Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,479 posts)
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 01:45 PM Apr 2015

These Abusers Aren't Allowed To Own Guns. So Why Aren't States Removing Them?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/14/domestic-violence-guns-restraining-orders_n_5982774.html?utm_hp_ref=gun-control

On the worst night of her life, Nicole Beverly was beaten almost unconscious by her husband and then forced to sit beside him as he loaded and unloaded his gun, threatening to kill her. “I was sure I was going to die,” she told The Huffington Post.

Paralyzed with fear, it took her five months to tell anyone about the abuse and seek help. One crisp Michigan morning she did, filing a restraining order and fleeing with her two children. But after Beverly was granted the order, she was horrified to find out that the gun her husband had used to terrorize her remained in his possession.

Under the 1996 Lautenberg amendment to the Federal Gun Control Act, people who are subject to permanent domestic violence restraining orders can’t own or buy guns. (The law generally doesn’t apply to dating partners or temporary restraining orders, although there are legislative efforts underway to change that.)

But Michigan -- like most states -- doesn’t have a law requiring people with domestic violence restraining orders to actually surrender their firearms to authorities. Without a mandatory state process in place to remove his guns, Beverly's husband was left armed and dangerous.

...


There must be a crack somewhere that stuff like this falls through.
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
These Abusers Aren't Allowed To Own Guns. So Why Aren't States Removing Them? (Original Post) discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2015 OP
The Federal Gun Control Act is a Federal Law, enforced by the Federal Government. PoliticAverse Apr 2015 #1
Which would fall under the BATFE.............. Lurks Often Apr 2015 #3
Yep. This is where true improvements can be made. Eleanors38 Apr 2015 #2
This issue shows deficiencies in the NICS as well . . . Surf Fishing Guru Apr 2015 #4
State NICS participation differs from one to another discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2015 #5

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
1. The Federal Gun Control Act is a Federal Law, enforced by the Federal Government.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 02:44 PM
Apr 2015

The Federal Government should be enforcing the law else what is the purpose of having it?

State laws on gun ownership and domestic violence vary by state.

http://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1117-restrictions-possession-firearms-individuals-convicted

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
2. Yep. This is where true improvements can be made.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 03:12 PM
Apr 2015

What is puzzling is that this punk should be subject to other felonies. Were these prosecuted? That should subject the offender to existing laws regarding gun possession. I understand Florida can prosecute domestic abusers even if the victim does not prefer charges.

Surf Fishing Guru

(115 posts)
4. This issue shows deficiencies in the NICS as well . . .
Sat Apr 25, 2015, 08:53 PM
Apr 2015

States don't report to NICS those who are placed under qualifying PFA/RO's.

There are on the order of 600,000 qualifying orders issued annually but the NICS database only has 48,000 records in it.

Sadly, the entire database is a joke . . .

FBI -- NICS ACTIVE RECORDS AS OF MARCH 31, 2015 (4kb pdf)

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,479 posts)
5. State NICS participation differs from one to another
Sun Apr 26, 2015, 07:47 AM
Apr 2015
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/general-information/participation-map



IMHO, the ideal is Full POC (point of contact). FFLs in the red states contact a state agency which not only contacts the FBI NICS database but also accesses various in-state records. Some states have very limiting and stringent privacy laws about doctor-patient privacy (which includes mental health) and this arrangement allows for a more complete investigation of the applicant.
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»These Abusers Aren't Allo...