Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sactowndog

Domestic Abusers and Guns

Recommended Posts

So the implications of the right wing insurrectionist nut job on the Supreme Court continues.  So much for reasonable limitations on whom can own a gun.  Now a domestic abuser/stalker can legally stay armed.   Women should think hard about whom they date.  
 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/02/5th-circuit-court-domestic-violence-second-amendment-right.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2023 at 7:18 PM, sactowndog said:

So the implications of the right wing insurrectionist nut job on the Supreme Court continues.  So much for reasonable limitations on whom can own a gun.  Now a domestic abuser/stalker can legally stay armed.   Women should think hard about whom they date.  
 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/02/5th-circuit-court-domestic-violence-second-amendment-right.html

 

FFS, in massive bolded font it says "Accused".  So in your humble opinion any guy that gets accused by some crazy bitch should have his guns taken away without due process?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2023 at 8:38 PM, CPslograd said:

FFS, in massive bolded font it says "Accused".  So in your humble opinion any guy that gets accused by some crazy bitch should have his guns taken away without due process?

It also says…..

In his opinion for the court, Wilson declared that there is no deeply rooted tradition of disarming individuals under a restraining order for domestic abuse. 
 

so anyone under and subject to a restraining order can continue to maintain their arms.  Now if you want to state that to restrict the right to bear arms while subject to a restraining should be subject to a higher standard….. Sure I’m listening.  But to restrict completely is an invitation to get a person killed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2023 at 8:38 PM, CPslograd said:

FFS, in massive bolded font it says "Accused".  So in your humble opinion any guy that gets accused by some crazy bitch should have his guns taken away without due process?

Also it’s about civil restraining order. Not criminal charges, which still can allow the gubmint to take your guns.

Although I would question if this same logic could be applied to civil forfeitures like child support to be in violation of the 4th Amendment?

Maynard out there somewhere celebrating either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2023 at 10:50 PM, East Coast Aztec said:

It reeks like an attempt to use law to pacify a woman. 

 

I am sure the same "I don't see a problem" folks will defend when a child molester or abuser get the same treatment.

Okay not quite sure what side you are arguing here :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2023 at 9:47 PM, sactowndog said:

It also says…..

In his opinion for the court, Wilson declared that there is no deeply rooted tradition of disarming individuals under a restraining order for domestic abuse. 
 

so anyone under and subject to a restraining order can continue to maintain their arms.  Now if you want to state that to restrict the right to bear arms while subject to a restraining should be subject to a higher standard….. Sure I’m listening.  But to restrict completely is an invitation to get a person killed.  

To not restrict, under those circumstances, is an invitation for an abused woman to be killed.

 

JFC, you gun nuts insanely love your guns more than you love your own families.

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2023 at 8:38 PM, CPslograd said:

FFS, in massive bolded font it says "Accused".  So in your humble opinion any guy that gets accused by some crazy bitch should have his guns taken away without due process?

I see what you’re saying here, but what’s worse? Someone falsely accused losing his guns temporarily or a woman murdered because a dangerous person still has access to guns even after he was correctly accused and a restraining order placed. 

I haven’t read much into this decision yet, and I generally agree that due process should be of paramount concern. But it seems like there needs to be some legal mechanism to protect people who are under genuine threat, too. Without one, abused women will be even less inclined to report domestic abuse. Less inclined to get a restraining order (which isn't so bad, because restraining orders are not particularly protective either). And more women will be murdered.

This isn't some overreaching gun control law to prevent still relatively rare mass shootings. Domestic violence is sadly all too common, one of the leading causes of premature death for women. And the presence of a gun in those situations increases the risk of homicide dramatically.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 7:21 AM, Spaztecs said:

To not restrict, under those circumstances, is an invitation for an abused woman to be killed.

 

JFC, you gun nuts insanely love your guns more than you love your own families.

Just to clear something up here, domestic abuse doesn't just impact women. While one in three women experience physical violence at the hands of their domestic partner, one in four men experience the same. That being said, I don't think that people realize just how often restraining orders are filed by a jilted lover. It's estimated that 70% of all restraining orders are considered trivial or false. More than half a million people are wrongfully arrested on unsubstantiated allegations of domestic violence every year and that doesn't include temporary restraining orders....1.5M temporary restraining orders are filed every year that are discovered to be false or trivial. 

