The Supreme Court in a unanimous 9-0 vote strengthened the law that states if someone is found guilty of domestic violence, even if no actual violence was proved, they can’t own a gun.
What part of ‘shall not be infringed’ regarding the 2nd Amendment do these ‘justices’ not understand?
To take someone’s gun because they have been involved in domestic violence will NOT stop domestic violence from occurring in the future.
These 2 issues are not related in any way.
See Page 2 For Complete Story:
Something needs to be done about the liberal Supreme Court.
THIS IS NOT A GOOD DECISION.
Going bye that logic, someone who robs, robs a bank, etc, they should have guns even if guns are not used?
The pigs are running the 1984 farm…
a friend of mine’s wife threw a pan full of hot grease at him, she missed. he told her that could be a domestic violence charge. she promptly picked up another pan and smashed it across her own arm. she looked him in the eye and said “see that mark, you did that”. that’s why domestic violence should not be considered concerning this issue. women have been known to hurt themselves and blame it on the man.
WHAT ABOUT THE IDIOT WOMEN WHO JUST TRY AND GET THEIR HUSBANDS IN TROUBLE BECAUSE THEIR BOYFRIEND IS SCARED OF HIM!!!
this is good news
Idiots
molon labe
The nuts in the supreme court think the issues are related.