|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
MI: Restraining orders and guns shouldn't mix
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
“It may be an exaggeration to say that some Michigan lawmakers want to arm abusers.”
“But not by much.”
“Michigan's Legislature has approved a law, ostensibly aimed at standardizing the way concealed-weapons permits are issued, that also eliminates a state provision barring individuals subject to a personal protection order from obtaining such permits.”
“Personal protection orders, also called restraining orders, are typically issued by a court when there's reason to believe a person is in danger. The subject of the order is generally barred from contacting the threatened person, visiting the person's home or place of employment, stalking or assaultive behavior. …” … |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(1/13/2015)
|
While many, (or most) ROs have a reasonable basis for a court to issue an emergent trend is causing a disturbingly large number across the nation that do not. Anti- gun advocates are abusing/manipulating this legitimate court power to "influence" subsequent proceedings or to coerce, ( by threat or action), the defendant into accepting their terms of settlement.
It is hardly the objective of these laws to empower one party in a dispute over another. But its often the result when a court doesn't offer opportunity for the subject of its orders to offer rebuttal. |
| Comment by:
PDQ
(1/13/2015)
|
| google an article "Hitting below the belt.." by Cathy Young to understand just how insidious this RO scheme is. and then after an RO, even a TRO you lose your gun rights, don't even have to know there is a court case, don't have to b e there. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
