Domestic Violence convictions


PDA






nicki
March 11, 2008, 03:44 AM
Friend of mine at the Gym told me how he had to plea bargain on domestic violence here in California.

Basically his wife had an affair, he goes to wife, puts knife to her throat, tells her he could cut her throat, but she isn't worth it.

She calls the cops and asks what she should do, Cops come, arrest my friend.
She doesn't want to press charges, Police say it doesn't matter.

He is charged with Felony Domestic violence, pleas to a Misdemenor, but he has to go to weekly Domestic violence classes.

Now of course this isn't free, he figures it cost him probably about 11K. This is the 2nd person I know this happened to.

Both guys were easy going guys, but got pushed.

Both guys have lost gun rights in California for the next 10 years, but my question is how does the Federal law play.

Once a person has a domestic violence conviction, is it a lifetime ban or can gun rights be restored.

In California, you can get your record expunged to get other rights back from criminal convictions.

I certainly don't support people who are abusers, and I believe the prosecutor abused their power not only with my friend, but probably with many others.

Many couples have fights, and many people have stressful relationships.

Many couples, have fights over money. Getting hit with having to pay 11K for anger management because of a spousal quarrel is not something that I think would help any couple who already have financial issues.

Nicki

If you enjoyed reading about "Domestic Violence convictions" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Valkman
March 11, 2008, 04:03 AM
It's a lifetime ban as far as I know - they never should've pled to it but should have fought it.

I went through that same exact thing way before Clinton passed the law banning guns for people convicted of DV. Arrested on a felony, charged with a misdemeanor and had a guy from County telling me I should plea guilty and do the classes which were very expensive back then. I said "No, I won't plead guilty" and the guy was astonished. He said "You know you risk 90 days in jail" and I said I didn't care, I was fighting it. So I hired a lawyer and he got it dismissed, and because of that I get to have guns today. Your "friends" should have done all they could have to fight it.

mekender
March 11, 2008, 05:24 AM
sorry, they shouldnt own guns... if they are the kind of person that can get pushed enough to draw a weapon on someone, they dont deserve to carry a gun... a smart person would have left before getting that angry... part of the burden of being a gun owner is a great responsibility to think before you act

Deanimator
March 11, 2008, 09:11 AM
The guy with the knife to his wife's throat strikes me as a fool. Maybe a fool who shouldn't have a gun.

buzz_knox
March 11, 2008, 09:17 AM
Many couples have fights, and many people have stressful relationships

Absolutely. But those fights shouldn't end up with the threat of deadly force.

Len S
March 11, 2008, 09:56 AM
If that were my dtr I would be embarassed about the affair but I would be livid about some a$$hat holding a knife to her throat. About 8 years ago a group of us were sitting on a patio shooting the breeze. All parents who have met through our children. One of the women threw out the question about what we would do if we caught our spouse in the act of cheating. There were the usual, divorce and stuff a few mentioned A$$ kicking. Everyone looked at me because I hunt and own guns. I simply said I would get pics and send them to her parents. My wife is from a very good family from Costa Rica. Very proper and stuff. Everyone there told me I was a sick nasty bast--D.I said it is the answer because in this case violence does nothing except get you in trouble. One of guys in the group said he would kill the guy and give his wife the choice. Back up his story of him killing her rapist or admit to the affair and send their children's father to jail.Short temper + gunpowder is a bad combo. Luckily I doubt that I will have to deal with such nonsense.


Len

Neo-Luddite
March 11, 2008, 10:17 AM
Many couples have fights, and many people have stressful relationships

I would venture to say that MOST people do. But rewind to the part about (1) placing a knife by her throat (2) her calling the police but not wanting to 'press charges'.

If you are tempted to reach for a weapon to threaten your spouse, it's time to go for a walk--if you call the police to interveen in the situation SOMEONE will go to jail and be charged.

In most places, that is SOP to prevent an escalation of the fight to serious violence and to reduce the tendency of certain people to be a PITA by needing the police to interveen on a frequent basis in their interpersonal relationships.

I do not like the lautenberg amdt for many reasons but that is apart from the point. The only way that I know of to have RKBA restored after a domestic violence conviction is expungment of the record by a judge--and that may be an expensive option requiring an attorney who knows how to approach the matter.

yhtomit
March 11, 2008, 11:21 AM
If someone held a knife to the throat to a woman who was important to me (my sister, or my mother, a girlfriend, even an ex-girlfriend), I'd be pretty unhappy about him getting a gun without very strong evidence that he had overcome his violence. (And I say that as someone who generally doesn't like the tiered approach to citizenship according to which there are sub- and super-citizens when it comes to gun ownership.)

Are there circumstances where I might be persuaded that it was ... rehearsal for a play they're both in at the dinner theater, or a self-defense drill, or a previously unrecognized and now controlled medical-mental problem, or some other oddball situation in which a knife-to-the-throat is something other than an attack? Yes, sure -- context matters. But if that's what it was (an attack out of anger), what brings you to overlook it?

But knife-attacks on one's wife make me think that being allowed to cop a plea is a court's (perhaps foolish) act of mercy.

Coronach
March 11, 2008, 11:35 AM
To answer the OP's question, the Federal law is a lifetime ban. There is, on paper, a process to have your 2nd amendment rights restored, but IIRC the process has never been carried out, due to lack of funding (read: they're preventing it from happening via the budgetary process). Do not quote me on that, it has been a while since I read it, and I may be wrong.

Mike

Kharn
March 11, 2008, 12:19 PM
Coronach:
The process used to be carried out, but the ATF's budget line has specifically prohibited using funds for it since at least the early Clinton years.

