National SCOTUS rules on Domestic Violence & firearms carry

[41mag]

US court strikes down domestic violence gun law

The ruling says the law barring domestic abusers from owning firearms is unconstitutional.

news.yahoo.com

Read More

 

[Andesite]

My read of the article that you link to from BBC News, Washington, says it was a Fifth Circuit Court decision, not SCOTUS directly. Though the 5th Circuit Court does cite Bruen.

Aside from that, I have very little 2A sympathy for someone under a restraining order for confirmed or alleged domestic violence. Just my opinion. YMMV.

 

[Andesite]

Similarly, I support red flag laws. While I prefer that these situations be handled within the family, as my family has done on a couple of occasions, not everyone has that immediate/present family support structure.

 

[jomoshakes]

I would support a red flag law if it was an actual psychiatrist making the decision and it should have to be at least two coming to the same conclusion. Otherwise it's too rife with people who will abuse it. You don't want your rights taken away by someone who has a vendetta against you and just makes a report and then they take it without any fair trial.

 

[jomoshakes]

Further I don't think most of these decisions would even be made if they had left gun righrs alone. They are forcing the courts now to make these determinations and now that there is precedent it's going the wrong way for anti 2a

 

[Member 53328]

I'd be cool with the domestic abuser taking a permanent dirt nap. Then we don't even have to have a conversation about their gun rights.

That goes for rapists and pedophiles too.

 

[jomoshakes]

Yeah but then you have to make sure that they actually did the crime. I have seen people
Accused of all the above and it turned out it was not true. So just getting accused though makes you lose your rights on someone who is being vindictive

 

[Tinman357]

And...... no charges are ever filed on the person that makes these false claims. Having been victimized by an vindictive ex, I'm against red flag laws and restraining orders without any evidence other than someones word.

 

[JO JO]

no charges are ever filed on the person that makes these false claims

This is a huge issue as it takes no effort to go downtown to fill out a paper full of lies , then a Judge reads it and issues a restraining order after that the police come to your home and hand you the legal restraining order with a court date, Violating this means your arrest and or loss of rights.
It's that simple then you need to hire an attorney for a few thousand to prove your innocence as the burden is on the accused not the accuser.
Once it is said and done you prove your innocence wasted thousands of dollars and hours of time just to see the accuser walk away laughing as
they face no charges for lying to the court.
This is why I am 100% against red flag laws until the Justice system has a mandatory charge for the accuser filing false claims and perjury of the court.
False claims that can trigger a red flag law should themselves face jail time .
.[-

 

[shibbershabber]

bubblegum like this is why I dont like giving money to some gun rights groups.

How much did this fight cost? Is this law a priority for their membership?

Of all the things they could be challenging in court... this is what they back?

 

[The Heretic]

My read of the article that you link to from BBC News, Washington, says it was a Fifth Circuit Court decision, not SCOTUS directly. Though the 5th Circuit Court does cite Bruen.

Aside from that, I have very little 2A sympathy for someone under a restraining order for confirmed or alleged domestic violence. Just my opinion. YMMV.

The main problems most people have with red flag laws:

1) They are a priori laws; they assume someone will do something bad before they do it, and restrict their rights accordingly.

2) Due process. The person usually is not able to defend themselves in court before a restraining order is put in place. Also, there is usually no punishment for false allegations.

 

[po18guy]

I have a very strong opinion on this.

 

[The_Crazys]

I have a very strong opinion on this.

Me too, and here it is:
Having been falsely red flagged it was extremely disappointing that the ex who accused me only faced the repercussions of paying the attorney fees, in $$ installments. I missed Christmas with my kid and ~13 days of time but restraining order court is not family court, so there is nothing to be done about lost time there. Separate courts, separate lawyer fees too, $$$$ needed to be taken unexpectedly from savings for retainer. Hours will depend on your case and how strong your ability to prove your own innocence is. Vindictive ex's will use this loophole and they have as I can attest to. It just takes a few choice framed words (with a topping of complete lies) to get it granted. In response when I got my chance after over a week of waiting it took 3 minutes of recording (out of ~8 minutes total) to disprove the hours of false witness and testimony in court. Would I want something potentially horrible happening if I was in the judges position? Of course not and I may have made the same decision as the judge did. The problem is that your are judged in absentia. The process itself is absolutely broken, unconstitutional, and worse completely fails to achieve its stated goals. Give 24 hours to stand in front of a judge and plead your case. How does giving a 48 hour window to notify the court you have transferred your firearms keep anyone safe? If I wasn't as blessed and with as strong support network as I have, I would have lost significantly more than my 2A and Christmas. I'll hope that no one else has to suffer such madness.