There needs to be a better way to vet the RO/TRO because the current system makes it impossible to police those that are credible. With the statistics above in mind, I understand why there is hesitation or refusal to take away 2A rights with so many false RO/TRO's filed. If I were in a relationship where my partner was physically abusive and I filed a RO/TRO and she was still allowed to carry a gun, I would probably be very nervous and upset about it. Likewise, if I were in a relationship and she filed a bogus RO/TRO and I was subject to having my guns (or anything) taken away, I would also be upset. I guess this is where the innocent until proven guilty thing comes into play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 7:24 AM, Slapdad said:

Just to clear something up here, domestic abuse doesn't just impact women. While one in three women experience physical violence at the hands of their domestic partner, one in four men experience the same. That being said, I don't think that people realize just how often restraining orders are filed by a jilted lover. It's estimated that 70% of all restraining orders are considered trivial or false. More than half a million people are wrongfully arrested on unsubstantiated allegations of domestic violence every year and that doesn't include temporary restraining orders....1.5M temporary restraining orders are filed every year that are discovered to be false or trivial. 

There needs to be a better way to vet the RO/TRO because the current system makes it impossible to police those that are credible. With the statistics above in mind, I understand why there is hesitation or refusal to take away 2A rights with so many false RO/TRO's filed. If I were in a relationship where my partner was physically abusive and I filed a RO/TRO and she was still allowed to carry a gun, I would probably be very nervous and upset about it. Likewise, if I were in a relationship and she filed a bogus RO/TRO and I was subject to having my guns (or anything) taken away, I would also be upset. I guess this is where the innocent until proven guilty thing comes into play. 

I agree that false reporting is an issue, too. But that domestic violence number comparing men to women, while true, is a bit misleading because it makes it sound as if the threat is equal to both genders. Let's go deeper into the stats (from the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence): 1 in 4 women compared to 1 in 9 men have been victims of "severe domestic violence," and 1 in 7 women compared to 1 in 25 men have been injured by an intimate partner.

From a 2009 Justice Dept. report (I wish I had newer stats, but I couldn't find any):

  • In 2008 females age 12 or older experienced about 552,000 nonfatal violent victimizations (rape/sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated or simple assault) by an intimate partner (a current or former spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend). In the same year, men experienced 101,000 nonfatal violent victimizations by an intimate partner.
  • In 2007 intimate partners committed 14% of all homicides in the U.S. The total estimated number of intimate partner homicide victims in 2007 was 2,340, including 1,640 females and 700 males. Females made up 70% of victims killed by an intimate partner in 2007, a proportion that has changed very little since 1993.

The point is that the threat of violence is real for both genders, but it is not equal. That's not to diminish the concern of false reporting, either. Just an argument that there HAS to be a legal mechanism in place that protects victims from the accused before conviction. To that, I don't think it is unreasonable for a judge to place a temporary restriction on a right in the most dangerous situations. If there is a better answer, though, I'd love to hear it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 7:24 AM, Slapdad said:

Just to clear something up here, domestic abuse doesn't just impact women. While one in three women experience physical violence at the hands of their domestic partner, one in four men experience the same. That being said, I don't think that people realize just how often restraining orders are filed by a jilted lover. It's estimated that 70% of all restraining orders are considered trivial or false. More than half a million people are wrongfully arrested on unsubstantiated allegations of domestic violence every year and that doesn't include temporary restraining orders....1.5M temporary restraining orders are filed every year that are discovered to be false or trivial. 

There needs to be a better way to vet the RO/TRO because the current system makes it impossible to police those that are credible. With the statistics above in mind, I understand why there is hesitation or refusal to take away 2A rights with so many false RO/TRO's filed. If I were in a relationship where my partner was physically abusive and I filed a RO/TRO and she was still allowed to carry a gun, I would probably be very nervous and upset about it. Likewise, if I were in a relationship and she filed a bogus RO/TRO and I was subject to having my guns (or anything) taken away, I would also be upset. I guess this is where the innocent until proven guilty thing comes into play. 

I’d like to see some sources on that “70% of all restraining orders are considered trivial or false” estimate.

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 10:01 AM, Old_SD_Dude said:

I’d like to see some sources on that “70% of all restraining orders are considered trivial or false” estimate.

