TX courts stymied re: Disarming domestic violence BG's.

[hillfighter]

baldeagle wrote: "Persons convicted of violations of the law deserve to have their rights stripped away. Even the founding fathers believed that. Rights are not absolute. They are conditional. You forfeit them when you harm other people. If you can't live in society without harming others, you don't deserve the rights that were naturally yours when you behaved yourself."


I agree with your statement completely. The only thing I have a problem with are Laws that contain exceptions for classes of people. Criminal Laws should apply to all citizens equally regardless of profession. It matters none what those exceptions are. The fact that they exist at all is ridiculous.

"Some people are more equal than others" is a foundational tenet of all tyrannies, and of no free States.

[RHenriksen]

Boy, going back to the OP I'm really surprised to hear that this DV-based firearms confiscation is so toothless. When I went through my divorce a couple of years ago, my biggest fear was that my ex would show up on my doorstep, provoke a confrontation, and then claim I'd assaulted her - triggering confiscation. I discussed this with my attorney; his advice, which seems pretty sensible, was to NOT answer the front door, and disappear out the back door and walk to a neighbor's house, a coffee shop, etc - avoid, avoid, avoid.

Thankfully, I did not have to resort to this.

[baldeagle]

I don't think you should lose any rights in the case of a misdemeanor conviction. I wasn't aware that that class of convictions resulted in a lifetime ban on gun ownership. Are you certain about that? Misdemeanors are minor offenses for which you should be punished by fines or brief imprisonment, not the permanent loss of your rights.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/misdem ... lence.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I was unaware of that. Once again, our federal government oversteps their bounds. A domestic violence case is a state matter. The Feds should have nothing to do with it. Passing a law to increase the punishment for a state offense by piling on a federal offense is wrong on many levels. Furthermore, misdemeanors are not serious offenses of the law to begin with. If they were, they would be felonies. Only a felony conviction should result in a loss of rights.

[rbwhatever1]

jbarn wrote: "So since you don't like the fact that there are exemptions in place for some, no domestic violence victim should expect the abuser is limited from access to firearms?"

On the contrary. I believe Convicted Criminal LEO's and Military men deserve the exact same treatment as all the other Convicted Criminals.

[WildBill]

Boy, going back to the OP I'm really surprised to hear that this DV-based firearms confiscation is so toothless. When I went through my divorce a couple of years ago, my biggest fear was that my ex would show up on my doorstep, provoke a confrontation, and then claim I'd assaulted her - triggering confiscation. I discussed this with my attorney; his advice, which seems pretty sensible, was to NOT answer the front door, and disappear out the back door and walk to a neighbor's house, a coffee shop, etc - avoid, avoid, avoid.

Thankfully, I did not have to resort to this.

I find it sad that a person who did nothing wrong would have to resort to acting like a criminal by hiding and evading another person for fear of losing their civil rights because they have a fear of them bearing false witness. This is one reason I don't agree with the absolute statements about banning firearm ownership or losing civil rights that are being posted by some people in this thread.

[RHenriksen]

I find it sad that a person who did nothing wrong would have to resort to acting like a criminal by hiding and evading another person for fear of losing their civil rights because they have a fear of them bearing false witness. This is one reason I don't agree with the absolute statements about banning firearm ownership or losing civil rights that are being posted by some people in this thread.

Exactly what I'd hoped to illustrate

[jmra]

Boy, going back to the OP I'm really surprised to hear that this DV-based firearms confiscation is so toothless. When I went through my divorce a couple of years ago, my biggest fear was that my ex would show up on my doorstep, provoke a confrontation, and then claim I'd assaulted her - triggering confiscation. I discussed this with my attorney; his advice, which seems pretty sensible, was to NOT answer the front door, and disappear out the back door and walk to a neighbor's house, a coffee shop, etc - avoid, avoid, avoid.

Thankfully, I did not have to resort to this.

I find it sad that a person who did nothing wrong would have to resort to acting like a criminal by hiding and evading another person for fear of losing their civil rights because they have a fear of them bearing false witness. This is one reason I don't agree with the absolute statements about banning firearm ownership or losing civil rights that are being posted by some people in this thread.