Quote:
|
...not sure restricting the freedoms of law abiding citizens is the way to go about it. (My emphasis)
|
Umm... which "law abiding citizens" are you referring to? The last time I looked, domestic violence was illegal. All the current proposals (such as closing the "dating partner loophole"
) would apply to people with domestic violence convictions, so... not too "law-abiding," it seems. (As to restraining orders, the restriction of rights applies only while the order is active. Although restraining orders are sometimes abused, I don't think the incidence of such abuse is as high as it's sometimes made out to be. I know this is an unpopular position, but I put a high value on the lives of women, who are in something of a double bind with respect to domestic violence: they are at considerable risk of injury or death from an abusive partner, but they are frequently charged and convicted when they do defend themselves, even when there's a clear case that they acted in self-defense.)
That said, a lifetime ban for a misdemeanor is excessive; I'd like to see
temporary bans instead, applied to a wider range of violent misdemeanors (not just domestic), on the basis that the best predictor of violence is a history of violence.