekend break next year, one of my mates has a criminal record from 1999 for a firearms offence, he was convicted and fined. He has had no bother since.
Can he travel to the states? what would he have to do to get in etc?
I will be organising the trip and need to know do we all need visas?

pogofish

Strictly, he should apply to the US Embassy for clearance and a visa well before he goes. This will probably involve an interview with an immigration officer.

Declare that on the form on the plane and I doubt he will get admission.

However, there is plenty of evidence of people with convictions who don't declare and are fine, it doesn't look like they do any serious checking (if at all) unless someone is already of interest to them in other ways - Just so long as he is aware and accepts the risk that if anything does happen and they do turn this up, he will probably be booted out with no chance of readmission, ever!

claire16c

The rest of you will just need to complete an ESTA and travel under the visa waiver programme.

He is the only one who technically should have a visa.

ferf1223

pogofish wrote: »

Declare that on the form on the plane and I doubt he will get admission.

You don't fill out a form on the plane anymore...but if he answers yes to the ESTA question he will no doubt be denied an ESTA.

scottishperson2

Firearms offences don't tend to fall under the realms of moral turpitude, so it all depends on what he was actually arrested and convicted for.

http://www.nlada.org/DMS/Documents/1189086066.64/Criminal%20Grounds%20of%20Removal.pdf

Firearms Offenses
INA § 237(a)(2)(C) renders deportable any alien convicted of purchasing, selling
offering for sale, exchanging, using, owning, possessing, or carrying a firearm or destructive device, or attempting or conspiring to do so). Note that firearms offenses are not a ground of inadmissibility under INA § 212(a)(2), except to the extent that they may involve moral turpitude. For example, simple possession of a firearm without a license or carrying a firearm in a vehicle
would not involve moral turpitude, while an offense that has as an element the use of a firearm to cause fear or induce submission would likely involve moral turpitude. Note that certain sentence enhancements for use of a firearm in the commission of an offense have been held not to qualify as conviction of a firearms offense where the underlying offense does not have firearms use or possession as an element. See Matter of Rodriguez-, 20 I&N Dec. 587 (BIA 1992) (holding that firearms ground of deportability did not apply because California firearms enhancements apply only where use of a firearm is NOT an element of the underlying offense).

If he intends to travel to the US using the VWP he should provide evidence that he can use the VWP, but only show it if asked.

nmjams

scottishperson2 wrote: »

Firearms offences don't tend to fall under the realms of moral turpitude, so it all depends on what he was actually arrested and convicted for.

http://www.nlada.org/DMS/Documents/1189086066.64/Criminal%20Grounds%20of%20Removal.pdf



If he intends to travel to the US using the VWP he should provide evidence that he can use the VWP, but only show it if asked.

pogofishs answer is wrong in so many ways it should be ignored.

his conviction involved a .22 air rifle, he says he was convicted for having a loaded air weapon in public.
Does that sound like it involves moral turpitude?

scottishperson2

nmjams wrote: »

his conviction involved a .22 air rifle, he says he was convicted for having a loaded air weapon in public.
Does that sound like it involves moral turpitude?

I'm not the one to say (but if pushed I'd say no). (I'm assuming there was no "evil intent" in his actions, ie he was going out to kill someone)

simple possession of a firearm without a license or carrying a firearm in a vehicle would not involve moral turpitude, while an offense that has as an element the use of a firearm to cause fear or induce submission would likely involve moral turpitude

If he wants to cover his back he should obtain court records and a copy of his record on the PNC.

Take that with him, but ONLY produce it if taken to secondary and questioned on his criminal record.

Also NEVER LIE to immigration!

scottishperson2

Heres the source document

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86942.pdf

hearts

Don't declare it, it's too much hassle for a minor offence.

scottishperson2

hearts wrote: »

Don't declare it, it's too much hassle for a minor offence.

Your post makes absolutely no sense at all. Declare what, the question asked is

Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or been a controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities?

According to CBP who run this system

Crimes committed against governmental authority, which would not constitute moral turpitude for visa issuance purposes, are, in general, violation of laws which are regulatory in character and which do not involve the element of fraud or other evil intent.
The following list assumes that the statutes involved do not require the showing of an intent to defraud, or evil intent.................

(11) Firearms violations;

Also it doesn't matter if you consider it a minor offence or not, its what uncle sam considers to be a CiMT that matters.