They initially met resistance from a small, but boisterous, group defending Second Amendment rights. However, each side listened to the other's position, and support for taking guns away from domestic abusers gained an ally. "We support the moms in this. We are all against domestic abusers. We believe they're criminals. They shouldn't have handguns, or guns of any kind," said one Second Amendment right's activist. [More]OK, I-Team Reporter David Collins of NBC's WBALTV11: Give us names that will allow their bona fides to be tested.
[Via Matt F]
2 comments:
I notice that the topic here is CONVICTED domestic abusers.
You know, all the politicians have to do is get off their asses and VOTE to reclassify domestic abuse as a felony, and all this other stuff will Just Fall Out. No guns for domestic abuse convicts, easy peasy.
So WHY won’t they do that?
I object to any precedent that says even convicts can lose constitutional rights for misdemeanors.
Domestic abusers are actually no different than any other kind of aggressor. Self defense is the basic right of all people, so it would seem much more intelligent and effective to train and arm the potential victims of domestic abuse. And, maybe, think of some way to encourage the potential victims to make better life choices all around.
Elevating the current "he looked at me" nonsense as a felony "abuse" really makes no sense.
Even the "convicted" have the same right of self defense as anyone else. If they are truly too dangerous to be armed, they are too dangerous to be walking the streets without a guardian.
Post a Comment