All Gun Owners Divorce Your Wives Quick

[4Freedom]

See, how congress and our corrupt ultra-left wing national socialist government is trying their very best to take guns out of the hands of its citizens:

Justices Uphold Ban On Guns for Abusers
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/24/AR2009022403423.html


So, now if men are convicted in any way of abuse they will lose their rights as an American citizen. Yes, I know there is lot of crazy guys who end up killing their wives, but these new laws go beyond reason and in the end more innocent people will lose their rights as gun owners than the criminals. People don't realize that domestic violence laws are such a grey area and a majority of men who are convicted of domestic violence are usually in the form of verbal abuse. Also, many women will commit fraud and report domestic violencee aginst them, when, indeed, the men had done nothing wrong at all, but the women either seeks revenge or some leverage in a divorce suit.

This is ludicrous. What they are doing is turning men against their wives. Now you cannot even trust the woman you share your bed with, for fear of the power she has. In this feminist society it doesn't take much for a woman to convince a jury you abused her. All she has to say is that you yelled at her and hit her and no one will look deeply in facts. This may vary from place to place in USA wher eyou live, but for most part, if your women decides to bring up abuse charges with you, you better have a damn good lawyer to help fight this off, she has the upper hand on you.

Look what our evil corrupt government is doing. Now as gun owners we will sleep next to our wives wondering if one day she will destroy our lives and our rights to be gun owners. This will only end up building more resentment, paranoia and fear. Now the husband will have to look at his wife or children as the people who have power through fraud and corruption to end his life and freedom. Yes, I know some of you are saying, oh but I lvoe my wife so much. Yeah, right.. Like good relationships never go sour. Like half of marraiges in this country don't end up in divorce now. PLease be aware, that as a gun owner you have a great liablility now in ur marriage and this would be horrible form of blackmail that your spouse can use on you. ONe day she may resent you and it would only take a trip to police station, to end your right as a gun owner.


This ban is unconstitutional and if a man is not convicted of violent assault or felony, he should never have his gun rights taken from him. The lack of justice and the lack of punishment of criminals is the problem. Yet, these vague laws criminalize the innocent. A man I met a while back told me one night he told his wife she could not go out with friends but had to stay with family. THe next day the wife filed an pyschological abuse charges against him and this man no longer has the right to own guns. Do you want this to happen to you?

We must stand up and fight against this. Today people who yell at their wives cannot have guns, tomorrow its people who jaywalk or forgot to pay a parking ticket. WHo knows what other excuse they will make for people to be barred from their God given rights as an American citizen.

 

[DeathByCactus]

This country depresses me at times.

 

[colemanw]

:banghead:

 

[colemanw]

Lord, take me now-

 

[Prince Yamato]

Now as gun owners we will sleep next to our wives wondering if one day she will destroy our lives and our rights to be gun owners.

Not if you marry the right woman. I think the law also says a lot about marriages in this country as well. If marriages are so bad that people fear that their wife will "get revenge" on them one day... maybe you shouldn't have married her in the first place.

You know, the door swings both ways... a woman who beats her husband looses her guns too.

 

[Davek1977]

Now you cannot even trust the woman you share your bed with, for fear of the power she has

If you are that insecure about the person you share your bed and life with, prehaps you SHOULDN'T be married. I don't lose sleep over what my wife could potentially do to harm me, as I wouldn't have married someone I had reason to be sacred of. It goes against everything a marriage is supposed to stand for if you are afraid of your spouse, or lay at night fantasizing about what she could possibly do to hurt you or screw you over at some point the future. Some of us, on the other hand, have healthny marriages, and this is the furthest thing from their minds. I'm scared of many things in this world of our's. Fear of the person I've committed my life to doesn't register very high on the scale of my fears though.



.

A man I met a while back told me one night he told his wife she could not go out with friends but had to stay with family

Is it not abuse, kidnapping, or false imprisonment, to hold someone against their will? Did the man imply she would be harmed if she left? Did she believe she would be in danger if she attempted to go against her husband's orders? What was their domestic history? The scenario "a man" presented to you could have much deeper implications than the version of the story you got. Most abusive men don't tend to brag about the fact they are bullies. Not calling you a liar, but secondhand, unreferenced material doesn't make for very compelling arguments, espeically when theres NO WAY to verify any part of the situatiuon whatsoever.

