Loss of 2nd Amendment Rights

[FLyellowdog]

If a police officer, FBI, or some such person is accused of and arrested for spousal abuse but found not guilty or charges dismissed, do they get their 2nd amendment right to carry a gun reinstated? What's the law that addresses this?

[X_Digger]

1. Differs by state

Dismissal, Not guilty- always get them back. Deferred adjudication, or probation / time served? Gone.

The other thing is that if they have a protective order against them from their spouse, and they're a cop- it gets tricky. Have to have a gun while at work, but not at home? Maybe our resident LEOs can chime in.

[tularetom]

3. "If they have a protective order against them from their spouse"

they should not be cops anymore. I hope our cities and counties realize the potential liabilities of giving people with anger management issues the type of authority that police officers have.

This is the type of shit that leads to big lawsuits and ultimately costs the taxpayers zillions of dollars.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. Only if its justified

They are automatic upon request in many areas and are often used as weapons in a divorce. They can raise hell with more than just firearms ownership. Justified ones, off course...tactical ones should be ignored.

[virginia mountainman]

4. The really problem is the fact that many divorce attorneys, PUSH

Their clients to get restraining orders, so that it will look better when they go to court..

I actually know of a case, where a restraining order, done unfairly like I mentioned, REALLY screwed a friends job up.

[jeepnstein]

6. A conviction is a career ender.

Even an arrest is usually enough to get your badge yanked in most jurisdictions. I know many people who have ruined their careers this way. You can beat the rap but you still have to take the ride.

[patriotvoice]

9. "I will keep my private life unsullied as an example to all."

That's part of the NC LE Code of Ethics (see also Article 6: http://www.jus.state.nc.us/NCJA/h-ethics.pdf). The Commissioner (or Sheriff) has the ultimate discretion in handling the officer, but troop pressure often incites the officer to take action personally, rather than involving command. Most frequently, this means transitioning out of sworn service, but sometimes out of the force out-right. Only in egregious cases does the Commissioner step in publically and swiftly.

[FLyellowdog]

2. My "almost" ex-friend was going ballistic over this

and was of course blaming Obama for the law. The more the friend talked, the closer to Freeperville they got. I didn't know enough to even argue intelligently about it...and google didn't help much. Thanks.

[X_Digger]

5. If I recall correctly..

..it was either 94 or 96 that the DV aspect of 'prohibited persons' was added.

There was a supreme court case recently about this issue, that may help you research it more.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/02/24/suspreme.court.gun.rights/index.html

eta: 96 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lautenberg_Amendment

[FLyellowdog]

7. Thanks.

[one-eyed fat man]

10. Lautenberg Amendment

Most every gun law carves an exemption for ON-DUTY police and military to carry weapons in an official capacity, except the Lautenberg Amendment. Here is a good discussion of how it affects the Army. The basics are true for the police.

Lautenberg Amendment and the US Army

Needless to say a misdemeanor conviction is a career stopper. The irony is that while the Government Exception still allows persons convicted of any type of felony, including domestic violence, it no longer applies to persons convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors.

What is also true is the the filing of an protective order is also disqualifying. In many cases it is very easy for a vindictive spouse to request a restraining order for no reason other than spite. The level of proof can be non-existent in some courts. Some judges issue such orders "pro-forma" in any divorce proceeding. No one is arguing that wife-beaters should have guns, but given the far reaching ramifications that an accusation of domestic abuse carries courts should see that they are founded. Additonally, courts have neglected to vacate such orders after the proceedings in which they were applicable have passed.

One other attribute of the Lautenberg Amendment that is that it applied retroactively, regardless of circumstances. An innocent person who may have plead guilty to a "domestic disturbance" charge and paid a fine to avoid a costlier court fight 40 years ago has no recourse and is penalized along with the truly guilty. Regardless, the law is unlikely to be changed as any attempt will result in claims the people want to arm domestic abusers.