Supreme Court Upholds Gun Ban For Those Under Domestic Violence Restraining Orders

[biku324]

At the risk of not being Miss Congeniality here, i did this countless times as a night command duty officer, well before red flag laws had been enacted. Inevitably these seizures followed violent domestic violence incidents, so plenty (too much) evidence of what had transpired was plainly visible.

By this time we would have arrested the assailant had he been present when we arrived. In most instances he would have fled the scene knowing full well we would again arrest him as we had in countless prior such calls. (Note: Virginity is a rare commodity in the law enforcement world. By the time we get to them, they have done it before).

We would, whenever possible, get the on call judge to place the bail out of reach to at least keep the suspect in custody over night if we had made an arrest. Judges were extremely cooperative about this.

I would also have a notation attached to the chain of custody sheet stating the firearm(s) were to be released only pursuant to court order. I wanted to prevent defendant or defense counsel from gaining the release of the firearms based solely on demand. I also wanted any magistrate considering such an order to be forced to read the crime report. I also wanted no blood on our departmental hands, and this was a way to attain that secondary objective.

Never in any of this did I consider the 2A rights of the defendant. My justification was the emergency exception rule, for which I had more than sufficient evidence. My sole intent was to save lives.

Looking back, I never received any negative kickback or response from any quarter.

My troops of course loved it. They did not care much for domestic abusers either.

Needless to say, I have no regrets about doing this.

Good deal all the way around.

When mandatory arrest came around, lots of officers wouldn't enforce it; when restrictions on firearms ownership for convicted DV offenders or those with DV restraining orders came about, many officers had to be encouraged to follow the law.

Not all police officers are sympathetic to DV victims. IMO, these folks should not work in field policing.

 

[steelslaver]

If they can actually show in court PROOF of abusive and or a danger that is one thing. Just one person who may well have an ax to grind stating you are is something else. Even one person and their family member(s) are suspect.

The number of completely false statements made by opposing parties in divorces, especially those involving child custody proves that such testimony is unreliable. Ask any attorney who is involved in family law.

If you had asked the mother of my children she would have stated I was a direct descendant of Attila the Hun. In fact her, her brother and a guy once pushed their way into my motel room, during the hours of my visitation because I had told her I was NOT going to bring them back until my time ended and she wanted them earlier. Then she tried to charge me after the cops showed up. Since our divorce the only way my long term relationships have ended was by the deaths of 2 good women and I am 8 years into another relationship, she on the other hand has never made it 2 years with anyone. CLUE?

My one brother spent a huge sum of money, a year in jail over accusations that were totally exposed as falsehoods at trial where he was found innocent and his ex has later recanted.

I will never ever support red flag laws that are based on a he/she said.
Way way to many vindictive people out their and way to many people in the judicial system willing to go along with it.

 

[GaryS]

My recollection and you may have a better memory of it, is that this all came out of a 1968 incident in CT where the police refused to do anything about a wife beater and he eventually murdered her.

As things sometimes do, the cure is sometimes worse than the disease. Lawyers will encourage their clients to suddenly discover that their soon to be ex once pushed her. In many states that mere statement is enough for a restraining order to be issued and guns confiscated.

I think that there should be a bit more balance in the process, but that someone with Rahimi's record clearly is a threat to anyone that angers him.

It's a tough job for police officers to try to sort this out and often they will err on the side of caution.

It's damned tricky dealing with humans.

Good deal all the way around.

When mandatory arrest came around, lots of officers wouldn't enforce it; when restrictions on firearms ownership for convicted DV offenders or those with DV restraining orders came about, many officers had to be encouraged to follow the law.

Not all police officers are sympathetic to DV victims. IMO, these folks should not work in field policing.