Gun Control for Domestric Abusers is Gaining Traction

[SecularMotion]

A national push to get guns out of the hands of people with a history of domestic abuse is finding some traction in the Rhode Island General Assembly, while some gun control advocates want tougher restrictions.

Democratic Rep. Teresa Tanzi has sponsored a bill that would expand the number of people required to surrender guns. The South Kingstown Democrat said most of the people affected by Coyne's bill are headed to prison because they've been convicted of the most serious violent crimes. Tanzi said she's more worried about those with misdemeanor domestic violence convictions.

Federal law has long prohibited felons and others convicted of domestic violence misdemeanor crimes or subject to protective orders from buying or owning guns. But it doesn't establish procedures for those abusers to surrender those guns. It also has a narrow definition of domestic relationships.

Everytown for Gun Safety, a national gun safety group, is supporting Tanzi's bill. It sent a letter to lawmakers recently detailing Rhode Island cases where it said courts didn't order abusers to turn in their guns even when federal law banned them from possessing a gun.

http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Gun-Control-for-Domestric-Abusers-is-Gaining-Traction-381861791.html

[JonathanRackham]

1. I hope there are no exemptions for special classes of people like police.

There should also be penalties for false accusations.

[marble falls]

2. Anyone indicted, found guilty of dmestic violence, has a peace warrant or restaining order needs...

to be totally disarmed by the police. That includes cops.

[JonathanRackham]

4. Restraining orders are useless paper.

Ask my sister. Her access, training and ability to use a firearm stopped her ex. No shots fired but she certainly made herself assertively equal and made it known to the prick who beat her once.

[marble falls]

6. And thats why anyone with one needs to be disarmed.

[JonathanRackham]

7. Cutting their arms off would stop use of knives and blunt instruments.

It would also prevent them from driving a car and running over their domestic partner.

[JonathanRackham]

3. All potential weapons should be removed from the house.

Domestic partners have been bludgeoned to death, poisoned and stabbed.

Upon evidence of violence or collaboration of threat of viokence the agressive or offending party should be removed from the domicile for a mandatory cooling off period. Put them in a cell if need be.

The controllers are not about stopping domestic violence but only about their fetish gun hate. Their true agenda hides behind the victims.

Don't engage in half assed pretend domestic violence prevention and laws. Get serious.

[sarisataka]

5. That statement

"controllers are not about stopping domestic violence but only about their fetish gun hate" has been proven clearly true. When a NJ woman was stabbed to death by an ex-partner, while waiting longer than the 30 days allowed by law for police to issue her a permit to purchase a gun, the control side blamed the victim...

but she did make some bad choices along the way

maybe not date that asshole in the first place

Not the kind of person I'd ever go on a date with if I were a woman

and of course a variation on the "at least the victim wasn't killed with a gun":

Maybe we should be praising NJ's laws for making the killer resort to a knife

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172168288

[pablo_marmol]

8. Time to paste & run, but no time for any real activism - eh SecMo?

Kamala Harris awaits your letter of indignation ----

"California Attorney General Kamala Harris, a candidate actively campaigning for the Senate seat that is opening up with Barbara Boxer’s retirement, recently made the news when she tried to shame members of Congress for refusing to enact unconstitutional and counterproductive gun-control laws. “They should have closed the chambers of Congress on the House and the Senate side, and said all you members go in there, only you, and spread out the autopsy photographs of and them to look at those photographs. And then vote your conscience,” Harris said at Politicon, a political convention held in Los Angeles.1

Wow! That’s some pretty extreme rhetoric. But is the pot calling the kettle black here? Harris is the highest level law enforcement officer in California, and the head of the Department of Justice (DOJ). DOJ is responsible for maintaining criminal records, mental illness records, records of those who have become ineligible to possess firearms, and all of the databases used to perform background checks on gun buyers, to register firearms, and to take firearms away from people who are prohibited from possessing them but who still have firearms registered in their name.

Those records, and the related databases, are a hot mess."

http://213ajq29v6vk19b76q3534cx.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Special-Feature-K-Harris.pdf