Justice Department asks Supreme Court to overturn domestic violence gun ruling: people under a domestic violence restraining order retain their guns

[71montess]

Wake up. You clearly have zero knowledge of this. They walk all the time. Especially in lib courts.

Yep, you are delusional.

 

[HuntMaine]

Yep, you are delusional.

Sorry, I don’t condone or support people who beat their wives.

 

[HuntMaine]

So let me get your amazing logic wrapped around my head.

You think that someone that has a restraining order filed against them needs their guns taken away because the might do harm/murder.

So the law against murder with a life sentence or death penalty won't stop them, but a f-ing restraining order and loss of firearms will?

Did you eat lead paint chips as a kid?

While I don’t agree with a 5 yr old approach to insults and name calling I’ll engage. Yes if you have an RO for violence against your wife, indeed their should be a hold on your firearms. I don’t support men who beat their wives, not sure where you are on that. Now is the system perfect , no, never said it was. But just like you don’t take away all firearms because of school shootings, you should not allow people who have ROs for violence against their wives access to firearms.

 

[FalArAk]

Omg do you even know what due process is? Your saying that it's proper for the government to take away your rights BEFORE the trial? Your NOT a friend to freedom at all if you believe this.

He is channeling Trump lol

 

[FalArAk]

While I don’t agree with a 5 yr old approach to insults and name calling I’ll engage. Yes if you have an RO for violence against your wife, indeed their should be a hold on your firearms. I don’t support men who beat their wives, not sure where you are on that. Now is the system perfect , no, never said it was. But just like you don’t take away all firearms because of school shootings, you should not allow people who have ROs for violence against their wives access to firearms.

You do know all it takes is a claim of violence without any evidence, right?

Women have weaponized a flaw in the system which you support.

 

[Goodandtight]

Beating your wife is a criminal offense. A RO is something entirely different.

 

[HuntMaine]

You do know all it takes is a claim of violence without any evidence, right?

Women have weaponized a flaw in the system which you support.

Sure there are rare cases but you can’t convince me to support or condone people who beat their wives

 

[FalArAk]

Sure there are rare cases but you can’t convince me to support or condone people who beat their wives

Who asked you to do that?

 

[Picton]

Sorry, I don’t condone or support people who beat their wives.

Lol, nobody else here does either.

The difference is that you DO condone the government infringing on RKBA without due process. That's no bueno.

 

[drgrant]

Sure there are rare cases but you can’t convince me to support or condone people who beat their wives

Abuse of the system is NOT rare, and likely the overwheling majority of ROs. If you don't think the system is abused more often than not you are 150% clueless.

 

[HuntMaine]

Who asked you to do that?

You are arguing despite a guy beating his wife and her getting an RO , that he be cleared from a temp loss of access to his firearms. So in essence give him a pass. I don’t agree with that

 

[Picton]

You are arguing despite a guy beating his wife and her getting an RO , that he be cleared from a temp loss of access to his firearms. So in essence give him a pass. I don’t agree with that

"Give him a pass?"

No. Give him a trial. Like every other criminal. If the result of that trial is a conviction, then sure, gank whatever rights the statute and the judge allow.

You're acting like an RO hearing is a trial, and it's not...

 

[HuntMaine]

Abuse of the system is NOT rare, and likely the overwheling majority of ROs. If you don't think the system is abused more often than not you are 150% clueless.

Sure because you know every case , ok. Maybe if you went in a few visits where the wife has been beaten and then struggled to get an RO out of fear onky to have the guy come back and put her into the hospital or worse. Again I don’t give passes to wife beaters and you will not convince me to do so. Maybe it’s the old “guys don’t beat girls” lesson I was brought up with

 

[HuntMaine]

"Give him a pass?"

No. Give him a trial. Like every other criminal.

You're acting like an RO hearing is a trial, and it's not...

He gets a trial, but in the meantime the wife beater loses access.

 

[Picton]

He gets a trial, but in the meantime the wife beater loses access.

Where, exactly, does the Constitution allow that?

 

[drgrant]

Sure because you know every case , ok. Maybe if you went in a few visits where the wife has been beaten and then struggled to get an RO out of fear onky to have the guy come back and put her into the hospital or worse. Again I don’t give passes to wife beaters and you will not convince me to do so. Maybe it’s the old “guys don’t beat girls” lesson I was brought up with

Struggled? This demonstrates how clueless you really are... a woman has to struggle to obtain an RO? in this state they are practically granted automatically at a wave of a hand. They even will assign her an advocate to dramatize everything for the judge.

 

[FalArAk]

He gets a trial, but in the meantime the wife beater loses access.

Do you also take away his kitchen knives, screwdrivers, hammers, pocket knives, multi-tools, shovels and any other blunt, heavy or sharp objects that may be used as a weapon?

