Marriage and the 2A
- Thread starter JamesM
- Start date
- Status
Bubbles
Member
Just something else to consider...
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-8/1188367183220300.xml&coll=1
Restraining order lifted, not gun ban
Years after domestic violence complaint, court rules man still cannot buy weapons
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
BY KATE COSCARELLI
Star-Ledger Staff
A person who has had guns seized by the police because of domestic violence cannot buy guns later -- even if the event was long ago and a restraining order has since been dropped, a state appeals court ruled yesterday.
The three-judge Appellate Division panel said a Millburn man and his wife, who had a nasty divorce that led to domestic violence charges and restraining orders against both of them, could not have a firearms purchaser identification card.
"The prohibition ... survives even if, as in the case here, a restraining order is vacated," Judge Ariel Rodriguez wrote.
Matthew Sweetwood, the Short Hills man at the center of the case, called the decision "completely unreasonable." The 44-year-old father of six owns a photographic supply shop in Florham Park. He collected the guns over several years, enjoyed target shooting as a hobby, and is a dues-paying member of the National Rifle Association.
"It's not about the guns," Sweetwood said. "A constitutional right has been taken from me and there was no real due process. I'm like a regular, normal guy. I have never done anything wrong. I don't have a point on my license ... and I've lost my right to bear arms. There is something not quite right about that."
Sweetwood said he is considering an appeal to the state Supreme Court.
Advocates for domestic violence victims said the ruling was important for battered women.
"The decision is an accurate reading of the law," said Sandy Clark, associate director of the New Jersey Coalition for Battered Women. "Firearm prohibitions, generally, are important protections for victims of domestic violence. It is our thinking that the less they are around, the safer victims are."
Paul Loriquet, a spokesman for the Essex County Prosecutor's Office, also said he was pleased with the decision.
The case goes back to January 1995 when Sweetwood got a firearms purchaser identification card. The following year, he and his wife became entangled in a contentious divorce. After a confrontation in front of their children, each signed a domestic violence complaint against the other. In January 1997, a judge issued a final restraining order against both of them, court papers show.
Because of the domestic violence complaint and restraining order, Sweetwood had to forfeit his five handguns, other paraphernalia and his firearms card to Millburn police. He was allowed to sell the guns to a registered gun dealer that year.
When the divorce was finalized in 2001, both Sweetwood and his former wife agreed to drop the restraining orders, he said.
In the spring of 2005, he sought to retrieve the card, something his former wife told the court she did not oppose. Last June, a civil court judge said he deserved the card back, but the Essex County Prosecutor's Office appealed.
The appellate judges said state law says such a card should not be issued to a person who had firearms seized, and not returned, related to a domestic violence incident. Even though the law was not in effect when the guns were taken, it was in effect when he asked for the card back, wrote Rodriguez, who was joined by Judges Edwin Stern and Jack Sabatino.
The decision said Millburn police may continue to hold the card "or destroy it."
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-8/1188367183220300.xml&coll=1
Restraining order lifted, not gun ban
Years after domestic violence complaint, court rules man still cannot buy weapons
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
BY KATE COSCARELLI
Star-Ledger Staff
A person who has had guns seized by the police because of domestic violence cannot buy guns later -- even if the event was long ago and a restraining order has since been dropped, a state appeals court ruled yesterday.
The three-judge Appellate Division panel said a Millburn man and his wife, who had a nasty divorce that led to domestic violence charges and restraining orders against both of them, could not have a firearms purchaser identification card.
"The prohibition ... survives even if, as in the case here, a restraining order is vacated," Judge Ariel Rodriguez wrote.
Matthew Sweetwood, the Short Hills man at the center of the case, called the decision "completely unreasonable." The 44-year-old father of six owns a photographic supply shop in Florham Park. He collected the guns over several years, enjoyed target shooting as a hobby, and is a dues-paying member of the National Rifle Association.
"It's not about the guns," Sweetwood said. "A constitutional right has been taken from me and there was no real due process. I'm like a regular, normal guy. I have never done anything wrong. I don't have a point on my license ... and I've lost my right to bear arms. There is something not quite right about that."
Sweetwood said he is considering an appeal to the state Supreme Court.
Advocates for domestic violence victims said the ruling was important for battered women.
"The decision is an accurate reading of the law," said Sandy Clark, associate director of the New Jersey Coalition for Battered Women. "Firearm prohibitions, generally, are important protections for victims of domestic violence. It is our thinking that the less they are around, the safer victims are."
Paul Loriquet, a spokesman for the Essex County Prosecutor's Office, also said he was pleased with the decision.
The case goes back to January 1995 when Sweetwood got a firearms purchaser identification card. The following year, he and his wife became entangled in a contentious divorce. After a confrontation in front of their children, each signed a domestic violence complaint against the other. In January 1997, a judge issued a final restraining order against both of them, court papers show.
Because of the domestic violence complaint and restraining order, Sweetwood had to forfeit his five handguns, other paraphernalia and his firearms card to Millburn police. He was allowed to sell the guns to a registered gun dealer that year.
When the divorce was finalized in 2001, both Sweetwood and his former wife agreed to drop the restraining orders, he said.
In the spring of 2005, he sought to retrieve the card, something his former wife told the court she did not oppose. Last June, a civil court judge said he deserved the card back, but the Essex County Prosecutor's Office appealed.