Not if you marry the right woman

Most intelligent line of this thread yet. I have no worries about my wife claiming abuse, so long as no abuse occurs. If I DO abuse her, she has every right to take appropriate measures(though she's more likely to go for 9MM instead of 911). I'm not scared of the law in this scenario, simply because I only married someone I loved and could trust completely. Combined with the fact I've NEVER been abusive to women in any way, and this is a complete non-issue to me. If its a concern to other people, maybe they need to check their own behaviors and/or feelings towards their wives. I don't think this is something the vast majority of shooters are going to be overly concerned with. Furthermore, this isn't a NEW law by any means. It simply clarified a law that has been on the books since 1996.

 

[sernv99]

this thread takes the cake as being the most absurd, putting more absurd fear into people. Now folks on here are advocating to be single for the rest of their life so their guns can be safe and secure well, the good thing about that is, there will be less human reproduction of conspiracy theorists to soil the rest of the gun owner community

 

[4Freedom]

Is it not abuse, kidnapping, or false imprisonment, to hold someone against their will? Did the man imply she would be harmed if she left? Did she believe she would be in danger if she attempted to go against her husband's orders? What was their domestic history? The scenario "a man" presented to you could have much deeper implications than the version of the story you got.

Oh Gosh.. Cmon.. Yeah immediately you assume men are all wife beaters who brag about their punching bag and women are al innocent little victims who are emotionally, mentally, physically , spiirtually attacked by her man. Actually, the man was not abusive at all. The woman was having an affair and she was looking for a way to attack him, so she would have a easier time for her soon-to-be divorce. She was after alimony payments, which are much easier if ther husband is mentally, physically, emotionally, spiritually abusiv. He did not force her and keep her in the house at all. Rather he got in an argument and said she could not leave, that she should be with the family.. Oh geez.. did your wife ever not tell you that you cannot go out with the boyz tonight, because you need to spend time with her? Yeah, that is real devastating and emotional abuse.. Perhaps you should call the SWAT team next time she starts complaining about the lack of attention you give her.

If I DO abuse her, she has every right to take appropriate measures(though she's more likely to go for 9MM instead of 911).

Til death do us part, thats what marriage is all about. Love each other until we cannot stand the other one. LOL Gee.. if my wife threw a rock or dish at my face, I would still not blast her with my 9mm.. Definately would call the police and get it resolved or get the hell out of there. I guess, what can you say, I am compassionate. Sure hope my wife won't blast me and make our childrens fatherless or orphans because I had a bad day at work and screamed at her. Go study facts, that very few women get busted for emotional or physical abuse against men, regardless if they were at fault.

this thread takes the cake as being the most absurd, putting more absurd fear into people

What's absurd is our bogus domestic violence and gun laws. And what is most absurd is people who are ignorant and don't really know the details of what threatens their rights as citizens.


Anyway this is way off topic. I am not talking about people who are in good marriages. WHat i am saying is the goverrnment is working their best to turn marriages sour and attack the rights of gun owners. These domestic abuse charges many men face are unfounded and over half of them stem to waht tehy call emotional abuse. That is such a broad term and hard to define or prove. Women do have the upper hand in court room and her simply saying you screamed at her every day is enough for her to take your gun rights away.

THose who have loving wives, there is nothing for you to worry about. But for those who have marriages on the rocks or a spouse with a history of deception (and many men do get screwed!) you may want to reconsider your relationship. I am sad that things have come to this in this country, where we cannot even trust our own family. Does anyone remember the Cultural Revolution in CHina, with Mao Zedung? He convinced children and bribed them with gifts if they would report on their parents. If they said the parents had any dissension on their lips, they would be executed and the chidlren rewarded by government. How many bad children took advantage of this.


My point is, this is just a way for the government to get guns out of the hands of the people. They will do any thing they can and find any excuse they can to remove our rights to bear firearms.

P.S. Don't let the title freak you out, I don't want anyone to get a divorce.. I just used that title to get your attention of what is happening in Wash DC today with our gun rights.

 

[Prion]

they can to remove our rights to bare firearms.

