- Joined
- Mar 7, 2018
- Messages
- 61,961
- Reaction score
- 19,061
- Location
- Lower Mainland of BC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
From United Press International
April 3 (UPI) -- Democrats are seeking to expand the Violence Against Women Act to close the so-called boyfriend loophole amid opposition from the National Rifle Association.
As Congress prepares to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., drafted a provision to be added to the 1994 law that would strip stalkers, current or former boyfriends or dating partners convicted of domestic abuse of their firearms.
"Domestic abusers are prohibited from buying or owning a firearm if they've ever been married to the victim, lived together or had a child together, but a dangerous ex-boyfriend or a dating partner, there's nothing to stop them," Dingell said.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said women are just as likely to be killed by dating partners as by spouses.
COMMENT:-
What a blatant violation of the Constitutional Rights of Americans on the basis of BOTH gender AND marital status.
Why aren't men given the same protections as Part 4 gives women?
Why are married, or formerly married, men treated differently than those who are not married, or formerly married?
Why does the NRA think that it's OK for a former "boyfriend" to be more able to kill a former "girlfriend" than a former "husband" is able to kill a former "wife"?
Inquiring minds want to know.
PS- Despite what the NRA said, the changes were passed in the House. Now it's up to the Senate to decide if it is going to protect the Constitution of the United States of America by preserving the rights of "former boyfriends" to "keep and bear arms". If the Senate doesn't do it, then it will be up to Mr. Trump to save the country yet again.
Right?
NRA opposes Democrats expansion of Violence Against Women Act
April 3 (UPI) -- Democrats are seeking to expand the Violence Against Women Act to close the so-called boyfriend loophole amid opposition from the National Rifle Association.
As Congress prepares to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., drafted a provision to be added to the 1994 law that would strip stalkers, current or former boyfriends or dating partners convicted of domestic abuse of their firearms.
"Domestic abusers are prohibited from buying or owning a firearm if they've ever been married to the victim, lived together or had a child together, but a dangerous ex-boyfriend or a dating partner, there's nothing to stop them," Dingell said.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said women are just as likely to be killed by dating partners as by spouses.
COMMENT:-
What a blatant violation of the Constitutional Rights of Americans on the basis of BOTH gender AND marital status.
Why aren't men given the same protections as Part 4 gives women?
Why are married, or formerly married, men treated differently than those who are not married, or formerly married?
Why does the NRA think that it's OK for a former "boyfriend" to be more able to kill a former "girlfriend" than a former "husband" is able to kill a former "wife"?
Inquiring minds want to know.
PS- Despite what the NRA said, the changes were passed in the House. Now it's up to the Senate to decide if it is going to protect the Constitution of the United States of America by preserving the rights of "former boyfriends" to "keep and bear arms". If the Senate doesn't do it, then it will be up to Mr. Trump to save the country yet again.
Right?