This was a bad case. They guy already misused a firearm on several occasions.
Look, I don’t consider myself a racist, but I f***ing hate little greasy ******s and ****s and gaw-damn slop-eating, f***ing fat ******** **** and those ***** *** ****** are worse than ******ing *********** *****, but the absolute worse are the gap-toothed ****** **** ******* and creepy *** *** ***** ***** but the dripping-wet ** ****** are the worse and their women smell like *** ****** *****. And don’t get me started on the fake-ass **** ********* who have the IQ of a **** ****** **** and the common sense of a low-level ***** ****!!!!!”
I agree that upon lawful conviction our rights are taken away. One hardly has freedom of association or assembly or press while in prison. In some instances, our lives can be taken.
But there is no due process here. This is not a convicted person. This is simply an accused person. That is why it is wrong. Anyone can accuse anyone for any reason at all.
Being “subject to a DV restraining order” isn’t being convicted of a crime. Taking someone’s constitutional rights away from them — any of them — should be persuant to a criminal conviction, not subject to a decision by one judge who can make that decision solely on the application of the (potential!) crime victim without any crime having actually occurred.