Once again domestic violence survivors are having to explain to the general public that if the courts don’t trust you within 500 feet from me, then why would a court allow you to keep your more lethal “potato launcher”?
I know, I know…what if someone breaks into the alleged abuser’s home and they don’t have their handy firearm to protect their property and life? What is my answer to this question? I take it directly from gun advocates. You can use a knife, a bat, a table leg or anything as a weapon. The ‘Right to Bear Arms’ does not only mean a gun. Ever use hairspray and a lighter? Talk about a “fire arm”.
The United States Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the right of a judge to order the removal and denial of firearms is NOT anymore against the gun owners civil rights as it is towards the alleged victim's right to not walk out their door and get shot.
The courts must reserve the right to remove lethal weapons from those who can cause bodily harm. This includes harm to oneself. I know that some gun owners do not like to hear this, but this ruling by the court also protects the gun owners rights.
This is not removing firearms from people without checks and balances. This is appearing in front of a judge and pleading your case for your gun(s). This is a way to help survivors feel comfortable obtaining a restraining order against their abuser(s).
I have worked in the field of domestic violence for over 20 years and I ask various questions before recommending a restraining order. One of those questions is: Does your abuser own a gun? The answer to that single question decides if a restraining order would be best for this situation. I must assess the legal benefit of taking out a restraining order; is it worth the risk of exposing my client to potential gun violence?
Less Talk, More Facts:
Let’s bring up Federal Statue: 18 U.S.C. § 921(g)(9). What is 18 USC § 921(g)(9)? It is an amendment to the 1968 Gun Control Act added in 1994. This prohibits anyone convicted of a felony, anyone with a domestic violence restraining order and/or anyone convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor from being in possession of a firearm. Please note, being in possession of a firearm extends beyond ownership. Here is the verbiage of the act itself when discussing the criteria to prohibit a subject from being in possession of a firearm:
“has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon, committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim."
Read up on the statue yourself: https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1117-restrictions-possession-firearms-individuals-convicted
This decision is not new. In 1994 when the sequel was added statue 18 USC 921 it passed almost unanimously in the United States Congress. That means this law has been in effective for 30 years!
One of the most important aspects of the 1994 statue is that there is no law enforcement exception. What does this mean? This means that any member of the military or any police officer who has a qualifying misdemeanor conviction is no longer able to possess a firearm, even while on duty.
So, what now??
Not much has changed for me as an advocate. I am happy that this law was upheld, however we have so much work to do. We still must assess the safety of all inflicted by the plight of domestic violence. Gun laws and domestic violence laws must go hand-in-hand. We can’t even begin to discuss gun laws without domestic violence being one of the top factors in the conversation. Domestic violence organizations and law makers must keep an open dialogue moving forward so that we don’t repeat history. Fear of a bullet snuffing out your existence should never be a fear any civilized person has.