Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Domestic abuse = No guns

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Domestic abuse = No guns

    Regardless of your position on domestic abuse, this sets a very dangerous precedent. Convicted of misdemeanor disturbing the peace? No peaceful assembly for you. Caught plagiarizing in school? No freedom of the press. Seriously, where does it end?

    http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...ntent=20160627
    "It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself."

  • #2
    It ends when the general populace has no means to defend itself.

    All in the name of "safety" of course.

    To over half of the republic, the 2nd amendment should not be a right for the general populace.

    However, I'm sure the folks on the hill enjoy those rights as well as the free security people provided to them that use those very same tools.

    Once the 2nd has been sanitized they'll start messing with the 1st amendment dealing with the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    They of course know what is best for us....
    Last edited by Gargamel; 06-27-2016, 07:03 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Death by a thousand cuts.
      "Self-government won't work without self-discipline." - Paul Harvey

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by helosailor View Post
        Regardless of your position on domestic abuse, this sets a very dangerous precedent. Convicted of misdemeanor disturbing the peace? No peaceful assembly for you. Caught plagiarizing in school? No freedom of the press. Seriously, where does it end?

        http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...ntent=20160627
        This is why we should only allow the government to take gun rights from people who are behind bars doing time, people on probation or parole, and the truly insane. Once a law was passed that let the government decide who could still have civil rights it is just a matter of time before they decide that no one is allowed to have civil rights.
        Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by svo855 View Post
          This is why we should only allow the government to take gun rights from people who are behind bars doing time, people on probation or parole, and the truly insane. Once a law was passed that let the government decide who could still have civil rights it is just a matter of time before they decide that no one is allowed to have civil rights.
          This right here. And to Gargamel; they have already been working on the 1st and the rest of the bill of rights. The entire thing has been trashed. About the only one they haven't violated is quartering of troops in our houses.
          I don't like Republicans, but I really FUCKING hate Democrats.


          Sex with an Asian woman is great, but 30 minutes later you're horny again.

          Comment


          • #6
            Just wait until MADD gets worked up over this and starts pushing for gun rights to be automatically stripped for a DWI arrest that doesn't get restored for lets say 5 years even if the case gets dropped. Things like this are what is coming if the no fly/no buy law gets passed.
            Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hasn't this been the case since the early to mid 90's? Seems like I was still in the Army when that started, because they were saying some soldiers were being discharged since they could not legally 'possess' firearms.

              Comment


              • #8

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Chili View Post
                  Hasn't this been the case since the early to mid 90's? Seems like I was still in the Army when that started, because they were saying some soldiers were being discharged since they could not legally 'possess' firearms.
                  Not sure on the 90's but it applies to domestic violence cases. Beat your wife or significant other, kids, etc and you can not have a firearm. Win the case, get your rights back. Put in place to protect victims of domestic violence. You know "she put me in jail so I will show her" type shit.

                  Basically it steps the felon in possession law down to reach into domestic violence cases.
                  Whos your Daddy?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Chili View Post
                    Hasn't this been the case since the early to mid 90's?
                    It is a law from the 90s but they keep lowering the bar about what domestic violence cases actually are.
                    Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by svo855 View Post
                      It is a law from the 90s but they keep lowering the bar about what domestic violence cases actually are.
                      The laws on domestic violence have not changed in the 15 years I have been doing this. Actually a couple of years ago in Texas it went from you shall arrest to whatever you need to do to prevent further family violence. So they lightened it up just a tad. Class C contact or threat is not even reported or tracked in most places. Only when you step up your game and do some damage to your life partner or kids.
                      Whos your Daddy?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        So, in other words, the no talent ass clown Russ Martin can't own a gun. I'm OK with that.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SS Junk View Post
                          So, in other words, the no talent ass clown Russ Martin can't own a gun. I'm OK with that.
                          He was never prosecuted from what I recall. I think she changed her story / refused to cooperate.

                          This isn't like the no fly list thing, you still have to be found guilty.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kingjason View Post
                            The laws on domestic violence have not changed in the 15 years I have been doing this. Actually a couple of years ago in Texas it went from you shall arrest to whatever you need to do to prevent further family violence. So they lightened it up just a tad. Class C contact or threat is not even reported or tracked in most places. Only when you step up your game and do some damage to your life partner or kids.
                            Texas isn't the state that has been monkeying with shit. The left leaning states are the ones working the system in a back door attempt to limit gun rights.
                            Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Chili View Post
                              He was never prosecuted from what I recall. I think she changed her story / refused to cooperate.

                              This isn't like the no fly list thing, you still have to be found guilty.
                              Not yet. But the police and the feds can already steal your shit without convicting you of a crime so it isn't much of a leap for them to start stealing your guns after you are accused of domestic violence. All in the name of "safety" of course.
                              Originally posted by racrguy
                              What's your beef with NPR, because their listeners are typically more informed than others?
                              Originally posted by racrguy
                              Voting is a constitutional right, overthrowing the government isn't.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X