P.S. Record every encounter with an ex. Cell phone in pocket. Bring a friend if you want to be extra entirely compliant to the law on the recording you are making of picking up your child during a scheduled exchange.

 

[po18guy]

Well, back when I carried badge and gun, I thought it a great injustice to be denied a fundamental civil and human right for a conviction of a single finger poke in the chest.

 

[The_Crazys]

Well, back when I carried badge and gun, I thought it a great injustice to be denied a fundamental civil and human right for a conviction of a single finger poke in the chest.

Admittedly, I've used monotone, cold logic, and an uncompromising view of genders before. Tragically many feelings have been hurt.

 

[DunRanull]

US court strikes down domestic violence gun law

The ruling says the law barring domestic abusers from owning firearms is unconstitutional.

news.yahoo.com

This needs to be applied NATIONALLY by the Supremes.

 

[Yarome]

bubblegum like this is why I dont like giving money to some gun rights groups.

How much did this fight cost? Is this law a priority for their membership?

Of all the things they could be challenging in court... this is what they back?

So, basically, you don't think it should be important or worthwhile to combat infringments against inalieanable rights... that have national impact? It's perfectly reasonable that a certain class of people (firearm owners) only have second class rights and not be allowed due process like every other person in the U.S., right?

I dunno. Maybe I'm just bias because I own a firearm, but having the same rights as everyone else seems pretty darn critial and worthwhile to me. Law abiding firearm owners are people too, ya know.

 

[shibbershabber]

So, basically, you don't think it should be important or worthwhile to combat infringments against inalieanable rights... that have national impact? It's perfectly reasonable that a certain class of people (firearm owners) only have second class rights and not be allowed due process like every other person in the U.S., right?

I dunno. Maybe I'm just bias because I own a firearm, but having the same rights as everyone else seems pretty darn critial and worthwhile to me. Law abiding firearm owners are people too, ya know.

My point is priorities.

Youre telling me that New York Rifle & Pistol Assoc. made the highest and best use of hundreds of thousands of dollars of their members money here?

Personally, I want to see rights restored to all shooters before I see guys who slap their families around get theirs back.

Of ALL the laws plaguing gun owners... Lets fight mag restrictions, ammo restrictions, AW bans, CCW protections, open carry laws, etc

Then when we all have those rights back, then we can talk about the guy who beat up his girlfriend (or accused) his guns back.

When all Americans can,own guns free & unencumbered by BS regulations... I dont care if we give felons their guns back...

 

[Yarome]

My point is priorities.

Youre telling me that New York Rifle & Pistol Assoc. made the highest and best use of hundreds of thousands of dollars of their members money here?

Personally, I want to see rights restored to all shooters before I see guys who slap their families around get theirs back.

Of ALL the laws plaguing gun owners... Lets fight mag restrictions, ammo restrictions, AW bans, CCW protections, open carry laws, etc

Then when we all have those rights back, then we can talk about the guy who beat up his girlfriend (or accused) his guns back.

When all Americans can,own guns free & unencumbered by BS regulations... I dont care if we give felons their guns back...

Difference of perspective I guess. I do feel it was of extreme importance. To me... having our inalienable rights protected is far more important than... say.... if I'm legally allowed to own a braced pistol or not (I have other firearm options). Or... even mag bans or carry restrictions.

Those issues are certainly critical, but they mean nothing if my 2A rights can be completely stripped away from me without being guilty of anything. It is not confined to women beaters. Heck. If they are convicted of beating women... we already have laws for that to strip their 2A rights.

The key element being that you must be guilty... not simply accused or some arbitrary person thinking you "might" be a danger because they don't like you and want to jam you up... or simply don't like guns and YOU have one. If we allow the law to strip our rights without due process... no other law matters.

Just sayin....

 

[The Heretic]

The key element being that you must be guilty... not simply accused or some arbitrary person thinking you "might" be a danger because they don't like you and want to jam you up... or simply don't like guns and YOU have one. If we allow the law to strip our rights without due process... no other law matters.

Innocent until proven guilty

The rights of due process