Kharn

MrAnteater
March 11, 2008, 01:01 PM
Normal, rational people don't threaten others with weapons no matter how upset they may be. You need to be honest about your "easy going" friends. You might have a good relationship with them but that doesn't mean they have a serious problem with violence against women.

I think the guy got off lucky with only 11k in costs.

How high would the costs have been to defend a second degree murder charge if he would have taken one more step in his violent outburst?

I hope the guy can change his heart and his propensity for violence because next time he might be serving a life sentence. I have no problem with him losing his gun rights for a long time.

Wineoceros
March 11, 2008, 01:03 PM
I hope the guy can change his heart and his propensity for violence because next time he might be serving a life sentence.
If she or someone else nearby are armed that sentence might be for the eternal dirt nap.

The Lone Haranguer
March 11, 2008, 01:42 PM
Basically his wife had an affair, he goes to wife, puts knife to her throat, tells her he could cut her throat, but she isn't worth it.

Did he do that? Seriously? Then, regardless of how I might feel about the law, I have no sympathy for him.

hanno
March 11, 2008, 02:48 PM
Both guys were easy going guys, but got pushed.

"pushed?"

The wife confesses to an affair and this "pushes" your friend to hold a knife to her throat?

A person who responds in that matter isn't responsible enough to own a gun.

leadcounsel
March 11, 2008, 02:59 PM
The knife to the throat is an extreme example. The same conviction can be sought for trivial things such as slamming a door or pushing past a spouse/girlfriend on your way to leave the house. The laws are heavy handed and unconstitutional.

rainbowbob
March 11, 2008, 03:05 PM
...he goes to wife, puts knife to her throat, tells her he could cut her throat, but she isn't worth it.

Gee...I wonder why she was looking elsewhere for a good man?

Nicki, Nicki, Nicki...are you kidding us? You are a woman and you believe that a man putting a knife to another woman's throat and telling her she isn't worth it (i.e., a murder charge) is the normal response of an easygoing friend? And you have two friends like this?

Am I missing something? Don't most of us CCW to protect ourselves and our loved ones FROM those kind of people?

If I'm not mistaken, the wife would have been well within her rights to gut shoot the SOB if she had been armed. Seems to me he got off easy.

BigG
March 11, 2008, 03:09 PM
The knife to the throat is an extreme example. The same conviction can be sought for trivial things such as slamming a door or pushing past a spouse/girlfriend on your way to leave the house. The laws are heavy handed and unconstitutional.

This is the truth. Many domestic "counselors" file these on behalf of the woman as a helpful hanna gesture. I don't want to call anybody out on their lack of moral clarity but people that castigate the original poster for his anecdotal description of what happened shouldn't complain if they get whacked by the same law for some reason. After all, the law is the law. :rolleyes:

Cougfan2
March 11, 2008, 03:34 PM
sorry, they shouldnt own guns... if they are the kind of person that can get pushed enough to draw a weapon on someone, they dont deserve to carry a gun... a smart person would have left before getting that angry... part of the burden of being a gun owner is a great responsibility to think before you act

Sorry for your friend, but I have to say +1 to mekender. Don't know the guy, but I wouldn't be comfortable with him owning guns. If your gal cheats on you either dump her or decide to work it out. There was no physical or implied threat from what you said to justify threat of deadly force.:mad:

revjen45
March 11, 2008, 03:45 PM
A better answer would be to remain calm, and the next time she leaves the house she returns to her belongings in the yard and the suggestion that she call her boy friend for a ride. Then you're shet of the trollop, not out $11K, and you still have your guns. BTW, there is nothing I find more ignoble or unmanly than physically abusing a woman.

MechAg94
March 11, 2008, 03:54 PM
Putting a knife to anyone's throat is a felony if I am not mistaken.

Yes, it is probably not the best example.

rainbowbob
March 11, 2008, 04:18 PM
Putting a knife to anyone's throat is a felony if I am not mistaken.

Yes, it is probably not the best example.

OK...How about this for an example: My daughter's mother-in-law's boyfriend (you still with me?) broke into his ex-wife's house and threatened to kill her in front of their children. This guy is a violent drunk who has beaten this ex-wife before she was the ex. She finally got a no-contact order filed, but it wasn't easy (and probably isn't worth the cost of the paper it is printed on).

In addition, my grandson (who is the light of my life) told me this SOB hit him in the stomach. My daughter and son-in-law no longer allow their son to see his other grandma if the BF is going to be around. What I would like to do to him is not High Road and would possibly result in the loss of my right to CCW. He truly “…is not worth it.”

Prince Yamato
March 11, 2008, 04:20 PM
Good God! Who the hell puts a knife to a person's throat? I mean crap, I could see a good screaming match, a lot of choice four-letter words and maybe throwing a lamp against the wall or two... but threatening with murder?

Heavy Metal Hero
March 11, 2008, 04:30 PM
This is the 2nd person I know this happened to.

Nothing just happened to this guy. He made his own decisions and deserves to be blackballed.

