Did you seriously link me to an article about a proposed bill that I directly linked?
So the quoted portion of that bill, which is exactly as written, is wrong? What point were you trying to even make? Read the proposed bill as-written, if it gets too confusing for you ask questions, and try and really comprehend what is going on within the bill. I can guarantee you that no trial is required, only a sworn affidavit. I know this because I read the proposed bill on the government website.
This bill would establish a procedure to obtain a gun violence restraining order and, when applicable, a firearm seizure warrant, when a person poses a significant risk of personal injury to himself or herself or others by possessing a firearm. The bill would establish the requirements for obtaining a gun violence restraining order and a firearm seizure warrant and would require, not later than 14 days after the execution of a gun violence restraining order, and, when applicable, a firearm seizure warrant, a hearing to determine whether a person who is subject to the order may, among other things, own or possess a firearm, or whether the seized firearm should be returned.
This bill would authorize a law enforcement agency to request a renewal of a gun violence restraining order if the agency has probable cause to believe that a person subject to that restraining order continues to pose a significant risk of personal injury to himself or herself or others by possessing a firearm. This bill would additionally authorize a judge, upon his or her own motion, or upon request of another person, to issue a renewal of a gun violence restraining order, as specified.
Existing law requires specified law enforcement officers to take temporary custody of any firearm or deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a lawful search when present at the scene of a domestic violence incident involving a threat to human life or physical assault.
This bill would apply the requirements described above to law enforcement officers serving a gun violence restraining order.
(a) Any person may submit an application to the court, on a form designed by the Judicial Council, setting forth the facts and circumstances necessitating that a gun violence restraining order be issued. A gun violence restraining order shall be issued to prohibit a named person from possessing a firearm if an affidavit, signed by the applicant under oath, and any additional information provided to the court demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the court, the named person poses a significant risk of personal injury to himself or herself or others by possessing firearms.
(b) A firearms seizure warrant may not be issued but upon probable cause, supported by an affidavit, naming or describing with reasonable specificity the facts and circumstances justifying the order and listing any firearm or firearms to be seized pursuant to the order.
Again, like I said, they have to provide proof of their claims and it has to be to the satisfaction of the court. You can't just go make an accusation and get an affadavit you have to provide valid proof of the claims being made and be backed up by law enforcement and get it signed through a magistrate. No one's rights are being violated, if a person is mentally ill they do not have rights to own a firearm.
As for Dan, I don’t take a Women’s Studies class, but it’s lovely that you jump to that conclusion about me when you’ve been going on against jumping to conclusions about men for pages, that’s lovely. Last time I checked your country ranked at 15 in gender equality.
And just because you think we’re “mostly equal” doesn’t mean that there still isn’t room for improvement, if only people would just sit down and listen to issue that directly affect women without trying to turn it back to men or feign skepticism maybe we’d be progressing faster on that equality. We’re in here telling you that we have to deal with gendered harassment and sexual objectification and you’re brushing us off by saying we’re overreacting or it’s not as common as we think, based on what exactly? Your experience with street harassment? Probably not.
This is a societal issue that needs to be addressed, yes sexual assaults happen to men too but you know what? The grand majority of the time it happens at the hands of other men, obviously this is an issue that mostly deals with men and we have to attack the problem at the source, men and concepts of masculinity which I have provided studies on that no one seems to want to address ever ITT. We have tried to voice our concerns and we have been brushed off and scrutinized to the point where women don’t even feel comfortable voicing their opinion because they’re tired of immediately being shut down and being told that they’re overreacting or aren’t making their claims nicely enough for you to take seriously~*~*~*~
You appear that you’re not trying to help when you resort to making ridiculous statements such as calling me a man hater or a misandrist for not agreeing with you. Have I called you a woman hater or a misogynist? No, and yet you say that I have to make my arguments in a nicer tone and then wonder why I lose my patience with you and don’t want to engage with you any further?
Edited by Mishelle, 30 May 2014 - 04:47 AM.