Boyfriend loophole

[Jrod 4nia]

Does anyone know what this "boyfriend loophole" on the gun bill there about to pass in congress means? I had a temp restraining order about 10 years ago from a girlfriend and now I'm worried they might try taking my LTC and firearms away...I can't seem to find a right answer anywhere...

 

[Thirwell1216]

Section 12005

This section creates a new firearm disability for persons convicted of a misdemeanor where the victim is someone the person was dating. The definition of a dating relationship is squishy and nebulous. It does not require any prior (voluntary) sexual contact between the offender and the victim for example, for the relationship to be a dating relationship. I cannot see how the bill differentiates a dating relationship from the relationships between acquaintances or friends.

The section says that in order for the disability to apply, the conviction must have occurred after this bill became law. It will not apply to convictions that happened before this bill became law.

The bill says that if a person only has one such conviction as to a dating partner, and five years have elapsed with no other convictions for any crimes involving use or attempted use physical force or the threat of use of a deadly weapon (whether against a domestic partner or dating partner or not), then the dating partner conviction is no longer disqualifying for possession of firearms purposes.

However, convictions related to a domestic partner as a victim (as under existing law) are disqualifying forever, as under current law. And a dating partner conviction, and then a second misdemeanor crime where the victim is anyone, that involves physical force or a deadly weapon (as outlined above) is disqualifying forever.

States can still expunge such convictions and pardons also still work to remove the firearms disability, as is the case under existing law.

 

[Thirwell1216]

Read about it here:

Gun Control Deal Applies Domestic Violence Statutes to 'Dating'

Section 12005 of the Senate gun control deal expands traditional domestic violence protections from spouses to "dating relationships."

www.breitbart.com

Section 12005 of the Senate gun control deal expands traditional domestic violence protections from spouse and ex-spouses to “dating relationships.”

This the list of prohibited purchasers in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) will include certain boyfriends and girlfriends, should the Senate gun control deal become law.

The bill says, “The term ‘dating relationship’ means a relationship between individuals who have or have recently had a a continuing serious relationship or a romantic or intimate nature.”

The legislation indicates the “length of the relationship,” “the nature of the relationship,” and the “frequency and type of interaction between individuals involved in the relationship,” all play a role in determining if the relationship is, in fact, a “dating relationship.”

The legislation does not indicate who will decide which relationships qualify as a “dating relationship.” Because of such ambiguities the NRA noted, “The NRA noted, “This bill leaves too much discretion in the hands of government officials and also contains undefined and overboard provisions — inviting interference with our constitutional freedoms.”

 

[JRT]

Does anyone know what this "boyfriend loophole" on the gun bill there about to pass in congress means? I had a temp restraining order about 10 years ago from a girlfriend and now I'm worried they might try taking my LTC and firearms away...I can't seem to find a right answer anywhere...

It will only affect you if you were convicted on a domestic violence charge.

 

[Jrod 4nia]

It will only affect you if you were convicted on a domestic violence charge.

I guess I'm good then. This was getting me worried..

 

[Jrod 4nia]

Read about it here:

Gun Control Deal Applies Domestic Violence Statutes to 'Dating'

Section 12005 of the Senate gun control deal expands traditional domestic violence protections from spouses to "dating relationships."

www.breitbart.com

Section 12005 of the Senate gun control deal expands traditional domestic violence protections from spouse and ex-spouses to “dating relationships.”

This the list of prohibited purchasers in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) will include certain boyfriends and girlfriends, should the Senate gun control deal become law.

The bill says, “The term ‘dating relationship’ means a relationship between individuals who have or have recently had a a continuing serious relationship or a romantic or intimate nature.”

The legislation indicates the “length of the relationship,” “the nature of the relationship,” and the “frequency and type of interaction between individuals involved in the relationship,” all play a role in determining if the relationship is, in fact, a “dating relationship.”

The legislation does not indicate who will decide which relationships qualify as a “dating relationship.” Because of such ambiguities the NRA noted, “The NRA noted, “This bill leaves too much discretion in the hands of government officials and also contains undefined and overboard provisions — inviting interference with our constitutional freedoms.”