Wineoceros
March 11, 2008, 04:38 PM
I note that under "Interests" you list "personal growth". I would suggest that this is a golden opportunity for said growth that can be capitalized on by reconsidering the type of people with whom you associate.

qwert65
March 11, 2008, 04:50 PM
I agree that if someone holds a knife or hits someone they've lost their privliges.
However, I think the law should be changed because, women can file charges for spite. For example, My current girlfreind was in an abusive marriage he threw her against the wall and threatened her and choked her. Personally I'd like to meet him in a dark alley..... Now the law is perfect in this case.
Another example, my buddy gave his gf a black eye accidently while sleeping a day later they got into a fight, the neighbors heard yelling and banging(they were both throwing things) and called the cops. The cops show up and there's a girl with a black eye. Now she was honest and they were fine once they calmed down. But if she had decided to lie who would've been belived?
anything that can be he said she said where the person loses rights must be carefully thought out. Just look at how many people are convicted of rape based on a victims testimoney only to be found inoccent with DNA

I think a misdeamoner should be a misdeamoner as already brought up holding a knife to someones throat is a felony. Who said better for 10 guilty men to go free than one innocent man in jail?

MechAg94
March 11, 2008, 04:53 PM
OK...How about this for an example: My daughter's mother-in-law's boyfriend (you still with me?) broke into his ex-wife's house and threatened to kill her in front of their children. This guy is a violent drunk who has beaten this ex-wife before she was the ex. She finally got a no-contact order filed, but it wasn't easy (and probably isn't worth the cost of the paper it is printed on).

In addition, my grandson (who is the light of my life) told me this SOB hit him in the stomach. My daughter and son-in-law no longer allow their son to see his other grandma if the BF is going to be around. What I would like to do to him is not High Road and would possibly result in the loss of my right to CCW. He truly “…is not worth it.”
Hey, I was referring to the sort of domestic disputes that were more non-violent. I have no problem with justice for scum bags like that.

A local radio guy here did a story on a mother who was raped, got pregnant and decided to have the kid. The rapists parents sued for visitation rights and were awarded them. The radio guy was livid that the judge would allow it. Apparently the mother was stuck with paying legal fees to fight it and paying for the lawyer to represent the kid. She couldn't afford to appeal it like she ought to be able to. A bunch of callers had additional stories of similar "system abuse" as I would call it.
There was another similar case of a woman whose ex-husband got out of prison and sued for custody. Similar BS.

Most of this had to do with a judge who didn't give a damn and who appointed her buddy as attorney for the kid. Since it was a mother who couldn't afford to fight it, it didn't look like things would change quickly.

hanno
March 11, 2008, 05:00 PM
Former prosecutor and former defense counsel here. A suggestion - if you ever find yourself charged with Domestic Violence, get a lawyer. Do not go to a pretrial meeting with the prosecutor without a lawyer and accept a plea. Ever. Whatever deal the prosecutor is willing to offer you, he will still offer to your attorney.

Your attorney, if he has experience with DVs, will also know what other alternatives are available for first time offenders - diversion (no conviction if certain conditions are met), plea to a different charge so RKBA is not lost, etc.
Of course, the attorney may also recommend trial if there is a decent chance for acquittal - likelihood the other party won't show up to testify or will show up and testify but not satisfy the elements of the offense.

Attorneys cost money but you might just find it is the best money you ever spent.

And a guy who holds a knife to his wife's throat because she told him she had an affair, should be in a cell and lose his RKBA.

Oh, and one last thing, be nice to your spouses, yell all you want, just don't engage in any physical stuff or even threats. Life is too short.

theken206
March 11, 2008, 05:10 PM
"If someone held a knife to the throat to a woman who was important to me (my sister, or my mother, a girlfriend, even an ex-girlfriend),"

good way to disappear where i come from, high road answer or not its the truth.

mordechaianiliewicz
March 11, 2008, 05:16 PM
Len S, you think like me. Often the worst thing you can do to someone isn't violent at all.

littlegator
March 11, 2008, 05:22 PM
Nicki - it may be possible to have the record expunged depending on the crime and after a certain waiting period, however, I don't know the law in California. The waiting period is tolled (does not start) until after time served, probation if any, and fees/fines, are completely paid. Additionally, if there is a restraining order against him, he most likely cannot have a gun during that time either. Again, this is not legal advice - it's merely an opinion on the net.

Ergosphere
March 11, 2008, 06:05 PM
be nice to your spouses, yell all you want, just don't engage in any physical stuff

No "physical stuff?" :scrutiny: Man, that takes all the fun out of marriage...

(J/K I know what you mean, but it sounded funny. :p)

As for violence or assault against a spouse such as described in the OP, I have no problem with the RKBA being rescinded for that sort of conduct. That said, non-violent contact between spouses during an argument (such as brushing past a spouse on the way out the door) should not be a crime.

nicki
March 11, 2008, 06:32 PM
I don't justify holding a knife or any other weapon on someone, but the reality is emotions are what moves people to action.

He didn't plan it, he reacted because he was angry because he was betrayed and he did hold himself back. He told her that it just wasn't worth it.

His wife and him are still together, but the relationship is strained.
He forgave her for adultery, but he can't forget.

When she goes out, if she makes herself pretty, it is always in the back of his mind, is she cheating. Logically, he says he has to let go, but he just can't shake that feeling.

You expect your enemies to do you harm, but when friends betray you it hurts because it is a stab in the heart. When you significant other betrays you, it stabs you in your soul.

Most of us are rational and incontrol of our actions, but things can happen that would cause many of us to snap.

Humans act emotionally, that is the way we are.

To expect people are just gong to be calm and rational after a major emotional trauma is not realistic.

Domestic violence is a serious problem, but overzealous enforcement is probably counter productive to reducing real domestic violence.

Each couple has their own unique problems and to say that tempers don't every flare is crazy.

I would say a large amount of men have been physically hit by wives and girlfriends which according to the law here in California is domestic abuse.

Of course many men would be embarassed to call the cops unless a wife or girlfriend did something really serious.



