| Category: General
Are we talking about US or UK ?
Does violence against King George domestic or not ?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Who is regulating the Militia ? What does “well” mean ?
Well, it would probably make it easier for them to do their abusing thing…
Isn’t there already a law that says felons can’t have guns?
Supreme Court’s follow up case of “should prison inmates have guns” case looks interesting too.
He killed his ex girlfriend and three of his children. Then shot his ex-wife…but left her alive to suffer the loss of her kids.
No…people who victimize their families should not be armed.
In California they can’t, even if they’ve been convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence offense.
Aka disarming the police
If domestic abusers are prevented from owning or using firearms then a lot of US police officers will be disarmed..
If anyone is curious, the actual supreme court argument isn’t whether domestic abusers should be allowed to own guns. It’s whether or not a restraining order – which is not being found guilty of a crime – is enough to remove a constitutional right. A restraining order hearing is not a trial. You do not have the protections a defendant in a criminal trial does. Should we be revoking constitutional rights on the whim of a judge and not a jury? That’s the actual question the Supreme Court is hearing.
Fuck no. Violence is violence, whether it’s committed with firearms or fists.
If anyone is willing to cross the line to violence without just reason, then they’re willing to pull a trigger without just reason.
Too many have imaginary pride they’re willing to sacrifice everything for, particularly poor American southerners
Of course not. If you’re putting your hands on your partner, you’re not mentally equipped to handle the responsibility of a firearm.
Of course not. Stupid question
No. But their partners should.
No one should.