Thanks for the information, this makes me feel better...

 

[VetteGirlMA]

It will be up to the courts to decide and in this part of the country packed with kangaroo courts they will decide the squishiness of the laws and that means the slippery slope applies.

 

[FrugalFannie]

It is kind of "off" that a person could be convicted of domestic violence and if they aren't married not be treated the same as someone married and convicted of domestic violence. DV is DV, no? If DV for married person's is a disqualifying act then DV for non-married persons should be a DQ.

 

[VetteGirlMA]

It is kind of "off" that a person could be convicted of domestic violence and if they aren't married not be treated the same as someone married and convicted of domestic violence. DV is DV, no? If DV for married person's is a disqualifying act then DV for non-married persons should be a DQ.

I watched and saw the impact of how this is misused with one of my neighbors kids. He was living with this girl and had a kid together. She wanted to leave him to shack up with another dude so she put together enough evidence to say he was abusive. He only owned one single gun, a hunting rifle, so they came and took it. She knew he loved hunting and I'm quite positive she wanted to hurt him. She won custody of the kid as the mother and moved in with the other guy. So she moves in with this other guy along with their son. Fast forward a year or two and she's now living in a crack house and is on track to becoming a flow blown addict. Meanwhile this guy spends thousands of dollars trying to clear his name and get the restraining order removed. Fast forward to today and he finally won his legal battle to get the kid away from the addict-ex, has full legal custody and the 209A is lifted. Still his name and reputation have been irreparably harmed by this addict chick who was rolling him to get more money for drugs. No point in suing an addict because what will be the result? See good person damaged, bad person gets away with it.

I'm not saying that domestic violence doesn't happen, but I wonder how much isn't actual domestic violence but revenge. Even if it's just 5%, that's 5% of the people who are going to be denied their civil rights because of complete BS. If you ask the left they will say 'sucks for that 5%, they made bad life choices, blah blah blah'. Basically no empathy at all to the downtrodden and falsely accused. I guess the conservative opinion at least according to the republicans in the senate is the same thing. Sucks to be you.

 

[FrugalFannie]

I watched and saw the impact of how this is misused with one of my neighbors kids. He was living with this girl and had a kid together. She wanted to leave him to shack up with another dude so she put together enough evidence to say he was abusive. He only owned one single gun, a hunting rifle, so they came and took it. She knew he loved hunting and I'm quite positive she wanted to hurt him. She won custody of the kid as the mother and moved in with the other guy. So she moves in with this other guy along with their son. Fast forward a year or two and she's now living in a crack house and is on track to becoming a flow blown addict. Meanwhile this guy spends thousands of dollars trying to clear his name and get the restraining order removed. Fast forward to today and he finally won his legal battle to get the kid away from the addict-ex, has full legal custody and the 209A is lifted. Still his name and reputation have been irreparably harmed by this addict chick who was rolling him to get more money for drugs. No point in suing an addict because what will be the result? See good person damaged, bad person gets away with it.

I'm not saying that domestic violence doesn't happen, but I wonder how much isn't actual domestic violence but revenge. Even if it's just 5%, that's 5% of the people who are going to be denied their civil rights because of complete BS. If you ask the left they will say 'sucks for that 5%, they made bad life choices, blah blah blah'. Basically no empathy at all to the downtrodden and falsely accused. I guess the conservative opinion at least according to the republicans in the senate is the same thing. Sucks to be you.

I'm seeing no place where he was convicted of DV. I don't think anyone should be denied their rights prior to conviction. Certainly not denied rights based on a TRO/209A. Innocent until proven guilty.
But once found guilty, all should be treated equal - dating, married, living together, whatever.

 

[Roof gunner]

Restraining orders are the first shot fired across the bow in every relationship break up. It is done mostly for spite and the guy gets f Ed every time !!! Add the boyfriend law to it and forget about it !! Women know it. I know from personal experience how sadistic it can be. In the end , the judge looked at my ex wife and said “ I believe you are using this restraining order as a weapon and not a shield ! Motion vacated ! Her affair Cost me thousands. Gun owners are now being forced to walk around on egg shells and are looked at like modern day pheriahs !

