Posted on 12/24/2004 11:19:51 PM PST by neverdem
woman's husband under a restraining order
Quite a bit of tin foil there!
Under most circumstances a person has to to have reasonable cause for a restraining order. If this dumb shmuk had been threatening this woman in some manor as to cause her to file for the writ in the first place, then maybe he was a menace to society. If he was inocent he should have had a lawyer. If he was an NRA member he could have gotten support.
Just because he owned guns doesn't mean he was of sound mind!
(understandable where women are concerned.)
There was no mention of her side of the story.
For her sake I hope she keeps a handgun under the pillow!
Ping
Big deal. I bought a pistol the other day. No fuss, no muss. And I got to take it home with me right away. Not only that, but I can carry concealed without any type of permit. But then again, I don't live in Assachusetts, the Gay State.
And yes, the Red Dawn scenario immediately came to mind.
Bloat and Merry Christmas!
Great tagline.
Welcome to the unrestrained and absolute power of the Judiciary in America.
Clearly unreasonable search and seizure. But if they are going to openly break the second admendment to the Constitution, surely all the others will soon follow.
America has become so much like the Kingdom of Brittany that we all fled from so long ago. No longer a nation of free men, the King owns the land, the deer and the guns. Must by why the illegal taxation by the IRS is so cherished. Not fun to be a King unless you have serfs.
They can do it here in conservative Indiana too.
Preliminary restraininng orders can be frivolous and are often used by a spiteful spouse.
They are all too easy to get and don't really provide much protection for anyone unless a cop is on guard 24/7.
Read up on how many men are murdered by their wives.
This is by no means a one way street.
Preliminary (emergency) restraining orders are often granted without notification to the person being "restrained", and they have NO opportunity to contest it.
Later there will be a hearing on whether an actual restraining order will be granted.
Unless the person is actually convicted of domestic abuse, ( a felony in many if not all states) there is no legal grounds for denying the ownership of firearms.
I like the fact that if domestic abuse occurs, most cops take BOTH spouses to jail for the night.
huh....never would have guessed....
of course that depends on circumstances too I guess...
dont register your firearms, obviously....
That would sure tic me off. Would they leave me with my 3,000 lb. truck and its 350 hp motor?
In California, a restraining order is automatic upon request in a divorce. No proof needed. Their impact is not just on firearms ownership.
If your work in the defense industry, your security clearances are your lifeblood. A RO can have a very negative impact on getting or maintaining a clearance. More than one colleague has seen theirs lowered or suspended due to allgations in a divorce or child custody fight. Recovering them later (and keeping your job) can be a major issue afterwards, even if you are cleared.
It doesnt just happen in MA. With our litiguous society, if the govt does not take every possible step to prevent any incident from occuring, should someone actually hurt someone with a gun that could have been confiscated there will be a helluva lawsuit. same with medical malpractice. Not that I approve, but it isnt just about confiscating guns.
-- Amendment IV, United States Constitution
What causes the order to be issued is state law -- varies from state to state. In Mass, it's a routine tactic in divorce maneuvering. It is filed on an affidavit only, and there is no investigation. Technically, the judge has discretion, but he or she never uses it.
Financially, as a divorce maximization tactic, this can be dumb, because in the cited case, the 13 guns will probably be destroyed even if the order is lifted; the wife has forfeited perhaps half the value of those weapons.
Of course, in the case at hand, the wife could indeed have reasonable cause. But that is not likely based on statistics alone. Perhaps one in a thousand restraining orders involves abuse of the threat of abuse.
She probably cannot keep a handgun under her pillow, because a standard countertactic is for the husband to file a restraining order on her, which the judge again will treat as essentially nondiscretionary.
If he was inocent he should have had a lawyer.
Guilty or innocent, he certainly had a lawyer, but the lawyer can do nothing to prevent the restraining order from issuing. And once it is issued you are a felon forever and for all time, at least as far as gun rights are concerned.
If he was an NRA member he could have gotten support.
Hah. The NRA won't touch a guy like this with a 10-foot pole. What if he's really a wife-beater? They can't get involved in this kind of thing, and in this case, you can't really blame them. But they also have a record... they didn't sign on to Emerson until others had it won already. The NRA is about nice salaries for a bunch of insiders in Washington, DC, and nice commissions for the ad agencies, fund-raisers, direct-mail firms, etc., to which they're connected. The heavy lifting, if any, is done by independent groups and state affiliates. But the NRA will be careful to stage a press conference claiming credit, if the locals win success, and will send a blizzard of fund-raising letters (90% to 95% of the funds raised by those letters goes to the direct-mail fund-raising firm).
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Wrong. Liberal judges give these out like candy to women in divorce or child custody proceedings in Massachusetts. It is standard practice for lawyers to ask for this in a contested matter.
In Mass, a person may transfer their firearms to a licensed friend or an FFL for safekeeping during the period of the restraining order.
This is much better than letting the cops get them. The cops will intentionally destroy guns by storing them improperly. Go into an evidence room and you'll find expensive over/under shotguns heaped in a pile with Jennings and Bryco handguns under a leaky roof.
After a time these guns go to bonded storage where fees can be as high as 1% of a gun's value PER DAY. When the owner stops making payment on their guns, the warehouse owner sells them at auction to recover their costs.
Thanks for the information!
Lessons learned: If you owm guns, don't live in Mass.
When dealing with a vindictive woman, hide your assets.
Don't count on the NRA for anything!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.