We're talking naked guns now? This thread is getting way off topic. But seriously, marry the right woman or don't marry, learn to control your emotions, especially anger. My wife and I have been through tough times but I have never raised my hand in violence or threatened her with physical violence. I married someone who is not a vindictive b@%$* and wouldn't perjure herself to harm me even if a divorce did occur. That being said the normal rule of law should apply and this is largely BS!

 

[XavierBreath]

Please Read

This thread could be important for some folks, informative to others.

I have removed blatantly political posts from it. This thread is not about Obama, the National Socialist Party, or nazis. Please keep it on topic and respectful to all concerned.

The issues here strike deep and personally for many. I hesitate to keep this thread open because of the risk of unrestrained flaming and myopia.

However, I have faith in THR's membership. Consider this a shot over the bow, one that should not be needed. Please don't take this thread into politics or towards ad hominem attacks or misogyny. If it goes in that direction, I will regretfully close it and take further action.

Thanks,
Xavier

 

[Davek1977]

immediately you assume men are all wife beaters

No, I actually said it was a possibility he was a wife beater, and that most men DO NOT brag about beating their wives (even if they ARE inclinded to do so...most men are not...some are, however). From the details you included in the first post, any num,ber of possible conclusions could have been possible. Even your second post is questionble still, because, as I've said, most abusers don't run and brag to their friends about beating up their wives. Your story is entirely dependant on the character of the man and what went on in the privacy of their home on that night. It could have happened exactly as he stated it did...or not, in all reality. I know when rehashing my home life to others, I don't include every detail, because quite frankly, not everything is everyone's business.

Sure hope my wife won't blast me and make our childrens fatherless or orphans because I had a bad day at work and screamed at her

As do I. When I said my wife was more likely to resolve things with a 9mm, I meant that if she felt her life was in danger, not if I yelled at her or spoke to her harshly. I don't recall stating WHAT LEVEL of abuse would lead her to use a firearm. In fact, rereading it, I KNOW I didn't specify, so way to go by taking the most minor situation and turning it into a potential shooting. Your imagination is running away with you again, or you are seeing things I simply did not write.

My point is, this is just a way for the government to get guns out of the hands of the people. They will do any thing they can and find any excuse they can to remove our rights to bear firearms.

Or...it could be a way of making sure people with a tangible tendency towards violence can't get guns, after they've been convicted of charges and found guilty "beyond a reasonble doubt". I'm ALL ABOUT the 2nd Amendment, gun rights, etc. I'm not in favor of Joe Blow, who beat his last girlfriend into a coma, being able to go to Walmart and buy a 12 gauge if he's suspicious his current gf is cheating on him or otherwise doing him wrong. The truth is, this law WILL NOT AFFECT THE VAST MAJORITY OF GUN OWNERS. I'm not ignorant of my rights, an uber-liberal, or otherwise incompetent. I simply don't see the need for alarmist-type posts that simply will not affect the vast majority of legal gun owners in any way whatsoever.

I have no problem with this law, personally, and if there is cricism to be leveled, its with the courts and how they handle "abuse" cases. I understand there is a difference between a punch and a shout. However, the definitions of assault and abuse can include words as well, and in some cases, rightfully so. However, I don't believe if my wife and I get into an argument about money that involves raised voices that the neighbors hear, that I should be immediately be arrested on a presumption of guilt, jailed and whatnot. The cops have to have room for descretion, and there needs to be sringent guidelines as far as what a person should be convicted of if and when such cases make their way to the court room However, I have no issues with a law that keeps guns out of the hands of people who have already demonstrated viollent tendencies. Don't want your guns taken away? Don't beat your wife, or otherwise cxome to the attention of the authorites, espcecially if you've committed a violent act.. Seems pretty straightforeward to me.

 

[divemedic]

This is a story of events that occurred to me about 5 years ago, events which resulted in my CWP being revoked. It took me six months, multiple hearings, an administrative appeal, and several thousand dollars in attorney fees to finally clear my name. I have posted this on a few other sites in the past, but it has been some time since I last mentioned it. Let this serve as a warning to others that this can happen to you. Sorry if this is a long story.

