Domestic Violence and Firearms ownership

TXsnake

Inactive
People are finding out the hard way that if they plead no contest or guilty to and assault enhanced with a family violence finding can no longer possess a firearm or ammunition. Be sure what the law is in your state before you plead to even a fine only assault(in Texas that is an offensive contact).
 
Considering that the Lautenberg Amendment has been around since 1994 this isn't something new. It is a violation of federal law for a person to possess a firearm after being convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

There doesn't even have to be any kind of special finding. The only requirements are that the offense have as an element the use of or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon and the victim is an "initmate partner."
 
The Lautenberg Amendment and the Lautenberg-Barr provision pretty well gutted my local law enforcement, as well as many others. The biggest "domestic abusers" turned out to be cops. I had great fun teasing our counties chief deputy that was moonlighting at my favorite gunshop.

http://ptexans.com/app-bill.htm
 
I had great fun teasing our counties chief deputy that was moonlighting at my favorite gunshop.

If I understand you correctly, that you enjoyed taunting a LEO who lost his job and 2nd Amendment rights because of a minor domestic conviction, that's something I wouldn't admit to, even in private, much less brag about over the Internet! :mad:

Of course, I wouldn't have to since I wouldn't find someone else's misfortune to be a subject of mirth.
 
If I understand you correctly, that you enjoyed taunting a LEO who lost his job and 2nd Amendment rights because of a minor domestic conviction, that's something I wouldn't admit to, even in private, much less brag about over the Internet!

Of course, I wouldn't have to since I wouldn't find someone else's misfortune to be a subject of mirth.

You didn't understand me correctly. He wasn't one of the abusers and he didn't lose his job. Few of them did, as a matter of fact. They just had an abundance of pencil pushers because a lot of them could no longer carry weapons. He was one of the few cops that was respected in my area because he was a decent person, not a badge heavy goon.

You must be young not to remember the "unintended consequences" of this misguided legislation. A serious backfire!
 
The warning of the Lautenberg law is clear. Never plead guilty or no contest to ANY charge, not even a traffic infraction. Make the state prove your guilt despite a good defense.

What it really means is that today, if you're charged with some misdemeanor crime you cannot know if a conviction will wipe away one or more of your civil rights. What's more, no one can advise you that it might happen so you'll be totally screwed if such a law passes. I still believe Lautenberg, as applied, amounts to an ex post facto law.
 
The warning of the Lautenberg law is clear. Never plead guilty or no contest to ANY charge, not even a traffic infraction. Make the state prove your guilt despite a good defense.

What it really means is that today, if you're charged with some misdemeanor crime you cannot know if a conviction will wipe away one or more of your civil rights. What's more, no one can advise you that it might happen so you'll be totally screwed if such a law passes. I still believe Lautenberg, as applied, amounts to an ex post facto law

Exactly! Bite the bullet and lawyer up, even for something that appears minor. You don't know what's going to happen down the road.

I also think the reasoning behind the surplus of charges made against people is so they'll agree to cop a plea, rather than fight multiple charges.
 
The best thing to do is if you and the wife are getting angry at each other is to pick up the keys and leave the house till you both cool down. don't let it get to a physical stage.
 
Yeah, don't slap the wife or others around and you don't have to worry about domestic violence charges.

And don't plead guilty or 'no contest' if false charges are brought against you.
 
Yeah, don't slap the wife or others around and you don't have to worry about domestic violence charges.

And don't get a divorce. The first thing her lawyer is going to tell her is to claim "domestic violence" and it'll be up to you to prove your innocence. Meanwhile you are going to be treated like you're guilty and your gun rights will be stripped, among other things.
 
The warning of the Lautenberg law is clear. Never plead guilty or no contest to ANY charge, not even a traffic infraction. Make the state prove your guilt despite a good defense.
So even if a person is guilty and the state has strong proof, he or she should go to trial and take probable jail time rather than a fine?
 
So even if a person is guilty and the state has strong proof, he or she should go to trial and take probable jail time rather than a fine?

If the case is really airtight, would they offer you a plea bargain?
 
pnac said:
If the case is really airtight, would they offer you a plea bargain?
Actually, yes. It's less expensive for the taxpayers, conserves resources in the prosecutor's office and ensures a conviction and subsequent punishment, something that may be iffy if it goes to trial, especially if the defendent comes across as a wronged person and the "victim" as a jerk.

Locally this week, a woman accepted a plea bargain for chasing her husband down with her SUV, crashing through the lobby of a building to hit him and hitting him a second time when he got up and tried to run away...all of it caught on video. She pleaded guilty to second-degree aggravated assault and second-degree criminal mischief, originally charged with attempted murder and criminal mischief.
 
KyJim said:
So even if a person is guilty and the state has strong proof, he or she should go to trial and take probable jail time rather than a fine?

That's a judgement call for you and your attorney. You may be guilty of one crime as charged, but not others "piled on" by cops or prosecutors. For example, in arguing with a neighbor police are called and eventually it's decided to charge you with trespassing. When the cop grabs your arm and says "Come with me" you yank free to pick up your ball cap... and the cop decides to charge your with resisting arrest. (It happened to a former neighbor I once had). He fought both charges and managed to win dismissal of the resisting charge and paid a whopping $25 fine for trespass.

Had he not fought, it's very possible that anti-gun legislation could be enacted, like Lautenberg, adding a new "disability" to certain misdemeanor crimes including assault, battery, resisting arrest, assaulting a police officer (i.e. touching), etc.

Your lawyer can also initiate a plea deal to some charge that's much more innocuous, and less likely to incur a disability, such as disturbing the peace.

It's happening in other areas of law too. A man, 68, was convicted of fraud in 1963 at age 19. But a new federal law meant to keep fraudsters and identity thieves out of banks meant he had to be fired, 49 years after the fact. A case of misdemeanor fraud turns out to be a big deal almost 50 years later when a senior citizen loses his job in this economy.
 
It's happening in other areas of law too. A man, 68, was convicted of fraud in 1963 at age 19. But a new federal law meant to keep fraudsters and identity thieves out of banks meant he had to be fired, 49 years after the fact. A case of misdemeanor fraud turns out to be a big deal almost 50 years later when a senior citizen loses his job in this economy.

The really ironic thing about that (the linked article) is that his bosses have stolen or defrauded people out of billions, maybe trillions, and will never be punished.
One set of rules for the "little people", one set for the ones doing the big crimes.
 
A friend is a retired Navy SEAL. He was undergoing a divorce when his wife decided he should die by cop.

The wife called the cops, claiming her husband had assaulted her and was planning to kill cops. The cops sent the SWAT team who soon released the guy. He went to a second home in another county. The wife called the cops in that county and another SWAT team soon showed up: He was soon released again. This stuff all happened in one day.

The ex-wife lost custody of her son in the divorce.
 
A friend is a retired Navy SEAL. He was undergoing a divorce when his wife decided he should die by cop.

The wife called the cops, claiming her husband had assaulted her and was planning to kill cops. The cops sent the SWAT team who soon released the guy. He went to a second home in another county. The wife called the cops in that county and another SWAT team soon showed up: He was soon released again. This stuff all happened in one day.

The ex-wife lost custody of her son in the divorce

I could tell some stories, but I can't beat that! Let's just say that I got custody of my kids also and I got my firearms back.
 
Back
Top