Should US citizens accused of domestic abuse lose the right to bear arms?

No

5 of 28

by Ken Bradford

• 

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

The thought of any man or woman intentionally inflicting violence or abuse in any domestic relationsip is appalling. Oftentimes, domestic violence begins in a less physical manner with emotional and psychological attacks on the victim, but in many cases of domestic violence the violent behavior will escalate to making threats with guns or other weapons. In many cases these threats are actually carried out.

If we were to make a decision based solely on our logic and our feelings, most of us would probably say that anyone who engages in violent behavior in a marital or live-in relationship, should not have access to a lethal weapon. That would make very good sense.

Whether or not a person "accused" of domestic violence should lose the right to bear arms brings up two very complex and very different issues.

The first issue - "the right to bear arms":
Not every citizen is in agreement that this is an actual "right" given to us in our Constitution, at least not in the manner that some would like to believe. I don't think anyone would disagree that the Constitution gives us the right to bear arms for protection and self-defense.

The second issue - "accused of domestic violence":
We must now look at two Amendments to our Constitution, the Fifth and the Fourteenth:

Fifth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution
" . . .nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;"

Fourteenth Amendment
" . . .nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Some have said that the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of due process only applys to the federal government, while the Fourteenth is applicable to the states. Supreme Court opinions have interpreted the two clauses in an identical manner.

Under most state jurisdictions, the decision whether or not to arrest a person accused of domestic violence rests solely with the police officer who responds to the call. Since the domestic violence laws of most states are complicated and ambiguous, the responding officer can ignore physical evidence or use his own judgment to believe that the case looks suspicious.
This practice can leave women and children in very violent abusive relationships, but on the other hand, a police officer just might arrest someone who has been falsely accused.

False accusations of child abuse and domestic violence are on the rise in divorce and child custody cases. The National District Attorneys Association describes a condition they call "Parental Alienation Syndrome" which normally presents itself in child custody disputes. It is no more than the brainwashing of a child to degrade a particular parent and support a false accusation of abuse or violence.

According to studies performed by the University of Michigan, 60% to 80% of sexual abuse allegations made during contested child custody battles are false and unsubstantiated.

At a Harvard Law School conference in 2000, Judge Rubenstein made the comment that overzealous attorneys see these cases as stepping stones to a higher office and prosecute them very vigorously. Judge Rubenstein went on to say that false accusations of abuse or violence are happening in at least 20% of divorce cases.

Under current laws, it is very easy for a vindictive man or a woman to get a retraining order or order of protection which will place the accused person on a list of "known" batterers.

Until the day our domestic violence laws are changed to include a proper definition of domestic violence with explicit instructions for law enforcement personnel, we just want know who is telling the truth, the alleged abuser or the alledged victim.

Our lack of education, involvement and concern for the epidemic of domestic violence in these United States is allowing the abusers to go free and the victims to continue to suffer. In many cases the end result of domestic violence is murder.

We just cannot take away any citizens Constitutional "right" simply because he/she has been accused of some offense. Our due process system does have a few safeguards, one of which is the "presumption of innocence".

Sources: U. S. Constitution, National District Attorneys Association-American Prosecutors Research Institute, University of Michigan-Professor of Phsychology, Harvard Law School Conference-Day Care Child Sex Abuse Phenomenon-11/18/200 0

Learn more about this author, Ken Bradford.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.