Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/25/2005 4:00:39 PM EDT
(note, I also posted this in the BOTS forum to get maximum exposure, if this was incorrect f me doing so, please delete whichever of the threads. I'm just trying to gather as much intel as possible)

Hi guys, I'm in need of some advice. I don't really have the money for a lawyer, so I thought I'd ask some opinions from your perspective.

So, here's the situation: I was involved with a girl, blah blah blah. Said girl turned out to have infidelity issues. How it went down is like this. She has friends, of whom I did not like because of their drug activity. She started hanging out with them and getting high on pot and such, time and time again. We fought over this multiple times. Well, long story short, she pretty much dumped me for this stupid pothead.

I'll admit I was a bit upset. This all happened right about the time I was laid off from my place of employment. So, needless to say I was feeling a bit low. Well, I talked to her one morning about how I had been thinking of suicide. I know I know... stupid thought, but hey, I'm still here. Well, we basically argued and then it was over. There was no contact as I am not the type to do something like that.

Anyway, so a little time goes on. We do the back and forth argueing from a distance (over the internet or phones). Finally I decided that I was done with her. So, one night I dropped all of her stuff off at the place she was staying, leaving a text message on her phone that her stuff was sealed in a bag in the driveway. Ok, she got her stuff back.

But she had things of mine that I wanted back. Well, I sent her an email stating that I wanted my things back from her. She eventually contacted me and told me that she gave it all away. I asked if that included my artwork. (I am a bit of an artist.)

She said no but that I wasn't getting it back. Well, I told her that I wanted it back regardless, that she had no right to it. So, as it goes, two weeks pass by and nothing. In that time period I hear of her continued drug use, and finally this morning I called her up and said that I wanted my things, and that if she didn't get them back to me, I was going to report her and her friends to the DEA. (which is part of what I'm asking about.)

Okay, so, she leaves my stuff on the front porch, no problems, I pick it up and leave, no knock on the door, no conversation, no sight of each other. Nothing. "Good," I think to myself. "It's done, and now I can go on about my life."

Now, it's nearing 8PM and I just got served a restraining order, stating that I have been accused of stalking. But, it was not considered by the judge to be criminal. Damn straight! I'm no criminal. I've NEVER been in trouble with the law, hell, my last speeding ticket was in 1998.

So anyway, now I have to go to court and speak my case. My questions are as follows:

1- is this going to affect my right to bare arms when I have ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION of EVER communicating with her again?

2- can some kind of action be taken by the fact (and I forgot to mention) that she spray painted "F*#@ YOU across my artwork? As well, can something be done about the things of mine that she gave away or threw away or whatever she did with it?

3- am I not in the right for wanting to, and do I have the right to, report her and her friend's drug activities to the DEA or local police?

In this situation, what is the prudent thing to do? Obviously obey the order, which I didn't need an order in the first place to do, as it was my intent to break contact after I got my things back in the first place. A little advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 4:06:15 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 4:40:23 PM EDT
okay, got an answer on number 1- according to the law, it is if the restrainging order is a domestic violence one. Mine is not. As well, it could apply to mine were the judge to decide that I am a danger to her, which, as I will be bringing quite a lot of credible people to testify as character witnesses on my behalf, it will be more than clear that I am a completely non-violent person and have never touched a hair on her head in any way that could be considered violent. So, on that note, I am all good. Which, the others I will admit were pretty much thoughts of how to get her back through the same system she is trying to use against me. But considering I will be losing no rights, she can keep whatever else she has, and have fun going down the path of drug use. There's no light at the end of that tunnel.

Okay, now that I don't have to be afraid of losing my RTKABA, I'm all good.

Thanks.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 4:46:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Conspiro-Agnew:
(. My questions are as follows:

1- is this going to affect my right to bare arms when I have ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION of EVER communicating with her again?





No, I am pretty sure you will be able to wear short sleeve shirts without fearing the authorities.

Hope you get your life straightened out.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 4:47:49 PM EDT
hahaha thanks for the laugh, I needed that!
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 4:56:05 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 5:17:31 PM EDT

But she had things of mine that I wanted back. Well, I sent her an email stating that I wanted my things back from her. She eventually contacted me and told me that she gave it all away. I asked if that included my artwork. (I am a bit of an artist.)


This was your mistake. You pushed for your stuff, but you do have a right to your property. However, for the price of a few pieces of art work you could have had her out of your life forever. Seems like a small price now doesn't it? To late now, but next time you will know better. Breakups are never easy and each one wants to get the better of the other person, but usually the best thing t o do is dump them first and don't ever contact them again.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 5:18:44 PM EDT
2- can some kind of action be taken by the fact (and I forgot to mention) that she spray painted "F*#@ YOU across my artwork? As well, can something be done about the things of mine that she gave away or threw away or whatever she did with it?


file a suit in small claims court.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 5:18:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Conspiro-Agnew:

So anyway, now I have to go to court and speak my case. My questions are as follows:

1- is this going to affect my right to bare arms when I have ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION of EVER communicating with her again?
No, you can wear tank tops or sleeveless shirts all you want.

2- can some kind of action be taken by the fact (and I forgot to mention) that she spray painted "F*#@ YOU across my artwork? As well, can something be done about the things of mine that she gave away or threw away or whatever she did with it?
Take said pic to court with you. A pic is worth a 1000 words, no?

3- am I not in the right for wanting to, and do I have the right to, report her and her friend's drug activities to the DEA or local police?
Mention it in court. Suggest she get tested to the judge & she what she says?

In this situation, what is the prudent thing to do?
Fight it! With even a misdemeanor conviction, you lose your 2nd Amendment rights for life! She has to PROVE to you were stalking her, no? Where's the PROOF?


