|
|
|
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:
More Gun Owners Disarmed on Word of Bitter Ex-Partners
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Lawful gun owners contend their First and Second Amendment rights have been stripped from them by lawless family court judges and disgruntled ex-partners."
"'I have never alluded to or committed violence against the children or her,' said Edward F. Taupier, a Connecticut father involved in a divorce battle with his estranged wife. 'I have been ordered not to possess a firearm and my pistol permit has been revoked.'"
"In September Mrs. Tanya Taupier filed a full protective order in Middlesex County Criminal Court stating she was in fear for her life without offering proof that her former partner of 12 years has a proclivity to violence, he said. 'The full protective order failed to cite a statute that was violated.'" ... |
| Comment by:
PDQ
(2/4/2015)
|
Wanna get really sick,
google the article "Hitting below the belt" by Cathy Young |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(2/4/2015)
|
| In divorce cases PFAs are routinely filed. And just as "routinely" approved by the courts. Defendants generally have no avenue for contest or appeal. IOW, its a commonly-employed form of "retribution" one partner can inflict upon the other without the necessity of proving any of the alleged "wrongs". One that can also bias the bench in determining the terms of dissolution of a marriage. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms. — Tench Coxe in `Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution' under the Pseudonym "A Pennsylvanian" in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1. |
|
|