It began when my live in girlfriend announced that she wanted to see other people, and moved out. While we were living together, her car had broken down, and I had been letting her drive my second car while she was awaiting repairs. She had also been using a second cell phone on my Nextel account. (Trust me, I am not rambling- this is all important later)

When she moved out, I turned off the cell phone and I asked for my car back. She refused. I called the cops, they told me that since I had given her the keys, it was a civil matter. I didn't know where she moved to, so my car was gone. A month later, I saw the car parked at the mall, but there was a "club" on the steering wheel. I had it towed to my house.

The next day, there was a sheriff's deputy at my door with a domestic violence injunction, ordering me to appear at a hearing a week later. At the hearing, she produced a statement that I had been beating her while we were together. No proof, no witnesses, no police reports, no medical records, no marks on her, no corroborating evidence of any kind, just her say-so. It turns out that there is a "domestic violence victims advocates office" at the court house that coaches these women in what to say, and makes sure they get sympathetic judges.

While in court, she began crying, and told the judge that I had taken away her phone, and that I had taken back my car, and left her with no way to get to work. She also told the judge that she was afraid of me because I owned a lot of guns. This infuriated the judge, and he ordered me to turn my guns in to the police, revoked my CCW, and ordered me to provide her with a car and a phone.

He also said that since my 2 jobs as a paramedic could potentially bring me near her, that I was prohibited from going to work. One job was willing to work with me, the other one fired me the next day.

My attorney pointed out that we were never married, and the car was mine. The judge told him to sit down. Luckily, the attorney had prewarned me about the anti-gun attitude of the judge, and I had sold all of my guns to my brother in law two days earlier. Since this was not a final judgment, we could not appeal. The judge also said that my taking away "her" car and phone was a kind of violence, in that I was using my financial influence and the threat of firearms to control her.

For the next five months, we had numerous hearings, and I got one of my jobs back. I had to endure her showing up everywhere I went and she would use the restraining order to force me to leave, sometimes while I was in the middle of dining in a restaurant. I started making sure I had witnesses wherever I was, so that she couldn't accuse me of anything. I hung out with friends and family, so that way it wouldn't be my word against hers.

It would go like this: I would be at a sports bar owned by my partner, and she would show up, and call the police. Since I was there first, they couldn't arrest me, but they would make me leave. She would go grocery shopping at the store across the street from my house, and tell the cops I was watching her from my window, and they would come over and hassle me. She called the cops and told them her doctor's office was in my mom's neighborhood, and they would even throw me out of my mom's house, and make me leave until she was finished at the doctor.

One night, she called me and told me that the whole thing would go away if I paid her $10,000 in cash, and let her keep the car. I refused. My attorney was finally able to trip the judge on a legal technicality, and got him recused from the case. With a new judge, we got the whole thing thrown out, and I got my car back. By the time I got it, it had been damaged by some sort of tool.

Another month, and some administrative appeals later, I managed to get my CWP back. I bought the guns from my brother in law, and my life returned to normal.

All of this was done on a statement filled out by her, with no witnesses, and no proof whatsoever. I discovered that when you get in front of these judges, you are at their mercy. They can ruin your life. One of the deputies told me that most of the domestic violence injunctions he serves are not really violence, but women trying to gain the upper hand in divorce proceedings, or out to get revenge.

 

[BryanP]

a majority of men who are convicted of domestic violence are usually in the form of verbal abuse.

Can you document this or did you pull this fact from nowhere?

 

[4Freedom]

Can you document this or did you pull this fact from nowhere?

Read the above's story. Emotional abuse is the #1 seller in the court room today. My gosh, its so much easier to prove you were emotionally mutilated than physically mutilated. When I was a victim of fraud, a woman and her husband hit my car from behind and sued me and her own husband for $500,000, one of the damages she put on the lawsuit , was that I emotionally and psychologically damaged her for life. Actually, a good portion of the lawsuit was inregards to mental and emotional damage and the endless psychiatrist visits she would need to cope with the trauma of the accident. She of course made up fake statements of her physical damage too, that she would hire some fradulent psychiatrist and physician to verify if this went to court. BTW, the woman and her husband were scam artists and not injured in the fender bender accident. She was suing 3 other people than me in other fender bender accidents she had , as well. Talking about working the system.