Nicki

mekender
March 11, 2008, 06:39 PM
sorry but use of a deadly weapon isnt overzealous enforcement....

now my wifes best friend had a situation that was a total load of crap... her boyfriend choked her up against a wall... as she was struggling to get away, her car keys scratched the guys face... when the cops showed up, he had the mark on him, so she went to jail...

i dont have a problem with the idea of the laws, but the blind enforcement is a crock...

Wineoceros
March 11, 2008, 06:47 PM
I don't justify holding a knife or any other weapon on someone, but the reality is emotions are what moves people to action.
Part of growing up is learning how to prevent your emotions from ruling you completely.

He didn't plan it, he reacted because he was angry because he was betrayed and he did hold himself back. He told her that it just wasn't worth it.
After putting a knife to her throat.

His wife and him are still together, but the relationship is strained.
That's an understatement. I'd bet good money that it won't last.

Most of us are rational and incontrol of our actions, but things can happen that would cause many of us to snap.
I've been driven to some pretty serious anger in my time, but I've never reacted to it by physically threatening someone's life.

Humans act emotionally, that is the way we are.
When we grow up, we learn to keep it in check enough to keep from killing one another.

To expect people are just gong to be calm and rational after a major emotional trauma is not realistic.
Perhaps you ought to consider the possibility of a significant amount of gray area in between "calm and rational" and putting knives to people's throats.

You're attempting to rationalize and excuse what was inexcusible, emotionally underdeveloped behavior.

hanno
March 11, 2008, 06:51 PM
He didn't plan it, he reacted because he was angry because he was betrayed and he did hold himself back. He told her that it just wasn't worth it.

In short, he doesn't think, he just reacts emotionally. That boy needs to grow up quickly before he ends up in prison.

rainbowbob
March 11, 2008, 07:09 PM
His wife and him are still together, but the relationship is strained. He forgave her for adultery, but he can't forget.

Boo-friggin-hoo...poor him! He “forgave" but he can't “forget". Nicki, I'm sincerely worried about the woman who would stay with a man that held a knife to her throat. She should have pressed charges and filed for divorce. I think she is in very real danger right now.

I'm also concerned that you would consider having this man for a friend and would continue to rationalize his bizarre and felonious actions. I think you may also be in danger.

You expect your enemies to do you harm, but when friends betray you it hurts because it is a stab in the heart.

Actually, adultery is only a stab to one's pride. If you can’t “forget” - Move on! Get over it!

A stab in the heart (or more accurately, throat) is what your friend almost did to his wife.

Ergosphere
March 11, 2008, 07:52 PM
You expect your enemies to do you harm, but when friends betray you it hurts because it is a stab in the heart. When you significant other betrays you, it stabs you in your soul.

I know that pain all too well. There's no way to restore trust after such a betrayal. This does not sound like a healthy or stable relationship.
To expect people are just gong to be calm and rational after a major emotional trauma is not realistic.
I've been betrayed before (and she was almost sadistic about it). When the extent of betrayal became evident, I walked away. Yes, it was emotional and messy and I still have anger even many years later. But I never threatened, abused, or assaulted the lady; I took the "high road" and acted with maturity.

Anger is understandable, but the difference between sentient people and animals is self-awareness, which includes rational control of our emotions. Your "friend" should be in prison, IMO.

HOME DEPOT GEORGE
March 11, 2008, 09:36 PM
I was convicted of violation of a restraining order and making threats 18 years ago in new jersey and a few years ago I hired a lawer and was able to get that and a few other stupid things when I was 21 expunged from my record and by the advice of a friend who works at a LGS waited 6 months after the final judgment to purchase and never had a problem. One piece of advice, if you get your record expunged keep a copy of the final judgment handy just in case of a legal issue like if you had to use a gun in self defense or any other reason law enforcement may have to run a backround check. Mine states that any and all arrests and convictions are deemed to never have happened so I can fill out a backround check and legally check no in the boxes that ask about domestic violence.

nicki
March 11, 2008, 10:17 PM
I have associations with diverse groups of people.

Few are what I call close friend's and none of my close friends have gotten into legal jams.

I learn from people, both from their successes and their setbacks.

You can learn alot from failures, and I would rather learn from other people's failures rather than my own.

My "friend" who is really just someone I casually run into at the gym, but gives great advice on body building deeply regrets his past transgression.

He has no interest in guns.

My concern is he made a mistake and now he is potentially barred for life from owning guns. What other rights do people can people easily loose?

If something happens in the future with his wife, he is just going to walk.

The reality is few people have sterile relationships, half of marriages end in divorce and domestic violence laws can be easily abused.

Couples in divorce do nasty and spiteful things to each other.

I have ran into many correctional officers and sheriffs who are now effectively indentured servants because of divorce.

Many had to do mandatory overtime due to staff shortages and it ruined their marriages.

The domestic abuse card was used to undermine their positions in divorce proceedings. Their ex wives were willing to destroy their careers with allegatons of spouse abuse.

People make mistakes, but after they have paid for their mistakes, they should be able to move on with their lives.

People should not lose any of their rights for life unless there is a compelling reason not to restore them.

Domestic violence is a problem, I would say at least 30 percent of all the women I know have had to file restraining orders at one time or another in their lives to deal with psycho ex partners.

Many have had to move, change jobs, etc. etc.

The current laws need serious revisions. One size does not fit all.


Nicki








.

jaholder1971
March 11, 2008, 11:25 PM
The knife to the throat is an extreme example. The same conviction can be sought for trivial things such as slamming a door or pushing past a spouse/girlfriend on your way to leave the house. The laws are heavy handed and unconstitutional.

Yes, but that's the example given.

