Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cops Can't Be Sued for Restraining Orders
WASHINGTON (AP) ^ | Jun 27, 10:57 AM (ET) | GINA HOLLAND

Posted on 06/27/2005 8:36:45 AM PDT by strange1

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last
Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to police enforcement of the court order against her husband, the court said in a 7-2 opinion.

Small comfort to her three daughters.

And the Anti-second amendment crowd will tell you the police are there to protect you.

1 posted on 06/27/2005 8:36:45 AM PDT by strange1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: strange1

I can't restrain myself!


2 posted on 06/27/2005 8:38:01 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: strange1
Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to police enforcement of the court order against her husband, the court said in a 7-2 opinion.

So, given this decision, then where is that ruling that the 2nd Amendment is actually a guarantee to the right of individuals to bear arms?

--- crickets ---

3 posted on 06/27/2005 8:38:19 AM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: strange1

Soooo who is supposed to help you if you have a restraining order against someone? (Besides Smith & Wesson) What good are they (restraining orders) if they're not going to be enforced?


4 posted on 06/27/2005 8:40:57 AM PDT by Millee (So you're a feminist......isn't that cute??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: strange1

This was a given. The Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occassions that the police have no obligation to protect every individual.

My advice to anyone who needs a restraining order is to hold a piece of paper in one hand and a gun in the other and try to determine which one is most likely to save your life from this type of nutcase.


5 posted on 06/27/2005 8:41:59 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: strange1
I think this was a good decision, except that this Supreme Court has no intention of taking this case to the next logical step.

The only "restraining order" anyone needs is a firearm and a sh!t-load of ammunition.

6 posted on 06/27/2005 8:42:19 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Millee
Restraining orders aren't worth the paper they're written upon if dealing with a real kook. They make for a nice "paper trail" and all...but if things really take a turn for the worse with a weirdo ex-spouse one needs high-quality hardware on their hip.

~ Blue Jays ~

7 posted on 06/27/2005 8:44:35 AM PDT by Blue Jays (Rock Hard, Ride Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: strange1
Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to police enforcement of the court order against her husband, the court said in a 7-2 opinion.

This ruling is scary (but with this court, not shocking). Sadly, if she had wanted an abortion, then she would have had a constitutional right to police enforced protection.

8 posted on 06/27/2005 8:45:31 AM PDT by lunarbicep ("Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve." - G. B. Shaw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: strange1

Those of us who are Second Amendment activists have been telling people for some time that the core fallacy of gun control is that the police are not required to protect you from the bad guys -- they only clean up the mess afterward. It's up to you to exercise your fundamentally human right to self-defense.


9 posted on 06/27/2005 8:46:03 AM PDT by HolgerDansk ("Oh Bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The only "restraining order" anyone needs is a firearm and a sh!t-load of ammunition.

I must strongly disagre here. With proper practice, only one or two shots is needed to send a punk to the morgue. :)

10 posted on 06/27/2005 8:46:33 AM PDT by Littlejon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: strange1

I remember a lot more to this particular story. The police dept. ignored her calls, telling her to wait it out, that he'd probably bring the girls home again.


11 posted on 06/27/2005 8:48:34 AM PDT by Tired of Taxes (News junkie here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Littlejon

Absolutely. I'm just allowing for the possibility that the "restraining order" is needed to deal with multiple punks!


12 posted on 06/27/2005 8:49:13 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: strange1
If Jessica had a weapon and shot the SOB we would be hearing the police tell us it is best not to confront the attacker, let the police handle it. just can't come up with the words to say how much this sickens me.
13 posted on 06/27/2005 8:51:02 AM PDT by Americanexpat (A strong democracy through citizen oversight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I like the way you think! :)


14 posted on 06/27/2005 8:51:54 AM PDT by Littlejon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: strange1

Restraining Order = Piece of paper.
It's not armor against bullets.
Take precautions.


15 posted on 06/27/2005 8:56:10 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: strange1
A restraining order is simply pre-established probable cause for arrest. That's all. It has never been, nor will it be, a magic protective shield for the victims of violence. Self-defense must be the primary course of action for such people.
16 posted on 06/27/2005 8:58:53 AM PDT by TChris (Liberals: All death, all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: strange1

As someone who was stalked for a year I carried my firearm. To do otherwise would have been stupid. Yes the guy once caught got a felony terrioristic threatning conviction and a permanent restraining order. I am smart enough to not rely on a piece of paper. A restraining order will NOT protect you.


17 posted on 06/27/2005 8:59:32 AM PDT by therut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: therut

The only purpose a restraining order serves is to make the shooting more defensible in a courtroom full of liberal jurors.


18 posted on 06/27/2005 9:05:19 AM PDT by boofus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

a short-barrelled shot gun is best.


19 posted on 06/27/2005 9:10:19 AM PDT by Soliton (Alone with everyone else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Littlejon

LOL -- thanks!


20 posted on 06/27/2005 9:14:55 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson