Corrected Title: GOCRA Helps Remove Infringements From Bill

[Lumpy]

3. Bob gets served notice of this order.

Someone actually mails him a piece of paper or do they still do the notice-by-publication thing?

[2in2out]

http://www.mnguntalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=49637&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

Thanks to Andrew and Rob for working on this so diligently over the course of this session.

[jshuberg]

As a general rule, the press is going to get the story wrong concerning firearms. Every time. Especially the strib.

This was in fact a win for us. The infringements in the original Bloomberg bill have all been removed. This is not what the anti-gun zealots wanted. They wanted the infringements to pass, and they got none of them. The strib is obviously spinning for the anti-gunners. Spinning really, really hard. Basically blatantly lying, as evidenced by the fabricated quote by Rob Doar. They are nothing but a propaganda rag.

My guess, this story might be an attempt at a divide and conquer tactic. I had a conversation at the range today with someone that was basically "screw GOCRA, I'm not giving them any more money", based on the false reports that they "caved" and were supporting a bill that infringed on firearm rights. I believe that after explaining what happened, and exactly what the bill does and does not do, he was OK with it.

Everyone in the firearm community should know that GOCRA will not compromise our rights. They have been fighting the good fight for us since 1989, and we enjoy some of the best firearm laws in the country as a result. If anyone (especially the strib) makes the assertion that GOCRA is doing anything but standing with firm resolve in defending and furthering our rights, there is a 99.9999999999999% change they're full of $hit, so don't believe them. Don't propagate the lie, and don't turn your back on an organization that's fighting and winning for you. If anything, it's a good time to donate a few extra bucks to them just to show the liars and spin doctors that we're not taking the bait, and that we as community stand united in our beliefs and convictions.

GOCRA are the good guys. They are in fact the only reason we enjoy the right to keep and bear arms the way we currently do in MN.

[Pat Cannon]

As a general rule, the press is going to get the story wrong concerning firearms. Every time. Especially the strib.

This was in fact a win for us. The infringements in the original Bloomberg bill have all been removed. This is not what the anti-gun zealots wanted. They wanted the infringements to pass, and they got none of them. The strib is obviously spinning for the anti-gunners. Spinning really, really hard. Basically blatantly lying, as evidenced by the fabricated quote by Rob Doar. They are nothing but a propaganda rag.

The up side is, the opposition may take the attitude that the've made progress and can go home.

[steve4102]

As a general rule, the press is going to get the story wrong concerning firearms. Every time. Especially the strib.

This was in fact a win for us. The infringements in the original Bloomberg bill have all been removed. This is not what the anti-gun zealots wanted. They wanted the infringements to pass, and they got none of them. The strib is obviously spinning for the anti-gunners. Spinning really, really hard. Basically blatantly lying, as evidenced by the fabricated quote by Rob Doar. They are nothing but a propaganda rag.

The up side is, the opposition may take the attitude that the've made progress and can go home.

Good Luck with that.

That ain't never gunna happen !!

[tman]

3. Bob gets served notice of this order.

Someone actually mails him a piece of paper or do they still do the notice-by-publication thing?

Orders for protection need to be personally served on all parties. Service by publication is a last resort when a party is either ducking service, or the court truly doesn't know where to look for them.


Sent from my iPad using that app which shall not be named.

[Bearcatrp]

Anyone care to post what the condtions are to get an order of protection? Are they easy or hard to get?

[Erud]

Anyone care to post what the condtions are to get an order of protection? Are they easy or hard to get?

To the best of my knowledge, it is just a matter of going to the courthouse and filling out the paperwork. I believe a temporary order is automatically served based on the initial filing, and is in effect until a judge hears the case. Basically, the party having the order filed on them is guilty until they get their day in court to prove himself not so. I know some folks who have had their lives turned upside-down by vindictive, estranged wives during the divorce process by this process.

If I am mistaken, hopefully one of our resident LEO's will correct me.

[jshuberg]

There is a difference between a restraining order and an order of protection. Google is your friend.

[Erud]

There is a difference between a restraining order and an order of protection. Google is your friend.

