Jump to content
one...two...tree

Domestic abuse suspects shouldn't be able to keep their guns.

 Share

17 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline

WaPo Editorial:

GAIL PUMPHREY came to dread meeting her ex-husband to transfer custody of their children. Sometimes he would curse at her. Once, she said, he spit in her face. On Thanksgiving Day two years ago, he fatally shot Ms. Pumphrey and their three children -- ages 7, 10 and 12 -- before killing himself. He used a .22-caliber rifle, the same gun Ms. Pumphrey had asked a court to confiscate just three weeks before.

The Maryland General Assembly is considering two bills that would make it harder for those accused of domestic violence to keep their guns. The legislation comes too late to save Ms. Pumphrey and her children but would help prevent such tragedies in the future. One bill would give judges the option of confiscating the firearms of domestic abuse suspects against whom temporary protective orders have been issued. The other would require judges to order the seizure of guns from suspects once final protective orders are in place. A number of states, including North Carolina and California, already have such measures. Even Virginia, not known for limiting gun ownership, prohibits domestic violence suspects from buying or carrying guns when protective orders have been issued against them.

Inexcusably, such legislation has died in the House Judiciary Committee in past years. The committee, chaired by Del. Joseph F. Vallario Jr. (D-Prince George's), has a reputation for protecting the rights of the accused -- sometimes at the expense of reasonable policy. Mr. Vallario, a criminal defense lawyer, told The Post's Lisa Rein that his main concern was that law enforcement officers accused of domestic abuse would not be able to carry their guns for work. It seems to us that Mr. Vallario should be more concerned about the safety of an abused spouse than the ability of an officer suspected of domestic violence to carry a gun.

Other critics contend that the bills unfairly target firearms. After all, they say, a spouse or partner can be harmed with a baseball bat or a knife. The statistics tell a different story: Female victims of domestic violence are more likely to be killed in shootings than through all other methods of violence combined. In Maryland, guns accounted for more than half of domestic-violence-related deaths from June 2007 to July 2008.

Lt. Gov. Anthony G. Brown (D) spoke passionately last week before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee about the need for tougher domestic violence laws. Mr. Brown no doubt drew upon a recent family tragedy: His cousin Catherine Brown was shot to death by an estranged boyfriend last year. Advocates for victims of domestic violence believe the legislation has a chance this year because of the O'Malley administration's support. We hope they're right. Mr. Vallario and his colleagues have the chance to save the next Gail Pumphrey.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...9021601103.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline

i thought this was already a federal law - given we had people in the military that were subject to it.

* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
i thought this was already a federal law - given we had people in the military that were subject to it.

Do you support the measure? What about police officers who are accused of domestic abuse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline
i thought this was already a federal law - given we had people in the military that were subject to it.

Do you support the measure? What about police officers who are accused of domestic abuse?

yes and yes. next?

* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Lift. Cond. (apr) Country: Egypt
Timeline

What about blind abusers?

Don't just open your mouth and prove yourself a fool....put it in writing.

It gets harder the more you know. Because the more you find out, the uglier everything seems.

kodasmall3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i thought this was already a federal law - given we had people in the military that were subject to it.

Do you support the measure? What about police officers who are accused of domestic abuse?

The measure is common sense.

According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you take away the man's gun, you don't take away his ability to kill. He still has a knife, his fist, or a fire extinguisher. To think that the situation is peachy when guns-free is inane.

This is attacking the problem in an asinine manner.

Love timeline:

??? 2003 -------> Started chatting regularly, became good friends

Nov 2004 -------> Fell in love

Jan 2006 -------> Met (in person) for first time

Apr 2008 -------> Wedding

Jun 2008 -------> Closed on house together

K-1 timeline:

Jun 11, 2007 -------> I-129f sent

Mar 20, 2008 -------> Visa in hand

AoS/EAD/AP timeline:

Apr 26, 2008 -------> Wedding

Apr 28, 2008 -------> Filed (forms mailed)

Apr 30, 2008 -------> Forms received by USCIS

May 06, 2008 -------> Cashed check posted to account

May 10, 2008 -------> NOA1 received for EAD, AP, and AoS

May 10, 2008 -------> Biometrics appt date received

May 28, 2008 -------> Biometrics for EAD & AoS

Jun 11, 2008 -------> AoS case transferred to CSC

Jul 05, 2008 -------> AP Approval

Jul 09, 2008 -------> EAD approval

Jul 14, 2008 -------> EAD and AP received

Jul 17, 2008 -------> AoS approved (card production ordered)

Now for my obnoxious signature Meez©:

0605_10033471973.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Country: China
Timeline
One bill would give judges the option of confiscating the firearms of domestic abuse suspects against whom temporary protective orders have been issued. The other would require judges to order the seizure of guns from suspects once final protective orders are in place.

trouble is, getting a temporary protective order is too easy. it's considered standard fare in a contentious divorce, and can be based on vague testimony by a woman who "feels unsafe" in any way whatsoever. doesn't have to be based upon credible threat or past actions, just how a woman feels. works this way in pennsylvania.

too bad about the people killed in the story attached to the plea. the woman should have had her own gun.

____________________________________________________________________________

obamasolyndrafleeced-lmao.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

illinois, it is law that if convicted..no gun card...or if a gun card has been issued..revoked

Peace to All creatures great and small............................................

But when we turn to the Hebrew literature, we do not find such jokes about the donkey. Rather the animal is known for its strength and its loyalty to its master (Genesis 49:14; Numbers 22:30).

Peppi_drinking_beer.jpg

my burro, bosco ..enjoying a beer in almaty

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...st&id=10835

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taking an abusers gun away wont do squat. Just a backdoor method to gun control.

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."- Ayn Rand

“Your freedom to be you includes my freedom to be free from you.”

― Andrew Wilkow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Colombia
Timeline

We were told in the military, this is my weapon, and this is my gun. (Holding your hand in a conspicuous place with the latter.)

So exactly what do they want to take away from that guy? As pointed out in another thread, our legislators do not know the difference between a semi or a fully automatic gun (their word, not mine). Apparently they don't know the difference between a gun and an weapon either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Country: Vietnam
Timeline

Very unfortunate about the victims. Also to take away guns from a suspect is unconstitutional. He is innocent until proven in a court of law and does not lose his rights just because he is a suspect. It is very common for spouses to make accusations also whether real or not. As also noted before, if someone wants to kill someone there are numerous ways to do so. If you take one of the ways to kill someone, then the next and so on it could be an ever expanding list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...