People are scoring more money from emotional abuse, not just in marriages, but all walks of life, than probably any other domestic or civil style lawsuit. Its outrageous. Not to mention how many fradulent physical abuse lawsuits that people make.


Now for those people who can actually prove, through medical examination, witnesses, testimony and detailed research that actual physical abuse happened, then I do believe the perpetrator should have his rights as a gun owner removed, because he is a criminal. The problem with all these fradulent lawsuits, is they dont just hurt men and gun owners, but also women who really are abused. These scam arists/opportunists are cloggin up our court system.

And also the point, many are missing here, is how quickly and easily the government is to act on removing gun rights from a person. I am sorry emotional abuse without any physical attacks, is not grounds to remove your guns. Claims of physical abuse without proof is also bogus. If they can prove the man is violent, a stalker, dangerous, these are physical and he should also be punished to the full extent of law. If the woman lives with a man like this she should leave or immediately go to the police if her life is in danger. Why would she stick around for months getting abused, unless she is dumb? Sorry, but women are educated in this society and they can think for themselves, they don't have to be victims. I find it bit strange that women go to court with a man, sue the life out of him and take away his rights as a citizen, unless there was some real damage done. When an assault occurs, there is evidence and its the duty of the law to analyze and come to conclusion about the situation. Sadly, our courts are biased and these domestic violent suits are more like witchhunts. If our court and legal system was more fair, you wouldn't hear me complaining about this legislation. This whole ordeal is a witch hunt against gun owners, but many don't see the gun grabbers are conspiring. People forget that the left-wingers of society view all gun owners as brutish, spouse abusing and dangerous people. They will bend rules to help promote their agenda.


There is hardly any real feasible way to prove emotional abuse in court of a spouse. I highly doubt a female gun owner would ever get convicted of this charge either and have her guns removed. People get in arguments and some men are jerks, some women are too. Lets not just grab their guns when people have dysfunctional relationships. Too many go for the lawyer and run to evil politicians for help.

BTW.. I didn't make mention that this may apply to children as well. If children run to the counselor, saying their father/mother yells to much at them, you be surprised how lawsuits can suddenly arise.

 

[Master Blaster]

this thread takes the cake as being the most absurd, putting more absurd fear into people. Now folks on here are advocating to be single for the rest of their life so their guns can be safe and secure well, the good thing about that is, there will be less human reproduction of conspiracy theorists to soil the rest of the gun owner community

Actually it never ceases to amaze me how clueless my fellow americans are when understanding the law and the potential for losing all of your rights. 5 years ago the police chief of Elsmere Delaware went through a divorce with his wife. She accused him of hitting her, all of his guns were removed, and he was unable to serve as police chief for 3 months until his court date. He had not hit his wife, and in fact at the time she claimed he did he was not even home but at work. His wife it later came out was a drug addict and an alcoholic, and had been running around with several other men.
The police chief came close to losing his career because of an unfounded accusation. Thats one of the potential issues with the Lautenberg Amendment.

 

[BCCL]

Here in Illinois, you don't even have to be convicted, if anyone that you have:

Lived with
Been married to
or have a child in common with

Files for a protective order and gets it (which can be done without showing any actual evidence of abuse), your gun owners card is taken along with any guns and ammo they find.

All on nothing more than one persons word.

 

[Hungry Seagull]

This is absurd.

My spouse is also armed and we have no issues leading to domestics. None at all. Disagreements, yes, yelling? Sure. But problems get solved and move on.

 

[Geneseo1911]

Wow. Mods aren't up yet, huh?

 

[4Freedom]

Wow. Mods aren't up yet, huh?

Why are you so quick to want a discussion about gun rights in a domestic sphere banned? This banning mentality is what is screwing things up in our nation. I don't feel anything inapproriate is being discussed. Many people don't feel threatened by gun grabbing legislation, but it is because most people are gullible and cannot see a storm brewing until their house is flooded by the crashing waves.

 

[leadcounsel]

What's absurd is our bogus domestic violence and gun laws. And what is most absurd is people who are ignorant and don't really know the details of what threatens their rights as citizens.

+1

We have created a slippery slope and an unstoppable train of consequences.

