[Criminal Number 18F]

How the hell can they take someone's weapons with as little as an unproven restraining order?

Mike, that's a Federal law -- the Lautenberg Amendment -- if you have an accusation of domestic abuse, you lose gun rights. Forever.

It's hilarious that they use Woburn, Mass., as an example. At least two Woburn PD officers have beaten their wives or ex-wives, and then the other cops have leaned on the wife to withdraw her complaint. This probably happens everywhere, but I know about it in that one city.

The reason they do this is that even a police officer loses his right to carry or even touch a firearm, and therefore his job. So, the boys tune up the women, it happens, you wouldn't want them to lose their pensions....? They're there to enforce the laws, not obey them.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[Criminal Number 18F]

The Lautenberg Amendment also applies to soldiers. Yes, if you had a restraining order in 1989 in Kentucky, you cannot use a weapon to defend yourself in Iraq. Of course, Frank Lautenberg is anti-military and anti-defense in general.

Some Army Policy on soldiers with this disability (their MOS gets an "L9" code, which I guess means rubber gun squad).

In 2001, the GOA Fought the Ban. The NRA does not appear to have opposed it. The Lautenberg Amendment was attached to legislation that NRA lobbyists wanted, so they let it slide.

I've never raised a hand to a woman, nor even been falsely accused (I am told that lawyers solicit these accusations from their clients as a routine divorce tactic, so the "false charge" is by no means rare), so I don't have a dog in this fight, except that I'm appalled by the way this law plays out in the field.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[MikefromOhio]

woman's husband under a restraining order

---

I didnt know a restraining order constituted domestic abuse? oh well...

[Mulder]

Mike, that's a Federal law -- the Lautenberg Amendment -- if you have an accusation of domestic abuse, you lose gun rights. Forever.

I thought cops were exempt.

They can beat their wives and still carry guns on the job.

[Richard-SIA]

The "Lautenberg Amendment" is unconstitutional on it's face!

It is clearly "ex post facto", and so is forbidden by the constitution.

It was "passed" by subterfuge, stuck deep into a "must pass" spending bill at the last possible moment.

SCOTUS has already ruled that any "law" which is unconstitutional is "Null and Void" from it's inception, without substance, as if it had never been passed.

So the Lautenberg Amendment is null and void, or will be as soon as they try to apply it to a Billionaire who sicks his legal team on it.

Or maybe we could band together for once, and support Ron Paul's bill to repeal it?
Probably easier, Gov. Org. tends not to go after too many billionaire gun owners for "spousal abuse".