Link Posted: 8/25/2005 5:21:51 PM EDT
Doesn't anyone ever just say goodbye and leave?

Link Posted: 8/25/2005 5:41:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/25/2005 5:42:41 PM EDT by Conspiro-Agnew]
Okay, Bob Cole, you've managed to confuse me a bit as it reads:


The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) and the 1997 Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act contain federal firearms laws related to domestic violence. VAWA makes it a crime for a person who is the subject of a domestic abuse restraining order to transport, receive, or possess firearms or ammunition which have come across state or federal borders. The Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997 made several amendments to the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968. The amendments prohibit the possession of firearms and ammunition by persons convicted of state or federal misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence and the distribution of firearms and ammunition to such persons. Unlike the provisions in VAWA, law enforcement officers and other governmental officials are NOT EXEMPT from the amendments. As of the effective date, September 30, 1996, any person convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor may no longer possess a firearm or ammunition. This technical support packet includes information on these two federal laws.

Note that the Grand Lodge Fraternal Order of Police has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the 1997 amendments to the Gun Control Act of 1968. Also, legislation has been introduced to eliminate the retroactive application and add the exemption for the use of firearms for official purposes.

For information or assistance, contact the Battered Women's Legal Advocacy Project or your local ATF office.

Compiled March, 1997 with funding from the Bush Foundation and the McKnight Foundation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



FEDERAL LAW



There are two separate federal firearms laws which relate to domestic violence. These are the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) and the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997 which amends the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968.

RESTRAINING ORDERS

The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 contains a provision which prohibits the subject of a domestic violence restraining order from possessing firearms and ammunition. Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), anyone subject to a qualifying restraining order cannot possess a firearm or ammunition. Intimate partners include spouses, former spouses or significant others, but do not include significant others with whom the defendant has NOT cohabited. A qualifying court restraining order is one where:


the court order must include a finding that the person represents a credible threat to the other person OR the order explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the other person.
the order was issued after a hearing. Minnesota OFPs issued under the no-hearing law provisions Minn. Stat. 518B.01 subd. 7 would NOT qualify.
the defendant had to have received actual notice of the hearing and have had an opportunity to participate in the hearing.


If a respondent of a qualifying court restraining order possesses firearms or ammunition, then they have committed a federal crime. If the restraining order expires or is dismissed, the respondent can then possess firearms again. The prohibition lasts as long as the restraining order.

A respondent does not need to be told about this prohibition against possessing firearms. They do not need to be ordered to not possess firearms. The penalty for violation of this federal firearm statute is a maximum of 10 years in prison and/or a $250,000 fine.

Although law enforcement officials are exempt from the restraining order law, the exemption applies only to department-issued firearms. 18 U.S.C. § 925(a). Therefore, a police officer who is the respondent of an OFP could still have their service revolver, even off-duty. That police officer just could not possess other guns.

MISDEMEANOR CRIMES OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

The Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997 amended the Federal Gun Control Act, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9). Under these provisions, it is unlawful for an individual convicted of a state or federal "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" to "ship, transport, possess or receive firearms or ammunition."

A "misdemeanor crime of violence," pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921(33)(a), means an offense that:

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.



Law enforcement officers and governmental employees (such as security guards or military personnel) art not exempt from this law with respect to their receipt or possession of firearms or ammunition. Therefore, law enforcement and other government employees who have been convicted of a qualifying misdemeanor will not be able to lawfully possess or receive firearms or ammunition or any purposes, including performing their official duties.

Furthermore, the law makes it unlawful for any person, including governmental agencies, to sell or otherwise issue firearms or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the person has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of violence.

As of September 30, 1996, the new law went into effect. However, the prohibition also applies to persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence AT ANY TIME PRIOR to September 30, 1996. Therefore, as of the effective date, any person who has EVER been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence may no longer possess a firearm or ammunition.

With respect to all persons convicted, the law would NOT apply if the conviction is defective procedurally due to representation or trial issues, such as the person's constitutional rights to counsel and/or a jury trial were not knowingly and intelligently waived. Also, the law would not apply if the conviction has been expunged, set aside, pardoned, or the person has had his or her civil rights restored and the person is not otherwise prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition.



source

according to this, it's only if I am convicted of domestic violence, which this isn't. She put out a "stalker" restraining order because I went over to her place and got my stuff that she left out on the front porch for me to get. So, as I read, mine would not apply anyway, according to both the VAWA and the omnibus crime bill. As well, as I read it, even if I was convicted of domestic violence, which isn't being charged in the first place as she knows damn well that I'm a non-violent person, it would only apply to the period of the restraining order. Am I missing something?
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 5:43:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/25/2005 5:44:05 PM EDT by mobius]

Originally Posted By Oslow:
Doesn't anyone ever just say goodbye and leave?




why? when it's easier just to fuck someone up, as a way of getting back at them, by way of the courts.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 5:57:39 PM EDT
I'd report her and druggie friends to the DEA.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 6:00:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AssaultRifler:
I'd report her and druggie friends to the DEA.



why? the DEA will only tell you to report it your local police.........the DEA doesn't go after small time druggies.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 6:09:14 PM EDT
Get a lawyer.

Borrow the money if you have to. Even a crappy lawyer is better than none. Too many guys think that the system is fair and that all they have to do is go in and tell the truth and everything will be ok. It won't.

Maybe she will tell the truth in front of the judge and you will be OK.

Maybe she will lie her ass off. (More likely)

Don't take a chance. Hire the eel.

Buck
Link Posted: 9/2/2005 7:18:49 AM EDT
Well, just an update... got a lawyer. She dropped the charges because she admitted herself that she filed them out of anger and that there was no grounds for it. So, back to life as usual.
Top Top