You could do everything right in life but have one loud argument with your wife/girlfriend/family member. Neighbors summon the police. You make admissons/statements and due to mandatory arrest laws you go to jail. Now you are prosecuted due to mandatory prosecution statutes.

Do you know how EASY it is to get convicted of a misdemeanor for 'domestic violence?' And once convicted you forever lose your 2A rights.

And now the court has hinted that it can be extended to ANY battery - including a bar fight for instance.

And the scary part is that Lautenberg is RETROACTIVE!!!!!!

That conviction for DV 20 years ago will haunt you. I expect the same could be true with that stupid battery you pled guilty to 20 years ago because the sentence was so light.

Where will the madness end!?

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Lots of misinformation here. Either that, or the rest of you live in states taken over by Rosie O'Donnell or something.

In my state, a Temporary Protective Order is just that, temporary. During the pendancy of the Protective Order final hearing, you lend your guns to a friend, your range, your pawnbroker, the police, whatever. No need to sell them. At the final hearing, which around here is held within two weeks of service of the Temporary Order, you can present rebuttal witnesses and, of course, appear with your own attorney to do battle with the "domestic violence advocate" slime. The complaining party must convince the judge to issue the order on the basis of objective evidence, and if you draw a moonbat judge, you appeal the Order. If the Order is granted, say for a year, you leave your guns with the friend for a year. Not great, but not "the end of your gun rights." When the Order ends, assuming no criminal charge or conviction, you are a free man and you get your guns back.

If the madwoman keeps trying to trap you into contacting her and violating the Protective Order, take out your own Protection from Harassment Order. Now SHE has to stay away from YOU.

If charged criminally (and NO, you cannot be charged with "psychological abuse" or "verbal abuse"; it has to be a physical assault), the standard of proof is a lot higher than "she said." The danger, and I've seen this happen, is that the "victim" gets her brother to beat her up and to claim he saw you do it. If that's the case, you need a very good attorney, and you still may lose. But you'd be surprised what a decent attorney can do in a DV case. My trial record is okay, but my DV trial record is excellent. And "victims" who make false reports, false statements and perjure themselves get charged criminally themselves. It makes the District Attorney rather cross to have his victim proven a liar in open court.

 

[franconialocal]

"You know, the door swings both ways... a woman who beats her husband looses her guns too." +1 to this comment.

In New Hampshire we are required to arrest the PRIMARY PHYSICAL AGGRESSOR. Notice it didn't say the FIRST physical aggressor which is often the misconception, and one that I had for a long time too until I learned differently.

Chew on this one.....the guy I arrested for domestic violence that was 6'2", all of near 300lbs. going up against his girlfriend that was about 5' even and very tiny. Yeah...he was battered up pretty good (much more than her), but it turns out HE rammed his face into the wall several times to try to accuse HER of the injury, thus trying to get her arrested. 2A rights or not (don't get me wrong, I'm all for em') is this the fellow that should get to keep his guns as it relates to the OP?? IMHO....no way.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

As everallm pointed out in the other thread, the 2A issue was not directly raised (thankfully, since the guy is anything but the poster child we want for a 2A challenge to lautenburg), and therefore not considered by the court. So it's a non-issue on that front.

However, point taken - with Lautenberg in place at this time, we'd all be wise to be very, very, very, very, VERY careful whom we choose as significant others and spouses.

 

[crebralfix]

I think one of the fears that crosses the male mind is not what will happen in a divorce, but what happens in the heat of the moment. I periodically see articles where a couple has a fight and the woman calls the police. She makes a claim to get back at him. Guess what...she does not realize that many states now press charges FOR the woman...so her man goes to jail and that was not what she intended.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

crebralfix: "I think one of the fears that crosses the male mind is not what will happen in a divorce, but what happens in the heat of the moment. I periodically see articles where a couple has a fight and the woman calls the police. She makes a claim to get back at him. Guess what...she does not realize that many states now press charges FOR the woman...so her man goes to jail and that was not what she intended."

Happens every day. About half of my DV defense clients have the victim on their side from the next morning forward. Television somehow has convinced them they have a say in whether the state presses charges.

But the tables sometimes get turned full-about; I'm here to tell you that sometimes when the woman calls the police, SHE is the one who gets arrested and charged.