|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
MI: Restraining orders and guns shouldn't mix
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
It may be an exaggeration to say that some Michigan lawmakers want to arm abusers.
But not by much.
Michigan's Legislature has approved a law, ostensibly aimed at standardizing the way concealed-weapons permits are issued, that also eliminates a state provision barring individuals subject to a personal protection order from obtaining such permits. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(1/9/2015)
|
One might agree with this concept but for a critical flaw. Thanks to "progressive thought" PFAs and ROs are issued by courts as a matter of routine, rather than necessity. Often, even in amicable divorce cases. A reality which may well mean the state "poisons the well" of human kindness existing prior to its order.
Particularly when one considers the "defendant" is often unaware of such an order being considered or offered opportunity to contest. Most often they only become aware when its a "fait accompli", and they're being compelled to surrender valuable personal property to the "tender mercy" of an arm of the state with no guarantee it will be preserved and maintained, and little recourse if it isn't. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