Since it was a misdemeanor, he shouldn't be denied. However he also should have never, ever been given a plea bargain IMHO.

Dude needs a new friend.

jaholder1971
March 11, 2008, 11:28 PM
I have associations with diverse groups of people.

Few are what I call close friend's and none of my close friends have gotten into legal jams.

I learn from people, both from their successes and their setbacks.

You can learn alot from failures, and I would rather learn from other people's failures rather than my own.

My "friend" who is really just someone I casually run into at the gym, but gives great advice on body building deeply regrets his past transgression.

He has no interest in guns.

My concern is he made a mistake and now he is potentially barred for life from owning guns. What other rights do people can people easily loose?

If something happens in the future with his wife, he is just going to walk.

The reality is few people have sterile relationships, half of marriages end in divorce and domestic violence laws can be easily abused.

Couples in divorce do nasty and spiteful things to each other.

I have ran into many correctional officers and sheriffs who are now effectively indentured servants because of divorce.

Many had to do mandatory overtime due to staff shortages and it ruined their marriages.

The domestic abuse card was used to undermine their positions in divorce proceedings. Their ex wives were willing to destroy their careers with allegatons of spouse abuse.

People make mistakes, but after they have paid for their mistakes, they should be able to move on with their lives.

People should not lose any of their rights for life unless there is a compelling reason not to restore them.

Domestic violence is a problem, I would say at least 30 percent of all the women I know have had to file restraining orders at one time or another in their lives to deal with psycho ex partners.

Many have had to move, change jobs, etc. etc.

The current laws need serious revisions. One size does not fit all.


Nicki







Nicki,

Yes, divorce and domestic violence has screwed gunowners all over America thanks to Lautenburg and other laws.

But do you know what precipitated those laws? Extremely dumb@ss stunts like your friend's at the Gym and the hand wringers who think passing a law is going to magically change them overnight.

Pilgrim
March 11, 2008, 11:42 PM
Many couples have fights, and many people have stressful relationships.
When my PMS moved out, I didn't say a word. I gave her money equal to half our mortgage payment so she could get a decent place to live. I paid her auto insurance. I didn't go near her except in public places with plenty of witnesses.

By the time I filed for divorce, it was established she could support herself and pay her own bills. I was reimbursed for the property that was mine before our marriage. She was left with the business I helped her build. I kept my pensions.

I had moved my guns out of the state so there was no danger of them being confiscated by the law.

I filed for divorce after moving to another state, so she couldn't claim I was stalking/harassing/threatening her. All contact after filing for divorce was done through my attorney.

All in all, it worked out pretty well. I am the happiest I have ever been in my entire life. I'm pretty sure she isn't so happy.

Pilgrim

che_70b
March 13, 2008, 12:34 AM
I firmly believe in the shall not be infringed part of the 2nd. It also seems to me that the guy did not actually hurt his wife, he thought about it real hard obviously, but at the moment of truth he let her go. Now from a self defense stand point in her shoes I would have been fighting back hard, but from a how the law ,should, be stand point he did not cross the line but did walk away.

RiflemanTripleEight
March 13, 2008, 01:20 AM
Too bad so sad. Don't threaten to kill people if you want to hang on to your rights.

rainbowbob
March 13, 2008, 01:30 AM
It also seems to me that the guy did not actually hurt his wife...he did not cross the line but did walk away.

He DID cross the line - and he only walked away because he chose an unarmed, defenseless victim to terrorize.

I'm curious if you would think that no line had been crossed if a man held a knife to YOUR throat?

Wineoceros
March 13, 2008, 07:07 AM
I firmly believe in the shall not be infringed part of the 2nd.
So do I. But I also firmly believe that you may forfeit your rights via your own dumbarsed actions.

He DID cross the line - and he only walked away because he chose an unarmed, defenseless victim to terrorize.

I'm curious if you would think that no line had been crossed if a man held a knife to YOUR throat?
+1

These lame rationalizations ("Well, he didn't actually slit her throat.") are really quite sillly.

jaholder1971
March 13, 2008, 06:37 PM
It also seems to me that the guy did not actually hurt his wife, he thought about it real hard obviously, but at the moment of truth he let her go. Now from a self defense stand point in her shoes I would have been fighting back hard, but from a how the law ,should, be stand point he did not cross the line but did walk away.


I'm having a REALLY hard time staying High Road here.

I suggest you go back and read the difference between Assault and Battery, specifically Aggravated Assault and Aggravated Battery. What this clown did was Assault by every standard in the U.S. He aggravated the situation by using a weapon, which is a felony in nearly every state in the union.

This sounds like one of the most lame@ssed reasons to excuse Domestic Violence I've ever heard. I've been falsely accused of Domestic Battery in the past (3 years and $5K later my nightmare ended with a dismissal) and oppose the Lautenburg law to the hilt, but anyone who wonders how in the world anyone would want to pass something like it needs only to look at this post.

Zoogster
March 13, 2008, 07:22 PM
The domestic violence laws are bad, usualy the examples are far more telling than the one you gave. The guy in your example was in fact lucky. What he did was a felony 'assault with a deadly' weapon in CA, and a felony anywhere else in the nation under a similar statute such as 'aggravated assault'.

That means in reality he would be a prohibited person anyplace in the country if the original charges stuck.

The domestic violence laws, both the firearm prohibition aspect as well as many states taking it further and requiring officers to arrest and press charges if there was even any mention of "domestic violence" (which does not require contact) contact regardless of the desires of the individuals involved add up to some interesting unconstitutional situations.