May I suggest google? I'm sure there will be different statistics from different sources...that was just one from a law firm's site, which referenced some other source. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 9:59 AM, NVGiant said:

I agree that false reporting is an issue, too. But that domestic violence number comparing men to women, while true, is a bit misleading because it makes it sound as if the threat is equal to both genders. Let's go deeper into the stats (from the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence): 1 in 4 women compared to 1 in 9 men have been victims of "severe domestic violence," and 1 in 7 women compared to 1 in 25 men have been injured by an intimate partner.

From a 2009 Justice Dept. report (I wish I had newer stats, but I couldn't find any):

  • In 2008 females age 12 or older experienced about 552,000 nonfatal violent victimizations (rape/sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated or simple assault) by an intimate partner (a current or former spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend). In the same year, men experienced 101,000 nonfatal violent victimizations by an intimate partner.
  • In 2007 intimate partners committed 14% of all homicides in the U.S. The total estimated number of intimate partner homicide victims in 2007 was 2,340, including 1,640 females and 700 males. Females made up 70% of victims killed by an intimate partner in 2007, a proportion that has changed very little since 1993.

The point is that the threat of violence is real for both genders, but it is not equal. That's not to diminish the concern of false reporting, either. Just an argument that there HAS to be a legal mechanism in place that protects victims from the accused before conviction. To that, I don't think it is unreasonable for a judge to place a temporary restriction on a right in the most dangerous situations. If there is a better answer, though, I'd love to hear it.

The point of my post was not to suggest that it was equal, but to point out that women weren't exclusively the victims, which is the tone that the thread had progressed to that point. While women are disproportionately the victims of domestic violence, men are disproportionately the victims of false RO/TRO's being filed. I believe my post expressed the fact that there are two sides to consider. I also realized that that is an unpopular opinion to have on this board. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 7:26 AM, NVGiant said:

I see what you’re saying here, but what’s worse? Someone falsely accused losing his guns temporarily or a woman murdered because a dangerous person still has access to guns even after he was correctly accused and a restraining order placed. 

I haven’t read much into this decision yet, and I generally agree that due process should be of paramount concern. But it seems like there needs to be some legal mechanism to protect people who are under genuine threat, too. Without one, abused women will be even less inclined to report domestic abuse. Less inclined to get a restraining order (which isn't so bad, because restraining orders are not particularly protective either). And more women will be murdered.

This isn't some overreaching gun control law to prevent still relatively rare mass shootings. Domestic violence is sadly all too common, one of the leading causes of premature death for women. And the presence of a gun in those situations increases the risk of homicide dramatically.

 

 

All these issues are about White Male Power.

 

We live in a world where politicians continue to advocate for a Mans Right to beat his wife and kids, murder his wife because dinner wasn't ready when he gets home, rape his daughters to teach them what they need to know when they get married, and kick their teen kids out of the house because they are confused about their sexuality.

 

Stop the World, I want off of this ride 

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 8:24 AM, Slapdad said:

Just to clear something up here, domestic abuse doesn't just impact women. While one in three women experience physical violence at the hands of their domestic partner, one in four men experience the same. That being said, I don't think that people realize just how often restraining orders are filed by a jilted lover. It's estimated that 70% of all restraining orders are considered trivial or false. More than half a million people are wrongfully arrested on unsubstantiated allegations of domestic violence every year and that doesn't include temporary restraining orders....1.5M temporary restraining orders are filed every year that are discovered to be false or trivial. 

There needs to be a better way to vet the RO/TRO because the current system makes it impossible to police those that are credible. With the statistics above in mind, I understand why there is hesitation or refusal to take away 2A rights with so many false RO/TRO's filed. If I were in a relationship where my partner was physically abusive and I filed a RO/TRO and she was still allowed to carry a gun, I would probably be very nervous and upset about it. Likewise, if I were in a relationship and she filed a bogus RO/TRO and I was subject to having my guns (or anything) taken away, I would also be upset. I guess this is where the innocent until proven guilty thing comes into play. 

 

So, in your eyes it's better to doubt the victims then get men to change their ways.

I know women who have had men put guns in their mouths and tell them it would be a nothing burger if he pulled the trigger. Then, when these women reported it, no one believed the women because these men were leaders of their Communities. Impeccable people who couldn't possibly act in this way.

Until the women turn up dead or they shoot their men, yet the women go to prison for murder and the men receive get out of jail free cards.

Absolutely phucking brilliant.

It's no wonder this world is where it is at.

And, I am calling you out on your bullshit 

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...