FOP and Lautenberg
TriggerFinger notes the Fraternal Order of Police having issue with the Lautenberg amendment. Seems a restraining order during a divorce proceeding isn’t forgivable like felon in possession is. In comments here, he notes:
Oh, and the reason for the lawsuits is that the federal law about misdemeanor domestic violence convictions or restraining orders does NOT contain such an exception. So, a cop who has a boilerplate restraining order filed by his wife in the middle of a divorce can’t carry his gun and is thus out of a job; while a cop with a felony conviction for murder could remain armed so long as someone deemed it in the public interest. I’m not surprised the FOP doesn’t like that situation.
July 10th, 2006 at 10:44 pm
Uncle,
I ran into this exact problem with one of my best NCOs when I commanded a Cavalry Troop. Thanks to Senator Lautenberg’s overly broad legislation, our nation lost a great soldier when we could have used him, because he was prohibited from being issued a weapon in the most controlled weapons environment possible: the U.S. Army. All because his ex alleged (and never proved) something during a bitter divorce.
Oh, and repeated letters to Sen. Lautenberg, written by the NCO’s commander were never once responded to.
Bob K
July 11th, 2006 at 3:17 am
Bob, I think that most of us think this crap is silly.
I for one, however, will fight to keep it in place. At least until the damn FOP suck it up and work toward removing this BS restriction on everyone, not just for themselves and congress.
’bout time the FOP supported the RKBA