Gun confiscation study
One of the oft abused provisions of the law (by the police and bitter lovers) is that of confiscation of firearms in domestic violence cases and after bogus restraining orders. Howard Dickinson of New Hampshire has asked the legislature there to study the issue:
“A lot of these domestic violence charges are brought as a tactic in divorces,” said Rep. Howard Dickinson, a Center Conway Republican. “There is an excessive amount of paranoia when it comes to guns, and sometimes the guns have nothing to do whatsoever with the situation.”
State laws allow guns to be seized in a couple of ways. A judge has an option of taking guns and ammunition when he or she issues a domestic violence petition. In addition, police officers are obligated by law to take guns when they are called to a domestic violence assault and make an arrest.
Dickinson, who said he advises people to get around the seizure laws by hiding their guns at friends’ houses, is asking only that the Legislature study the existing laws, not immediately change them. He’s hoping that approach will calm some of the opposition he expects to face.
I think if someone is genuinely a threat that the police (using proper and legal methods) could pursue the confiscation route. However, in some cases, if the police come to your home for a variety of reasons, they ask if you have guns and take them. They do this whether it’s necessary or not.
Update: Matt has more.
January 3rd, 2005 at 8:40 pm
Whom you or I might define as a threat is one thing. Your pissed-off neighbor or a police officer might have an entirely different idea. Fighting a wrongful confiscation will be time-consuming and expensive.