Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim S who wrote (22415)	6/27/2006 4:29:14 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543974

Not sure if we are talking about the same case but I am familiar with a splashy case in which the guns were confiscated before the order was served, thus, no notice. It's a technicality but if the guy has the money for a lawyer, he's got the right to make a big deal out of technicalities. If the order continues or there was a conviction, the bottom line is that he still can't keep the guns. I would imagine that someone subject to the order could let a friend keep them for him while the case was pending, or give them away, or sell them. Seems like it would be up to the victim to let the cops and the court know about the guns, although I have heard of one case in another state where the perp lied to the cops about the guns and then shot the victim dead. But restraining orders won't stop a person determined to do harm to the victim. They restrain people who flew off the handle or have a mean streak, but if they're sick in the head, these orders don't do any good.