The justices are forced to confront the gun policy disaster that it created.

  • Drusas@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Domestic violence is already seriously under-prosecuted and victims given little protection at all. It’s seen somehow as less important than other forms of violence, while I would say that this should be the opposite.

    No one with a history of violence should be allowed to own a gun, but especially someone with a history of domestic violence, as that tends to be a pattern and not a one-off incident.

    • HelixDab@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The problem is that it’s not “proven”; the only side presenting any evidence is the person seeking the protective order. If you make it an adversarial process so that the subject of the protective order can try to refute claims by the person seeking the order, then sure.

      But right now it’s strictly one-sided. Most places do require some form of evidence, but that evidence doesn’t have to meet normal evidentiary standards, and the evidence isn’t being questioned in an adversarial way.

      Personally, I’m not comfortable removing rights when the person losing rights can’t contest it.

      • AnalogyAddict@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think you’re getting temporary POs confused with permanent ones.

        My ex and abuser was convicted of domestic violence charges, and currently owns a gun and has no public record of his crimes. This despite being anti gun and getting it for the sole purpose of scaring me. Proof has nothing to do with it. Courts regularly ignore proof in order to fail to protect victims. If they don’t accept criminal convictions as proof, there isn’t much they will accept. Don’t pretend this has anything to do with a need to prove that someone is a monster before taking away his deadly toys.

        For what it is worth, our kids are still fighting to heal the damage he did to them. But he has a right to a gun, so bully for him.

        • HelixDab@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If he was convicted of domestic violence, then he cannot legally own a firearm, unless the conviction has been vacated or he’s been pardoned. That’s federal law. Therefore, he either wasn’t convicted of domestic violence, the courts failed to follow through with their legal obligations and report the conviction to NICS, or he acquired the firearm illegally.

      • snooggums@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you had some stranger threatening your child, how much proof should you need before getting a restraining order?

        • Flaky_Fish69@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          actually, you should need enough proof to show the stranger made those remarks, yeah?

          like, people make false accusations all the time. like… how many times have karens called the cops wanting exactly this to happen?

          Edit to clarify: you need to satisfy a cop that the subject actually represents a persistent threat. That cop then can issue a protective order of a relatively short duration (days, typically), while the courts decide-adversarially- if it is indeed warranted.

          • Mintyytea@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Actually, there are more cases of domestic violence than false accusations. How come we’re not worried about false accusations of robbery when they happen at the same rate as false accusations of sexual assault? Trust me, there are not karens lurking in every corner trying to make fake reports.

            In our society where sexual assault is underreported, and one in 4 women experience domestic violence, why are you putting a comment that wouldn’t help this society improve on this front?

            • Flaky_Fish69@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Actually, there are more cases of domestic violence than false accusations.

              protective orders are used for far more than just instances of domestic violence. domestic violence. Further, just because most accusations of domestic violence aren’t false… doesn’t mean that there doesn’t need to be some attempt to verify the truth of the accusation. Arguing that 99 prior accusations were honest, doesn’t mean that 1 time isn’t.

              How come we’re not worried about false accusations of robbery when they happen at the same rate as false accusations of sexual assault?
              nice whataboutism. you don’t get protective orders handed to you because you stole some shit.

              Trust me, there are not karens lurking in every corner trying to make fake reports.

              And yet… it happens… sure a lot of those are for stupid reasons. It’s still pure malice, and it’s still wrong. Amy cooper, did exactly what we’re talking.

          • AnalogyAddict@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Police don’t issue POs in any jurisdiction I know of. You have to go to court for that. Police can’t do more than ask them nicely to go away until you get a court issued PO signed by a judge.

            The vast majority of evidence shows that people don’t tend to go around falsely accusing their loved ones of crimes just for kicks and giggles. Yet every abuse apologist loves to polish up that argument every single time.

            I’m trying to give you the benefit of doubt, but you do realize that making these arguments in this way puts you squarely aligned with the most consistent group of murderers in the world, right?

            “People are being hurt and terrorized, and need to be protected!”

            “But we couldn’t possibly take away a few guns until we sort this out, because an entitled violent person’s right to have a gun is way more important than thousands of innocent murdered women and children, right!..Right?”