 

[Picton]

I can see that the laws need to evolve with society, I guess: people just aren't getting married anymore, for a host of reasons, but that doesn't mean they're not at some level committed, or in love, or whatever. "Families" and "couples" just don't look the same as they used to.

But the devil's in the details. The proposed definition in the statute about what "dating" means is just begging to be taken to court. But then, that's how our system works.

 

[Jrod 4nia]

It will only affect you if you were convicted on a domestic violence charge.

And that's different from a restraining order right?

 

[JRT]

And that's different from a restraining order right?

As I read the wording of the bill, yes.

 

[Broc]

I watched and saw the impact of how this is misused with one of my neighbors kids. He was living with this girl and had a kid together. She wanted to leave him to shack up with another dude so she put together enough evidence to say he was abusive. He only owned one single gun, a hunting rifle, so they came and took it. She knew he loved hunting and I'm quite positive she wanted to hurt him. She won custody of the kid as the mother and moved in with the other guy. So she moves in with this other guy along with their son. Fast forward a year or two and she's now living in a crack house and is on track to becoming a flow blown addict. Meanwhile this guy spends thousands of dollars trying to clear his name and get the restraining order removed. Fast forward to today and he finally won his legal battle to get the kid away from the addict-ex, has full legal custody and the 209A is lifted. Still his name and reputation have been irreparably harmed by this addict chick who was rolling him to get more money for drugs. No point in suing an addict because what will be the result? See good person damaged, bad person gets away with it.

I'm not saying that domestic violence doesn't happen, but I wonder how much isn't actual domestic violence but revenge. Even if it's just 5%, that's 5% of the people who are going to be denied their civil rights because of complete BS. If you ask the left they will say 'sucks for that 5%, they made bad life choices, blah blah blah'. Basically no empathy at all to the downtrodden and falsely accused. I guess the conservative opinion at least according to the republicans in the senate is the same thing. Sucks to be you.

Why wouldn't what you described also apply to married couples?

I am not sure I follow your example, if the kid was married she would have been able to do the same to him.

 

[Hoover]

I watched and saw the impact of how this is misused with one of my neighbors kids. He was living with this girl and had a kid together. She wanted to leave him to shack up with another dude so she put together enough evidence to say he was abusive. He only owned one single gun, a hunting rifle, so they came and took it. She knew he loved hunting and I'm quite positive she wanted to hurt him. She won custody of the kid as the mother and moved in with the other guy. So she moves in with this other guy along with their son. Fast forward a year or two and she's now living in a crack house and is on track to becoming a flow blown addict. Meanwhile this guy spends thousands of dollars trying to clear his name and get the restraining order removed. Fast forward to today and he finally won his legal battle to get the kid away from the addict-ex, has full legal custody and the 209A is lifted. Still his name and reputation have been irreparably harmed by this addict chick who was rolling him to get more money for drugs. No point in suing an addict because what will be the result? See good person damaged, bad person gets away with it.

I'm not saying that domestic violence doesn't happen, but I wonder how much isn't actual domestic violence but revenge. Even if it's just 5%, that's 5% of the people who are going to be denied their civil rights because of complete BS. If you ask the left they will say 'sucks for that 5%, they made bad life choices, blah blah blah'. Basically no empathy at all to the downtrodden and falsely accused. I guess the conservative opinion at least according to the republicans in the senate is the same thing. Sucks to be you.

A female lieutenant cop told me 95% of the TROs they serve are a complete waste of time, BS. I already knew, but she went on about how people use the courts and cops as weapons oil divorces, custody disputes, bad break ups, etc

If someone is evil and knows how the system works, they can use the courts to really make someones life hell and rack up a lot of legal expenses.

 

[Admin]

I predict a lot more charges and convictions for "Domestic violence" in all liberal controlled kangaroo courts in the future.

 

[Dennis in MA]

The Boyfriend Loophole sounds like something to do with pegging.

And honestly - Boyfriend Loophole will save ones of lives a year. Gosh. So much effort into such a meaningless stupid probably illegal law.

