State Sees Instant Results in Electronic Gun Checks

NY Times ^ | December 25, 2004 | FOX BUTTERFIELD

[Centurion2000]

Under most circumstances a person has to to have reasonable cause for a restraining order

That's a complete pile of B$. Restraining orders are tactical maneuvers used by almost EVERY woman wanting a divorce

[Mulder]

If you haven't read Boston T. Party's "Molon Labe" you should. Ditto for Ross's "Unintended Consequences" and Travis's (writing under his real name) excellent "Enemies Foreign and Domestic"

I've read all three, and highly recommend them.

[supercat]

Put another way, let's say a Police Chief, Mayor, Governor, etc., wanted to finally, absolutely, rid themselves of all those pesky 2nd Ammendment advocates. They take a writ to friendly Left-wing judge, request a "restraining order" claiming some threat against the government official by each and every gun owner. Then these gun owners have two options, i.e. turn in their guns voluntarily, or have them confiscated, and possibly, be prosecuted for illegal gun ownership (i.e. due to the restraining order).

What's needed, perhaps, is for the judiciary in some conservative pro-RKBA state to find that Daley, Feinstein, Boxer, et al. have by their actions threatened material harm to other people and issue an order against them.

The linguistic twisting necessary to justify that would be no worse than what people use to justify the Lautenberg Abomonation.

[fire_eye]

If he admitted that anywhere where his statement was recorded, you have an equal protection case. In fact, you probably have one anyway.

[fire_eye]

If the woman lies in a sworn statement, she's left herself open to prosecution. Whether or not it can be proven, and whether or not the local excuse for a prosecutor will be willing to go after her, are different questions. The fact remains that she is a criminal.

Moreover, all she has to do is slip up once and yammer to her mother or her girlfriend about how she lied to get the restraining order, and if it becomes known, it can become grounds for filing a complaint; they can be supoenaed, and forced to either testify against her or lie under oath.

The problem is that the MEN are unwilling to go after these women. Typically, they're afraid of jeopardizing the child-custody or visitation rights case they know will follow. So the women continue to get away with it. The excuse "it won't work", or "the woman always wins", or etc. etc. is more often than not just masking the man's unwillingness to really bring the legal heavy artillery to bear on his wife.

[looscnnn]

Yep, time to start putting pressure on Congress to fix this. In fact it is time to pressure them into defending the Constitution/BOR, to pass laws that are pro-gun and to get rid of the anti-gun laws.

[Warlord David]

Hell hath no fury, has a man condemn without a court or by a jury of his peers. This will be the begining of the end of this country. And it will only get worse. The question that demand and answer is who or what will be the last straw to bring down this country the Islamic raghead or one of or own. Only time will tell.