Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Firearm-Related News' started by Joe Link, Nov 8, 2017.
Continue Reading: <broken link removed>
"No one is coming for your guns."
Unless they decide they want to come for your guns. Good thing they have a list.
How does Seattle compare to Chicago?
in terms of violence, gun violence, gun deaths, and killing of civilians by cops?
Not quite up to par with Chicago, but give it time. I have a LEO friend south of Seattle. To keep things vague, lets just say there was a shootout last year (100+ rounds fired). Police investigation was over in less than an hour. Nobody was talking and the detectives packed everything up and left. Nothing on the news locally or otherwise.
Having grown up in Kent in the 90s, I have witnessed several shootings. A friend and I were caught in the crossfire of a gang shooting in Renton one night. I was at work the night of the Quail Ridge shooting. Quail Ridge was an apartment complex on the Kent east hill that erupted in massive gunfire one night. I was outside taking a break when the shooting started. It sounded like a damn warzone! The complex was closed and vacant for years after that. I don't remember any news coverage of that either.
If the shooting doesn't push the leftist narrative, you don't hear about it. Some day, Seattle might be worse that Chicago, but we'll never know due to lack of reporting.
maybe they would be better to implement controls on their own laws already in place that were so sadly ignored/overlooked/avoided/otherwise mishandled, otherwise known as making your bureaucratic drones responsible for their mistakes that result in such carnage
41; You don't really believe anyone of those Bevis Buddies are going to admit that a mistake was made? I almost ended that sentence with a period instead of a question mark. But then it wasn't really meant to be answered, so...
Off-Duty Soldiers Trade Gunfire At a House Linked to Drug Sales Off-Duty Soldiers Trade Gunfire At a House Linked to Drug Sales
Here’s an oldie but a goodie
My understanding is this is exactly what they are doing. I think this is probably a good thing, since it's against the law for domestic abusers to possess firearms, but a lot of them ignore the judge's orders to relinquish. My daughter, who is an attorney in NM, says this is a big problem with domestic violence; she deals with it nearly every day.
I'm all for proper enforcement of existing laws before making any new ones, and that appears to be just what this is about. It's not often that I praise Seattle or King County these days, but this looks like a good thing to me.
You'd think they'd be satisfied with banning gun stores (for the taxes!) in that city. scumbags
The Problem IMHO is that way too many of the cases are one sided just like the Divorce Laws were for years. Domestic Abuse laws are almost always Enforced only against the Male and many times(I think almost always in Kinky Kounty) these go up in front of a Female Judge and the Guy hasn't got a chance. And more than likely the Guy has been tossed out of his own house with nothing but the clothes on his back. I'm ALL for Equal Enforcement of the Law but I've yet to see it in the So Called Domestic Courts. Ask your daughter if she hasn't selected a Female Judge more than once.
This may well be the case; I have little doubt there is a lot of injustice in the justice system. But the fact is that it is a federal law that anyone with a domestic abuse conviction can't possess (or purchase) firearms, and it appears to be a law that is often ignored.
Supposedly we are a nation of laws, and ignoring some of those laws can and does put people at risk every day. I'm sure it's unfair to some who would never consider using a firearm on someone who wasn't a threat, but I suspect the law is there because the risk of escalating violence by a person with a history of violence are somewhat higher than for the rest of us. Personally, if a husband is violent to his wife or child, he's lost any sympathy I might have for him otherwise and I'm fine with him losing his guns.
The Air Force admits it 'dropped the ball' on this recent Texas case. Failure to notify of such a status belies the importance of the program. That he escaped a mental institution, with (so far) no legal issues arising, and has what seems like multiple violent convictions ON HIS RECORD, raises all sorts of unanswered questions, whether posed with or without the punctuation mark.
How many of these kinds of cases 'slip through'??? Nor has the inquiry into SSRI or other psychiatric medications been adequately examined.
You've just proved my point. According to your statement there are NO abusive Wives. And this is exactly what I was talking about. The Courts would also have us believe that the ONLY abusers are Men and I know for a fact that that just ain't the case. I'm ready to hang an Abusive Spouse just as fast as you are but my feelings aren't colored by how the abuser takes a leak!
I'm all for applying the Law, I just want it applied equally. I think that's important, too.
SEATTLE - Police and prosecutors in King County are pushing to respond faster to the requests of families fearful of a dangerous or mentally ill loved one who has a gun.
On Monday, the Metropolitan King County Council agreed to dedicate $600,000 to create a task force that will solely focus on firearms relinquishment in domestic violence and extreme protection order cases.
“We have got to do this work. We have an epidemic of gun violence in our country,” Council Chair Joe McDermott told KOMO on Tuesday.
@sigmadog Unfortunately there are new laws that only require a simple statement on the part of the accuser. The respondent, at least in Oregon, has no chance to rebut, the decision is made and the respondent is not informed (until the confiscation), and there is no evidence hearing, and no expert testimony allowed. In other words, a kangaroo court. The potential for abuse is great.
I said nothing with regard to whether I believe in the existence of abusive wives. Yes. They exist. The vast majority of abusive spouses are men. That's a fact. Put it in a pie and the abusive wife slice wouldn't amount to enough to justify the whipping cream. Just because I use the majority case as an example is not a declaration on my part that female abusers don't exist.
To get back to the point I was making: Supposedly, we are governed by laws. Federal law is that an abusive spouse loses the right to posses or purchase firearms. I'm cool with that. Let's try enforcing that before we rush out and pass new laws.
Work to get rid of the laws you don't like, or the judges you don't like. But until then, everyone should follow the laws and the judge's orders.
Note I was referring to Federal laws. State, County, and City laws are another matter entirely and way above my pay grade.
A good friend of mine lost his gun rights after being charged for domestic violence. His 16 year old stepson (who was physically bigger than him) was destroying the house and then came at him. After defending himself from the unprovoked attack, jr. ran off and the cops showed up. In spite of his wife backing his story, he got cuffed and stuffed -- by the ex husband's best friend. Cops make arrests and prosecuters prosecute. It took many years and thousands of dollars to reinstate his rights.
I totally agree with sigmadog that if you beat your wife and kids you lose my sympathy. But we all know that "domestic violence" carrys a pretty broad and vague definition and its always guilty until proven otherwise.
I heard something on the radio today that the military lets (recent historical) slip like 75% (my math.. the Navy is like 95% and then the rest fall to equal up the that) of required "reporting". yays wtff
That's disturbing if true.
I feel sorry for your friend. The law casts a wide net sometimes. It ain't perfect, but it can be changed if enough people want it.