I've got enough friends already. If you know more about this topic than I do (which would be pretty easy for me to believe), please feel free to enlighten me, and anyone else who may not know the difference.

[jshuberg]

I could, but it's not necessary and simply muddies the topic of this discussion.

For the purposes of this discussion, when passed MN state law will reflect current federal law, except that a prohibited person must document the disposition of his firearms for the court. The substance of the bill - who, why and when they become a prohibited person has not changed. As such GOCRA no longer opposes it. Andrew and Rob were in fact instrumental in assisting the author in removing any new firearm restrictions from the bill, and ensuring that due process be provided to anyone accused.

The topic of this thread is about GOCRA and new firearm restrictions in the bill, of which there are none. The title of the thread is in fact wrong and I would respectfully request that the OP or mod change the title so as not to give the wrong impression.

[642rUS]

I've been lobbying for GOCRA for more than 25 years.

Much of what we do is killing bad ideas before they become bills and kill bad bills before hearing.
Often there is (cannot be) publication about this. If we educate a Legislator and get him to cooperate there is no gain to publically declaring his idea to have been foolish. We might have to (or want to) deal with him again.

Lobbying is a chess game. The intent of a move may not be visible until the next session. GOCRA is in it for the long haul.

We try to be courteous winners. We don't know how to lose (it's '94 or '95 since we took a big one).

[northerner1]

Title corrected per jshuberg's suggestion. Thanks to those involved for the clarification.

[farmerj]

Anyone care to post what the condtions are to get an order of protection? Are they easy or hard to get?

I am going to TRY to keep this from frustrating me.

You get the forms here:
http://www.mncourts.gov/?page=513

or else at the court house clerk of courts office. You can also get them from a victims advocate in the police or sheriff's office. Some counties, the VA is in the county attorneys office.

To fill out the restraining order, requires a $300 filing fee as well.
http://www.mncourts.gov/default.aspx?pa ... tegory=255


To File an OFP or Child protection order is free.
Order For Protection
http://www.mncourts.gov/default.aspx?pa ... tegory=242

Child protection order
http://www.mncourts.gov/default.aspx?pa ... ategory=43

The big difference between a restraining order and an order for protection is relationship. A husband/wife/mistress/boyfriend/girlfriend/son/daughter is an OFP. Two people who work together, an errant customer in a store would be a restraining order.

As to the original topic, VAWA and Lautenburg already directly address this issue. With an OFP in place, you are a prohibited person. With a DV conviction, you are a prohibited person. This bill was nothing more than an attempt to do something at the state level a federal law already controls. There is no 3-day provision in the law as it is written right now to allow you to turn your weapons over. Generally, when the served party is given the papers for the OFP, the officer serving them asks if there are weapons owned by the individual. At which time the officer takes possession immediately. The OFP, as I understand it from an attorney and a judge is "the warrant" for them to search the residence for weapons. A receipt is given with serial number and description. When the OFP expires, you get to go to the LE center and get your property back.

What is interesting also is that VAWA and Lautenburg not only criminalize the possession of weapons, but also ammunition AND components of ammunition.

As to the "conditions" to get one put against you? All a woman has to do is state that they are afraid for their safety and fill out the forms. Hand them to the court and generally within 24 hours she will have an Ex Parte (emergency). It is not automatic. It is reviewed by a judge. Sometimes he will have a short hearing, other times he reviews the forms and signs them. Within 5 days, there must be a full hearing to issue a full OFP. I have seen men with black eyes, fingernail gouges and other injuries NOT receive an OFP even when it was known that the spouse caused the injuries.

An OFP is currently the BEST and most damaging way a vindictive wife WILL use to get immediate custody from a father. It does not surprise me that bloombergs troops would be going this route. Several years ago, MN modified their OFP laws to allow it to be put in place for 50 YEARS instead of 12 months. A first time OFP is now put in place for 24 months. As someone stated above....."Until you can prove your innocence."

Basically, the party having the order filed on them is guilty until they get their day in court to prove himself not so.

http://www.ejfi.org/
http://www.batteredmen.com/
http://www.dadsdivorce.com/