If a woman has an emotional outburst, begins breaking stuff or even strikes a man, and the man grabs her wrists and keeps her from doing more damage, a neighbor hears something and calls the police and they arrive...Both will go to jail. That is if both sides are honest. He held her wrists, probably strong enough to leave a mark if she was struggling, and she assaulted and perhaps battered him.

Now if one side or both sides are dishonest and accuse eachother of things that didn't happen it could be even worse.
A simple yelling match could result in one or both sides going to jail for domestic violence if when the police arrive one or both sides is creating stories about violence against the other, perhaps as a defense against something they actualy did do, which many people do.

When I was younger I knew some pretty vindictive individuals, one girl even smacked herself in the mouth a few times drawing blood to get her boyfriend in trouble because he cheated on her. She showed it to someone to get them to beat him up, and someone else called the police and reported him for it. I no longer associated with her. If she could do that to someone else, she was not a good person, and that could be me some day. A great way to learn a lot about someone is to see how they treat people they do not like or are upset with. Remember you at any time could become that person.

Well many states have a mandatory requirment that an arrest is made if there is even any mention of domestic violence, regardless of what either party wants.
Domestic violence does not even require physical contact.

Many people do not understand the legal difference between an assault and a battery. Battery is when contact is actualy made, an assault however is just a physical threat or implication whether or not it is followed through. Raising your hand or even getting into someone's face during an argument can be an assault, no contact is necessary. The act which is intimidating can be taken as a threat of violence and is an assault. Pointing your finger at someone in an argument could even be an assault.

Many police and military have lost thier careers both from legitimate misdemeanor as well as false domestic violence accusations. Many citizen's have lost an important civil right.
The Lautenburg amendment should be repealed and is a serious violation of the constitution.
However your example is probably one of the worst examples for that. Your example is in fact better for supporting it than anything.
A guy made a life threatening threat with a weapon while in no physical danger because he was upset with someone. He commited a serious violent felony, and only recieved a misdemeanor because of a plea.

There is many here who do not believe in the Lautenburg amendment.
There is many here who do not believe in non violent felonies taking away constitutional guaranteed rights.
There is even people that believe no constitutionaly granted right should be removed from someone regardless of what crime they have commited once they are a free man.

You however have gone beyond all of that. You are asking for sympathy for a man that practicly got away with a serious violent felony he did in fact commit, and served no time as a result of it.

My personal opinion is that he should have been charged and convicted for the crime which he commited, served the years in prison as a violent offender that such a charge warrants, and then been released a free man with all his rights.
That however is just my opinion.
He instead served no time, but did lose his rights. The system is backwards.

yenchisks
April 12, 2008, 11:56 PM
I think most of you are ignorant,and miss the point,I don't care if two poeple beat the sh$$ out off each other,nothing should take your 2a away...nothing..say a guy beats his wife goe's to jail and lose's his 2a rights,doe's that stop him from thinking,if he wish he can still get a firearm ,bat, knife a fn rock for that matter ,if someone is determined they'll find a way to do what ever it is there going to do ,taking 2a from abusers,is only a infringment, on God given rights,it's one step to take your 2a away you d@#$ a@$ ,whats next ,speeding, wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!! most of you say id leave if my wife/husban was caught cheating,well then you don't love them very much,ill just walk away no problem, bull,

boggyboy72
April 13, 2008, 12:25 AM
Puting a knife to someones throat is not a ''spousal quarrel''.I can't beleve a woman is defending this guy.

scrat
April 13, 2008, 12:44 AM
Omg i cant believe all that i have just read. same time though i guess this happens every day. Im so glad my wife and i dont argue. I guess we are both past those stages. I cant remember the last time we had an arguement. If we dont agree on something we dont argue about it. Wow.

I do have a question though. My neighbor Now in his late 20's has always talked about getting a gun. He has an old 16 gauge single shotgun. thats it. i kinda always laughed at. Since i have a closet full of guns. Any how we were talking one night and i guess when he was 18 he got busted for something dealing with drugs. A possesion from what i understand. He did go to jail im not too sure how long never really asked after that. He did say it cost his parents a lot of money in legal fees. Well its been about 10 years since this. He was asking me if i knew if he could legally purchase a handgun now. I told him to go to the DOJ website and fill out one of those forms to see if he is eligible to purchase one. Same time now that i read through this i wonder if he can get his record expunged. Same time how much does that cost im sure that is not cheap. I guess the bottom line is we all have choices in life and its important to make the right choices. Especially when your young. Because you never know what lies ahead in your future. 10-15-20 years from now you dont want to have a past record from when you were young.

2nd 41
April 13, 2008, 06:45 PM
Held a knife to his wife's throat? I can't sympathize.
My 1st marriage was so bad I took my Labrador and left. It was that bad. I left everything and started over. And life is real good today.(22years later) Glad I did what I had to do.

HOME DEPOT GEORGE
April 13, 2008, 07:01 PM
Scrat-He can get his record expunged, it cost me about 6000 dollars if I remember right.

another okie
April 13, 2008, 08:52 PM
In some cultures it's normal for a spouse to extract violent revenge when cheated on. It's no longer normal or accepted in our culture, but some folks are slow to get the message.

It's a last vestige of the honor culture that had many bad aspects, such as this one, but also served as a check on rude and offensive behavior.

Notice that it's not that we are never allowed to use violence. We can use it when we face a direct threat to our own lives.

It's that a cheating spouse is no longer considered serious enough to justify violence. Under Napoleon's code a husband who caught his wife cheating was considered to be temporarily insane and therefore not liable for murdering both parties.

otasan
April 13, 2008, 10:49 PM
I have NO SYMPATHY for the guy who threatens his wife with deadly force in such a manner. Adultery is a terrible thing, but it is not a capital crime.

shadowalker
April 13, 2008, 11:08 PM
I have absolutely no doubt if I threatened my wife in such a way police would be responding to a shooting and rightfully so.

