Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's the problem with a lot of stories that spread around the internet... the fine details get lost. Just like a lot of studies where they use dubious control groups to come to any conclusion they want. I find this is so prevalent I no longer trust any study at face value.
I would argue someone unstable enough to have cops called out multiple times on domestic dispute calls doesn't really need a permit.
So a women who gets beat by her husband and calls the cops shouldn't be able to get a gun to protect herself?
So now we are basing your constitutional rights on how many times the police show up at your house? No trial? No jury? Not even an indictment? Sounds like the Spanish inquisition to me, but at least they got something of a trial back in the dark ages.
I agree. The only standard that matters is found guilty. Not arested, not a mistrial, not a police call.
So now we are basing your constitutional rights on how many times the police show up at your house? No trial? No jury? Not even an indictment? Sounds like the Spanish inquisition to me, but at least they got something of a trial back in the dark ages.
Re-read my post and take a few deep breaths. I said he might well have a case, I simply pointed out the fact that there are valid reasons for concern on the part of the police department. You can dance around it all you want but when there are multiple calls to the address there is a problem, adding a gun to the mix is not going to improve anything. I do not know what the local laws and guidelines are when it comes approving gun acquisition/ownership but if their laws say the police get the discretion to decide then that is that, if not then he should pursue his rights in the courts or better yet, move.
So a women who gets beat by her husband and calls the cops shouldn't be able to get a gun to protect herself?
No said that, it is the husband that wants the gun. She would be better served by hiring a divorce attorney, once she is gone he will get his gun, a win win for everyone.
No said that, it is the husband that wants the gun. She would be better served by hiring a divorce attorney, once she is gone he will get his gun, a win win for everyone.
Do we even know the police wernt called because the wife was yelling at the husband?
Either way, my point still stands, if he has not be found guilty than he has a right to the permit.
I prefer we don't end up in a country where the police become the sole arm of Justice.
They know the facts of the Calls, I did not say anything about a court of law. You said we do not know the facts behind the calls they responded to, I stated that they know why they were there and what the facts involved with those calls are, they do.
I agree, but if the laws in the local area state that he police get to make the determination then you have to change the law to change the situation, there are ways to do that, failing on that front leaves a person with three options, live with the law, break the law, or move.
They know the facts of the Calls, I did not say anything about a court of law. You said we do not know the facts behind the calls they responded to, I stated that they know why they were there and what the facts involved with those calls are, they do.
I agree, but if the laws in the local area state that he police get to make the determination then you have to change the law to change the situation, there are ways to do that, failing on that front leaves a person with three options, live with the law, break the law, or move.
The law of discriminatory issuance is being challenged. It is an obvious violation of the 14th amendment, especially if they have issued to one other person is a similar situation or have one police officer in the state who has had the police called to their house and allowed them to continue to be sworn officers. The odds are certainly on my side with this claim.
You can't make this stuff up: Court rules domestic violence allegations enough to deny gun permit | NJ.com
So this guy was accused of a crime 20 years ago, acquitted, and now he was denied a gun permit because of it. Guilty after being proven innocent. Why even have a constitution? It's clear that our government has no intention on abiding by it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