 

[HuntMaine]

Where, exactly, does the Constitution allow that?

Right where it says you have the right to not have the government Lauren to your calls , read your texts and your emails

 

[HuntMaine]

Struggled? This demonstrates how clueless you really are... a woman has to struggle to obtain an RO? in this state they are practically granted automatically at a wave of a hand. They even will assign her an advocate to dramatize everything for the judge.

If you read and comprehended the full sentence you would see the explanation. Maybe you missed the fact many struggle in fear of losing their kids etc. facts

 

[Whutmeworry]

Sure because you know every case , ok. Maybe if you went in a few visits where the wife has been beaten and then struggled to get an RO out of fear onky to have the guy come back and put her into the hospital or worse. Again I don’t give passes to wife beaters and you will not convince me to do so. Maybe it’s the old “guys don’t beat girls” lesson I was brought up with

So you're once again admitting that having access to firearms or not having access to firearms means nothing. The woman gets beaten whether or not there are firearms present. THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, NOT GUNS. The abusive spouse/intimate partner, etc. NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM FREE SOCIETY, PERIOD.

Yes, I get that the system is broken and this is not happening. STOP making excuses for the broken system! Be an advocate for changing the law in favor of actually punishing crime, not for infringing upon someone's constitutional rights without due process!

Alternatively, I respectfully suggest removing "2A Supporter" from your profile.

 

[HuntMaine]

Do you also take away his kitchen knives, screwdrivers, hammers, pocket knives, multi-tools, shovels and any other blunt, heavy or sharp objects that may be used as a weapon?

Nice tangent but again you won’t convince me to support, give a pass or condone wife beating.

 

[Whutmeworry]

Right where it says you have the right to not have the government Lauren to your calls , read your texts and your emails

So in other words, nowhere.

 

[pastera]

Sure because you know every case , ok. Maybe if you went in a few visits where the wife has been beaten and then struggled to get an RO out of fear onky to have the guy come back and put her into the hospital or worse. Again I don’t give passes to wife beaters and you will not convince me to do so. Maybe it’s the old “guys don’t beat girls” lesson I was brought up with

Why not arm the victim
Like I said before, over and over, if there is objective evidence that there was an actual battery then arrest, charge and prosecute. If the abuser posts bail then loss of guns can be made as a condition thereof.
But that happens with representation from both sides so the accused gets due process unlike an RO where the accused has zero due process

If you are advocating for loss of rights as part of a condition of bail with due process and representation, then that's not an issue.

If you think that a person should be deprived of fundamental rights and large amounts of time and money simply on the accusation of a third party with an axe to grind, that's not okay.

 

[Goodandtight]

HuntMaine you keep conflating beating someone you live with (wife in his example) with a RO that has a completely different legal standard and due process protection or lack thereof.

I'm not sure if you are being intentionally obtuse.

 

[pastera]

Nice tangent but again you won’t convince me to support, give a pass or condone wife beating.

So, you are doubling down on "if saves just one (insert emotional object here)".

 

[HuntMaine]

So, you are doubling down on "if saves just one (insert emotional object here)".

And you are doubling down on giving a pass to wife beaters

 

[Goodandtight]

I'm starting to think HuntMaine is a wife beater.

 

[pastera]

And you are doubling down on giving a pass to wife beaters

Can you show us on the doll where the wife beaters touched you...

No one here has advocated for anyone, male or female, to be allowed to repeat victimize another person.
You are the only one doing so in that RO's are routinely used to force compliance and punishment on otherwise innocent people (mostly men) in domestic disputes (notice the word dispute not violence).

I get it, someone you care about got tuned up multiple times by an abuser.
That sucks but it doesn't mean innocent people should be sodomized by the legal system to make past victims feel better.

 

[HuntMaine]

Can you show us on the doll where the wife beaters touched you...

No one here has advocated for anyone, male or female, to be allowed to repeat victimize another person.
You are the only one doing so in that RO's are routinely used to force compliance and punishment on otherwise innocent people (mostly men) in domestic disputes (notice the word dispute not violence).

I get it, someone you care about got tuned up multiple times by an abuser.
That sucks but it doesn't mean innocent people should be sodomized by the legal system to make past victims feel better.

Again for clarity I will not support anyone who abuses their wife and ends up being issues an RO. They lose access to their firearms until their day in court.

 

[pastera]

Again for clarity I will not support anyone who abuses their wife and ends up being issues an RO. They lose access to their firearms until their day in court.

And again you cannot answer the question because you don't have a position, only an emotion.
Answer this situation
Wife shows up at the police station saying hubby pushed her with no visible evidence.
Cops track down hubby at ER getting care for a deep corneal abrasion.
He admits to pushing her away as a reaction based on pain from the eye damage.
There are children at home.

Who gets the shaft in this situation?
Be honest if possible.

This shit plays out all the time.