He deserves to loose his freedom as well. It was a very poor decision made by someone who was out of control and clearly has the inability to regulate themselves.

It hurts but if you really love them you act like a mature person and walk away, not throw stuff around, assault them, threaten to or actually kill them.

Not really sure how I feel about a lifetime ban on RKBA, I normally don't favor such things but I think it may be reasonable to restrict it for a good period of time.

Rmeju
April 14, 2008, 01:35 AM
If some sort of bar to possession of firearms against domestic abusers could properly and constitutionally be codified into law, your friend would be the poster child of the guy who it should apply to.

If his response to being pushed is to draw a knife and threaten his philandering wife/gf with murder, then in no way should he own, or even have access to, a firearm.

IMO, $11,000 of anger management classes and 10 years on the blackball list (while a somewhat extreme length of time) would make me feel a lot better about him owning a firearm later.

Reid

coloradokevin
April 14, 2008, 04:01 AM
Around here a state misdemeanor or felony DOMV charge results in a lifetime ban.

This guy sounds like someone who shouldn't own guns. The charge for that behavior would be "felony menacing" in CO, an F5 felony. If he actually injured her at all with the knife, he would jump up to 2nd degree assault (which is generally an F4 felony, though heat of passion may reduce it to an F6). If he caused serious bodily injury with the knife, he is now looking at an F3 felony.

The point is, any of the possible outcomes when conducting yourself in that manner land with a felony charge (one which it sounds like he worked down to a state misdeamenor).

Interestingly, from what I've been told, municipal DOMV charges do not result in the revocation of your 2nd ammendment rights... I can't swear to that, but it is sort of the rumor at work.

Also, the argument about the spiteful woman causing problems to an innocent man is often brought up... and has been in this thread as well. Keep in mind:

1) To lose your rights, you need to be convicted in court, or plead guilty to the charge. Simply being accused is not sufficient.

2) If you honestly believe that your spouse/girlfriend/etc is the type of person who would lie to the authorities just to make your life miserable, perhaps you need to find a different romantic interest in your life!


Also, to the OP... In most states, whether or not the victim (be it a woman or man) wishes to press charges is irrelevant. If we show up and find probable cause that a DOMV law violation has occured, we are REQUIRED by law to arrest the primary aggressor. Colorado handles DOMV this way, as do many other states. Personally, I'm not fond of that aspect of the law... I feel that all victims were created equal, and people need to be smart enough to look out for themselves (in other words, if the victim isn't bothered by the beating enough to want to report it, and isn't willing to help themselves, oh well).

But, my personal biases aside, that is the law... and I always follow it. To me, it isn't worth losing my job because someone is being difficult when I arrive to take the report! If your spouse assaults you, you should report it. If you choose not to, don't call the police!

Either way, your friend sounds like someone with some serious issues. Holding a knife to a woman's throat and threatening her is not a very manly thing to do.

woodybrighton
April 14, 2008, 05:00 AM
a knife at somebody's throat 5mm slip and its murder
a handgun makes an accidental killing even easier :(
10 years down the road he may have grown up

Sergeant Sabre
April 14, 2008, 12:41 PM
I had to stop when I read this:

I certainly don't support people who are abusers, and I believe the prosecutor abused their power not only with my friend, but probably with many others.

Many couples have fights, and many people have stressful relationships.

Many couples, have fights over money. Getting hit with having to pay 11K for anger management because of a spousal quarrel is not something that I think would help any couple who already have financial issues.

I'm sure it has been beaten to death already, but bears repeating ad nauseum.

Your friend got off easy if he was allowed to plead to a misdemeanor. He committed a felonious assault and the prosecutor let him off easy. Certainly there was no abuse of power here, except on the part of your abusing friend.

Your friend is fortunate that there is no room in prison for him, 'cause that's where he belongs and I'm glad that he can't have a firearm of any type, ever, anywhere, for the rest of his life.

If you take the act of putting a knife to somebody's throat and dismiss it by calling it a "spousal quarrel" arising from a "stressful relationship" then you need to re-evaluate yourself, too. That's simply ridiculous to make those kind of excuses.

k_dawg
April 14, 2008, 04:03 PM
yes/no. There are two [ seperate issues ].

1) The second amendment right should only be surrendered upon the conviction of a felony. Never a misdemeanour.

2) This gentlemen commited a felony, and should have been charged with one.

2nd 41
April 14, 2008, 05:07 PM
If I caught my wife with another man...I'd say Yo pal...I have to do this...you don't. :neener: :neener: :neener:

megatronrules
April 15, 2008, 08:36 PM
I've been where your friends were before and can tell you I would never respond this way. any woman or man who would cheats on a spouse is garbage in my book and simply not worth it. I had my colt 1911 concealed on me under a sweater when my last girlfriend admitted to cheating on me,and you know what I did? I called her some choice words and turned and walked out of her apartment and her life never to return. never at any time did it cross my mind to threaten her with bodily harm. No your friends shouldn't own a gun its people like them that give us responsible gun owners a bad name.

