http://www.startribune.com/politics/sta ... 49681.html
BEGINNING OF QUOTATIONS FROM THE ARTICLE
Title: Gun restrictions on domestic abusers, stalkers gain bipartisan support in Minnesota
Minnesota could be on the verge of breakthrough changes in some of its gun laws, as a bipartisan group of lawmakers heads toward passing a bill to end firearm ownership for convicted stalkers and domestic abusers.
Minnesota already prevents convicted domestic abusers from owning handguns. The bill would broaden those restrictions to include rifles and any other firearms. It also would prohibit anyone subject to a temporary protective order from having a firearm. The measure would allow those weapons to be turned over to a friend or relative while the order is in effect.
“It’s not perfect, but it’s getting there,” said Rob Doar, a lobbyist for the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance, which has dropped its objection to Schoen’s bill. “We agree with making sure the guns get out of the house.”
State Rep. David Dill, who opposed last year’s measure on background checks, said he is not quite ready to commit to supporting the new measure. He wants to make sure there is ample due process for people subject to restraining orders.
“Domestic abuse is a horrible thing, an awful thing,” said Dill, DFL-Crane Lake. “But I want to make sure there is as much due process and protection in it possible for legal, law-abiding gun owners.”
The measure has strong support from Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the country’s largest gun violence prevention advocacy organization. The group was founded by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has poured millions of dollars of his personal fortune into the cause. Just this month, Bloomberg pledged an additional $50 million to try to match the NRA’s formidable membership base, lobbying force and campaign organization.
“You’ve got to work at it piece by piece,” Bloomberg told the New York Times.
END OF QUOTATIONS FROM THE ARTICLE
I appreciate GOCRA being on the ground at the capitol staying on top of gun-related legislation. I am hoping for some reassuring answers to these questions:
How hard is it to get a temporary restraining order on a person?
What protections does a person have in this bill that an unjust or vengeful accusation (and restraining order) doesn't deprive you of your right to self-defense?
Bloomberg's strategy is a piece by piece dismantling if the right to bear arms. Is it wise to play along?
I can imagine a situation in which a domestic abuser (the bad guy) files a restraining order against his girlfriend (the victim) so she has to give up her firearms and means of defense. Will she be able to protect herself?