The appellate judges said state law says such a card should not be issued to a person who had firearms seized, and not returned, related to a domestic violence incident. Even though the law was not in effect when the guns were taken, it was in effect when he asked for the card back, wrote Rodriguez, who was joined by Judges Edwin Stern and Jack Sabatino.
The decision said Millburn police may continue to hold the card "or destroy it."
ArfinGreebly
Moderator Emeritus
Clergy & Divorce Attorneys
TallPine
I mentioned that I used the services of a rabbi. None of the parties was or is Jewish, other than the rabbi himself. There was a reason for that. He was a man I had good reason to believe I could trust, while the more familiar pastor(s) of my acquaintance were people to whom I would not turn.
Choose wisely.
On balance, given the choice between equally competent and trustworthy persons, one of "medicine" and the other of the clergy, I'll take clergy every time.
And, like you, I have what I believe to be good reasons for so doing.
SteveS
A further note to ponder:
My aversion to intervention by "medical" ("mental health") professionals, and my preference for clergy stems in no small part from a long-term observation that, on the whole, the "mental health" field is biased with prejudice against "delusional" religious beliefs. I can't count the number of them who firmly believe that there's no such thing as a soul (by that or any other name) and that religion is a mostly harmless delusional framework.
This has consequences in their understanding and expression of morality.
If I were, myself, a member of the clergy, I would have a real problem referring people to a mental health professional whose core beliefs include that my job is a "mostly harmless" delusion.
There are plenty of people who are not bothered by this disconnect, who feel that "mental health" is a science and thus irrelevant to one's beliefs. I, on the other hand, am bothered by it.
I make my choices accordingly.
Your mileage will, of course, vary.
A lot.
TallPine
I would never suggest that one grab a random member of the clergy.
I wouldn't bet on that, considering my experience. Pastors can break confidentiality (not for "cause" as in mandatory reporting) and there is no oversight or accountability. BTDT
If you think your gun rights are safe in church - think again.
I mentioned that I used the services of a rabbi. None of the parties was or is Jewish, other than the rabbi himself. There was a reason for that. He was a man I had good reason to believe I could trust, while the more familiar pastor(s) of my acquaintance were people to whom I would not turn.
Choose wisely.
On balance, given the choice between equally competent and trustworthy persons, one of "medicine" and the other of the clergy, I'll take clergy every time.
And, like you, I have what I believe to be good reasons for so doing.
SteveS
My address there was the result of observing cases where one spouse contacted a "domestic specialist" for advice, resulting in a mind-boggling progression of premeditation and domestic malfeasance -- misappropriation of common funds -- toward an eventual "spontaneous" departure and a very expensive process proceeding from that. All orchestrated by said domestic specialist attorney.
See my remarks to TallPine above.
A further note to ponder:
My aversion to intervention by "medical" ("mental health") professionals, and my preference for clergy stems in no small part from a long-term observation that, on the whole, the "mental health" field is biased with prejudice against "delusional" religious beliefs. I can't count the number of them who firmly believe that there's no such thing as a soul (by that or any other name) and that religion is a mostly harmless delusional framework.
This has consequences in their understanding and expression of morality.
If I were, myself, a member of the clergy, I would have a real problem referring people to a mental health professional whose core beliefs include that my job is a "mostly harmless" delusion.
There are plenty of people who are not bothered by this disconnect, who feel that "mental health" is a science and thus irrelevant to one's beliefs. I, on the other hand, am bothered by it.
I make my choices accordingly.
Your mileage will, of course, vary.
A lot.
"The appellate judges said state law says such a card should not be issued to a person who had firearms seized, and not returned, related to a domestic violence incident. Even though the law was not in effect when the guns were taken, it was in effect when he asked for the card back, wrote Rodriguez, who was joined by Judges Edwin Stern and Jack Sabatino."
Nothing like a little ex post facto law.
Nothing like a little ex post facto law.
ArfinGreebly
Moderator Emeritus
Domestic Violence
Yes.
And a shouting match is "violence."
And someone claiming to "be afraid" of you . . . is "violence."
Because, like, you know, anyone with the equipment to commit murder is already a murderer, even before the fact. So we have to revoke the equipment.
Like we do for rapists. Who, you know, have the equipment to commit rape, and therefore . . .
Yeah.
Yes.
And a shouting match is "violence."
And someone claiming to "be afraid" of you . . . is "violence."
Because, like, you know, anyone with the equipment to commit murder is already a murderer, even before the fact. So we have to revoke the equipment.
Like we do for rapists. Who, you know, have the equipment to commit rape, and therefore . . .
Yeah.
"OMG! I'm so scared of him! He might hurt me! Help!"
"Sorry, sir, you can't own a gun. You're violent."
"Sorry, sir, you can't own a gun. You're violent."
TallPine
Member
Actually, Arfin - I have little or no use for secular counselors either.
The problem is that when one is in need of someone to "talk to", usually you're not in a state of mind to carefully research all the available options (as for instance when buying a new car).
The problem is that when one is in need of someone to "talk to", usually you're not in a state of mind to carefully research all the available options (as for instance when buying a new car).
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Since this thread has gone to wandering...
Enuf.
Art
Enuf.
Art
- Status