Think about it anyone that cheats is a crumby human being,again think about it,do you really want to be a felon for life over the likes of them?

jaholder1971
April 16, 2008, 12:03 AM
I think most of you are ignorant,and miss the point,I don't care if two poeple beat the sh$$ out off each other,nothing should take your 2a away...nothing..say a guy beats his wife goe's to jail and lose's his 2a rights,doe's that stop him from thinking,if he wish he can still get a firearm ,bat, knife a fn rock for that matter ,if someone is determined they'll find a way to do what ever it is there going to do ,taking 2a from abusers,is only a infringment, on God given rights,it's one step to take your 2a away you d@#$ a@$ ,whats next ,speeding, wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!! most of you say id leave if my wife/husban was caught cheating,well then you don't love them very much,ill just walk away no problem, bull,

Wow man, just, Wow!

Some folks have obviously forgotten that with every one of your civil rights comes responsibilities.

With this sort of logic, everyone in prison today should be allowed to arm themselves as they see fit as not arming them would violate their 2nd amendment rights.

RancidSumo
April 16, 2008, 12:21 AM
Woah, the person who revived this thread needs the calm down. The person deserves to be locked up not just loose his RKBA. Mabey after a while he should be able to get them back but I don't know.

DCR
June 26, 2008, 01:43 PM
I have enjoyed the thread so far, but there's a much, much deeper level to it. I don't have the time to post the links right now, but will when I have time. Or you can do a search on the following key words:

"misdemeanor crime of domestic violence"

It's rather long, so I'm going to abbreviate it MCDV

As we all know, the law prohibits anyone convicted of an MCDV from owning or possessing a firearm or ammunition. So, if a person is not convicted of "domestic battery," "domestic assault," "domestic violence," or whatever name a state has given to its specific MCDV's, they don't lose their right to RKBA or ammunition, right?

WRONG!!!!! :what:

Some folks have taken plea agreements to non-MCDV offenses (misdemeanors of course) like simple battery or assault, or even disturbing the peace - offenses that do not specifically characterize the "victim" as a spouse or household member - on the belief that since it isn't specified as an MCDV in their state, they won't lose their gun rights. And boy were they ever surprised when they were denied their next gun purchase or arrested, charged and CONVICTED of felony charges for unlawful possession of a firearm.

ATF and other agencies, as well as some state and local governmental entities, have started looking to the underlying FACTS of the case - the charges and factual allegations - and if the underlying facts, plus the wording of the statute/law/ordinance add up to an act of violence or aggression against a spouse or household member, they deem it an MCDV and declare the person convicted ineligible to possess a firearm.

You won't have to look far on this one - there are federal district court convictions, and federal circuit courts of appeal decisions upholding this practice.

I know that the US Attorney for Idaho has issued a statement on this very topic indicating how he views the law and his office's position on such prosecutions, but haven't located it yet to include for reference. Problem is, though, even if his office has elected not to take such an interpretation and prosecute in this fashion, it doesn't really someone who gets denied a purchase from some unknowing, uncaring, faceless, nameless petty bureaucratic minion at the national instant background check center who sees "arrest - domestic violence - convicted - disturbing the peace" and issues the denial on that basis.

Oh, yes, and remember, you CAN appeal denials, however long that may take...but if the agency's policy is to look to the underlying charge and facts, you're going to get how far? :banghead: And remember that ATF office citizens were supposed to be able to file appeals because their prior felony conviction or MCDV was dismissed pursuant to a withheld judgment...the one that ATF never asks for funding for...and congress has consequently never funded...and the courts have said that just because the law created such an office doesn't mean it has to be funded, staffed, or operational because it's congress' discretion to not fund it, and therefore they won't issue a writ of mandamus ordering ATF to start accepting and processing citizens' appeals?

Bottom line - there are no guarantees that anyone will ever be able to possess a firearm or ammunition after an arrest for any MCDV unless the charge is fully dismissed before trial, they get a pardon or total expungement after conviction, or they are ACQUITTED!

Seems the only option is to fight any such charge fully and vigorously and not compromise - but at what cost? And believe me, it will be tough - federal STOP (I forget the acronym's meaning) grants pour hundreds of millions of dollars into local law enforcement and prosecutor's offices for technology, training, trips to desirable destinations for training and workshops, and other specialized staff.....yes, there are DV "advocates," counselors, secretaries, and full-time prosecutors who only prosecute DV cases whose whole salary, benefits, etc. are paid for by those grants. The funding also pays for specialized "family courts" or "Domestic Violence courts" --yes, including some or all of those courts' judges' salaries -- and the mandatory counselling/education/rehabilitation programs for the convicted (who also have to pay to take those classes!), battered women's shelters, hotlines, support group therapists...you can imagine how far the list goes on.

Domestic Violence has become quite an industry, and local governments are not at all interested in losing those fat grant funds - and they will fight vigorously to keep them by ensuring as many convictions and as few plea agreements as possible so they can show how their programs are "working" and they should be given the same amount of money or more for the next fiscal year.

I don't have the answer - but I do know that it's imperative to fight.

I'll welcome comments, criticisms, and suggestions alike!

DCR

Zoogster
June 26, 2008, 02:32 PM
DCR, there is many abuses with this law. Yes there is entire professions that exist to deal with such issues, and yes they do have an incentive to see more prosecutions.

Domestic violence "assault" can exist just in a heated argument where no physical contact is made. Assault is the threat or implied use of force. Being angry, arguing, and in close proximity can be considered a threat.

However the initial case mentioned in this thread is a really bad one to argue your beliefs in.
A guy commited felonies, used a weapon to assault and threaten someone, and the domestic violence statute was not even necessary to remove his RKBA.
The only reason that law even relates is the plea bargain removed the charges for the felonies he actualy commited.

So please make a new thread about the issue rather than argue from a several month old thread defending a violent predator that commited more than a misdemeanor.

If you enjoyed reading about "Domestic Violence convictions" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!