- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: DO NOT ever threaten someone for risk of losing gun rights.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:48 am to momentoftruth87
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:48 am to momentoftruth87
quote:
That’s the thing, this isn’t even criminal. It’s the second someone files an order of protection. Why do you lose rights before court?
It is not even confined to an order of protection. It is wide open to discretion.
0
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:48 am to Indefatigable
I don’t either. However my brother in law is going thru this right now in a divorce. His wife cleared his bank and went to the police dept and filed an OP. The TRO will be over turned, however he’s never been arrested and it was simply by her going to a non profit and them filing it with the court with no evidence.
Yeah that opened my eyes quite a bit someone can make an allegation, the burden is then on them in liberal courts where there is literally no evidence.
Yeah that opened my eyes quite a bit someone can make an allegation, the burden is then on them in liberal courts where there is literally no evidence.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:50 am to momentoftruth87
We can agree that far too much deference is given to women in such situations.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:50 am to Indefatigable
Good. Which makes this bullshite.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:53 am to Timeoday
So OP, do you feel that someone who has a domestic violence restraining order (usually due to threats or acts of violence) should have a gun to commit violence against the person who needed the restraining order?
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:54 am to AubieinNC2009
Are you innocent until proven guilty or guilty with rights taken without due process?
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:54 am to momentoftruth87
Kavanaugh's concurrence is worth a read on the Court's analysis.
Second Amendment absolutists should not read Barrett's, it starts with:
Second Amendment absolutists should not read Barrett's, it starts with:
quote:
Despite its unqualified text, the Second Amendment is not absolute. It codified a pre-existing right, and preexisting limits on that right are part and parcel of it.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 9:55 am to Indefatigable
So illegals don’t have rights?
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:00 am to AubieinNC2009
quote:
So OP, do you feel that someone who has a domestic violence restraining order (usually due to threats or acts of violence) should have a gun to commit violence against the person who needed the restraining order?
If they've committed domestic violence they should be locked up, after a trial
This idea that the government will somehow keep you safe is stupid, if someone is hell bent on killing you a restraining order isn't going to stop them
This will only continue to be a weapon used by bitter partners to gain leverage in a divorce
How about we add one caveat to it, if the allegation cannot be substantiated then the accuser goes to jail for 1 year
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:00 am to AubieinNC2009
quote:
So OP, do you feel that someone who has a domestic violence restraining order (usually due to threats or acts of violence) should have a gun to commit violence against the person who needed the restraining order?
I believe if a person is violent, that person must be incarcerated. I believe if you are threatened, you are responsible for dealing with your threat.
I do not believe, because someone I do not even know, my right to own a gun suddenly becomes ambiguous because another can simply claim I threatened them.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:01 am to BlueFalcon
Yep. It’s basically red flag laws on crack.
Terrible decision by the court
Terrible decision by the court
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:05 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Second Amendment absolutists should not read Barrett's, it starts with
Yet another justice appointed by a Republican President who turned out to be a left-wing lunatic. Notice how the reverse NEVER happens...
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:08 am to momentoftruth87
The 4 person appeals court ruled unanimously that while the attempt to keep guns out the hands of abusers was well-meaning, it was unconstitutional.
How the supposedly conservative Supreme Court majority went the other way is beyond me. The government argued a precedent being guns being taken from British loyalists. It's ridiculous.
How the supposedly conservative Supreme Court majority went the other way is beyond me. The government argued a precedent being guns being taken from British loyalists. It's ridiculous.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:09 am to momentoftruth87
quote:
Yep. It’s basically red flag laws on crack.
Terrible decision by the court
Ambiguity is the wettest of dreams for lawyers everywhere. Today is their happy day.
Leeches gonna be sucking hard going forward.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:11 am to Timeoday
I guess I’m missing your assertion about the lawyers. Exactly what are you insinuating about lawyers having a heyday with this moving forward?
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:15 am to Indefatigable
quote:
quote:Now it’s enforced anytime there is an order of protection, firearms are taken.
A domestic violence restraining order, yes. I don't have a problem with that.
In general, I don't either.
But that's also assuming we have an unbiased and politically neutral judiciary making decisions on these situations.....that doesn't exist in America today.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:20 am to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
How the supposedly conservative Supreme Court majority went the other way is beyond me.
Because only one of them actually understands the Second Amendment.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:23 am to momentoftruth87
quote:
So illegals don’t have rights?
Not sure I understand what you're asking
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:26 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented
quote:
The presumption against restrictions on keeping and bearing firearms is a central feature of the Second Amendment. That Amendment does not merely narrow the Government’s regulatory power. It is a barrier, placing the right to keep and bear arms off limits to the Government.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 10:27 am to Indefatigable
quote:
We can agree that far too much deference is given to women in such situations.
Well, there are far more women voters.
Page 2 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News