 

[VetteGirlMA]

Why wouldn't what you described also apply to married couples?

I am not sure I follow your example, if the kid was married she would have been able to do the same to him.

They weren't married just living together but I wanted to showcase a real life use case where someone lost their 2A rights at the hands of a drug addict who just wanted money. In the end the good person won but at what cost? What good is it to win when one's reputation has been severely tarnished. That's my point. Funny I just talked to this kid a few weeks ago and he was talking about how he could get his LTC and go hunting again.

 

[greencobra]

So much effort into such a meaningless stupid probably illegal law.

yep, i agree, dennis. we know after all, this just gives the lawmakers a good feeling inside, to present to the public, a piece of kneejerk legislation that gives the impression they are all over it. i don't get warm and fuzzy about governing this way.

 

[Dennis in MA]

Keep in mind, Debbie Democrap gets most of her crime stats from the ABC Movie of the Week. Wait. They don't have that anymore. Lifetime tragic movie of the week, then. As far as they are concerned, millions of women are being saved from certain death. Millions!


Oh and, "Boy my wife was a pain last night. She rode my Boyfriend Loophole like it owed her money!"

 

[JDL]

There is no loophole Straw Purchsess are al ready ellegal.. just another rehash of a law already on the books to make the liberals look like they are doing something.

 

[enbloc]

What we need to do is introduce these treasonous Politicians to the "Original Loophole"...

 

[arsco]

I didnt read it all and I know it's a mildly juvenile response but WTF is so hard to understand about "shall not be infringed "

 

[mothybee]

And that's different from a restraining order right?

Dude, if I read that right, it all pertains to after the bill is signed. Sleep well.

 

[mothybee]

A female lieutenant cop told me 95% of the TROs they serve are a complete waste of time, BS. I already knew, but she went on about how people use the courts and cops as weapons oil divorces, custody disputes, bad break ups, etc

If someone is evil and knows how the system works, they can use the courts to really make someones life hell and rack up a lot of legal expenses.

Yup, a kid of mine's a cop, works holidays, says he knows who's calling before they do. "He's 2 min late bringing him back, go arrest him." He doesn't.

 

[MAGA99]

Does anyone know what this "boyfriend loophole" on the gun bill there about to pass in congress means? I had a temp restraining order about 10 years ago from a girlfriend and now I'm worried they might try taking my LTC and firearms away...I can't seem to find a right answer anywhere...

Don’t let them take shit. Fight like your life depends on it.

 

[MAGA99]

I watched and saw the impact of how this is misused with one of my neighbors kids. He was living with this girl and had a kid together. She wanted to leave him to shack up with another dude so she put together enough evidence to say he was abusive. He only owned one single gun, a hunting rifle, so they came and took it. She knew he loved hunting and I'm quite positive she wanted to hurt him. She won custody of the kid as the mother and moved in with the other guy. So she moves in with this other guy along with their son. Fast forward a year or two and she's now living in a crack house and is on track to becoming a flow blown addict. Meanwhile this guy spends thousands of dollars trying to clear his name and get the restraining order removed. Fast forward to today and he finally won his legal battle to get the kid away from the addict-ex, has full legal custody and the 209A is lifted. Still his name and reputation have been irreparably harmed by this addict chick who was rolling him to get more money for drugs. No point in suing an addict because what will be the result? See good person damaged, bad person gets away with it.

I'm not saying that domestic violence doesn't happen, but I wonder how much isn't actual domestic violence but revenge. Even if it's just 5%, that's 5% of the people who are going to be denied their civil rights because of complete BS. If you ask the left they will say 'sucks for that 5%, they made bad life choices, blah blah blah'. Basically no empathy at all to the downtrodden and falsely accused. I guess the conservative opinion at least according to the republicans in the senate is the same thing. Sucks to be you.

That you g man has a remedy. He should bide his time and....

 

[MAGA99]

What we need to do is introduce these treasonous Politicians to the "Original Loophole"...

View attachment 629819

Just be careful with comms

 

[enbloc]

Just be careful with comms

Communists..???