chief vs. statute

There shouldn't be a LE exemption. Let them suffer with the rest of us. Then they are more likely to support the cause.

I have not posted a lot lately as I have been doing aviation related things that have sucked up all my time and money, but I have a reputation for not exactly being LEO friendly... I have a differing opinion than they do more often than not.

That being said I never make it personal, it is a philosophical difference of opinion.

Normally I would say "finally we are breaking down the barrier between the Centurions who have special privileges ( 50 state CCW even in retirement if certain criteria are met) and us mere mortals.

But I have seen too many people screwed royally with no right of appeal by the misuse of restraining orders.

I know many cops in my former place of residence who told me they knew the system was being abused but the law tied their hands, and I believed and still believe them. For the most part men have been getting screwed over either by the MA version of Lautenberg, and then by the Lautenberg Amendment for over 25 years now.

There has been some relief in the past few years, but not enough IMHO.

Judges rubber stamp 99.9% of these applications for a 208 or 209A order because they don't want a TV crew on their front lawn when they deny an order and someone gets killed. Oh and that has happened in MA BTW.

Until there is a way to effectively mount a challenge to an allegation that is not a criminal charge then anyone who can beat it is fine by me.

IMHO there is no way to mount an effective defense against these type of charges

IMHO any domestic restraining order should require a criminal charge to be filed and the defendant given a chance to defend themselves against the charges.

IMHO anyone who lies on an application for a domestic restraining order needs to be incarcerated for 10 yeaars
 
Last edited:
IMHO anyone who lies on an application for a domestic restraining order needs to be incarcerated for 10 yeaars
I think anyone who offers false testimony to try to frame someone should be subjected to whatever penalty would be imposed on the framee if they had succeeded.
 
IMHO anyone who lies on an application for a domestic restraining order needs to be incarcerated for 10 yeaars

I think anyone who offers false testimony to try to frame someone should be subjected to whatever penalty would be imposed on the framee if they had succeeded.

And this will happen right after the flying unicorn I ordered arrives. [sad2]
 
When a spouse offers false testimony to try to gain advantage in a divorce, they don't seem to get prosecuted very often.

I don't think it ever happens in MA. I also think that everyone recognizes that in a divorce action, everyone involved is lying and if they prosecuted on perjury everyone would get locked up.
 
Back
Top Bottom