please the court addressing the felony in this case there was no evidence of nothing which the jury could probably have found or in a little louder counsel there is no evidence from which the jury could have properly found or inferred that blas did not have an id to conceal the firearm no the police when they took him into custody they could have asked him if he is just one they didn't do that or if they did that wasn't put in evidence that this was the whole thing is trouble you've got this case i looked at the transcript and i found where the the nine concealed permit was introduced as a as an item of evidence yes then figure out how that ever got into approaching the bench or something showing you a government exhibit number eight do you recognize this yes what is that answer that would be just firearms identification card is it a copy of it as an appendix to our reply brief that is the entire evidence that the government put on that he did not try to carry a concealed  of what concerns me is the question of burden of proof who has the burden of a stab wishing that he had the concealed weapon permit yes i think the government did because i says that it is a crime if you don't have it so we submit that the government has that burke and now the government concedes that they totally can see it right and we mention that number doesn't it the way i saw the evidence was that when the confrontation occurred between the officers and the and mr blast he produced this exhibit a yes but of course we yes we don't know exactly  vehicle he's the one who has a duty to carry a permit he knows enough to get a nine concealed permit and yet he's got a concealed weapon so the government supposed to tell him she if you're going to conceal your weapon use force to have a concealed permit he knows he's got produce which he didn't do well it may be his duty to go out and get one because he has been charged with not having permission which means the idea or the permit to have it but but we have a criminal case here where they're saying that he broke the lawn by not having one and so don't they have to show that he didn't have a gun she's going to keep it in his in his pocket while he goes to jail and he's never going to produce it is that it well i'm not saying that your concealing i weapon that's what i want and here he is and he doesn't have one you know that because he produces this one well the one that i'm showing you in the a done into the robot but the evidence is not would you please give us all the it's a reasonable  inference given the fact that he understood what he had to do with this non concealed permit that if he had one he would have displayed it well we don't know he was trying to get out from under by showing this one if you had a one a cover the weapon he would have shown it we don't even know what the co he could just as well that had another one there is nothing about the collar quit the government used do you contend that there is in existence a concealed weapon permit you know but on the other hand between possessing a concealed firearm without a license to do so and possessing this kind of a firearm and not having that the climate in your multiple turns out there was a what was that i mean she appeared to be a twenty two rifle in the front seat when they searched the car they found the three fifty seven nine them handgun within reach outside of the view  to say there's nothing in the record to show that he had a concealed weapon permit is that enough to affirm that he had a non concealed no no no no no there's nothing in the  record to show that he ever had a concealed weapons perm that he didn't have  i'm having a problem with that exact question of how the concealed permit was handed over under what conditions or what questions by the officers why you know i tried a million of these kinds of cases and when you have to prove something like that's a negative you simply bring in somebody from the department which is what the code says in that apartment person says i'm the custodian of records or something like that i qualify to i understand these records i searched the records under this name to determine whether there had been issued a permit of this kind and i couldn't find one why wasn't something simple like that done in this case would have saved us this issue on appeal but i don't believe that it's the government's requirement to prove a negative government oh but you've got to prove the element of the crime yes your honor and we and the government did prove weapon rather strange and for the s k s to peter which was the non concealment so we had before the jury one gun a concealed weapon exhibit ten the weapon from rolling which goes to the concealed weapon the assault rifle and the identification not concealed for the assault rifle to the defense now is that enough for the jury to infer under the statute with this ambiguity that peter blast did not have a concealed permit for the registered weapon when we do have in the record the concealed permit by the brother in other words you get makes you got to make some connections what  peter blasts produced it we've gone over the other than as far as the owners of id i suppose it was the show that he didn't own it but you don't have to own the gun you only have to have a permission to conceal it or you have to have a thing you have to have that with you at all times according to one law that's right and the government has to prove that because this is not a law against concealing a weapon this is a law against can see with having a concealed weapon having will be submitted for decision