Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

niyad

(112,435 posts)
33. not surprised at your response. now, kindly cite the link where I ever said what you italicized.
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 11:24 AM
Jan 2014

keep trying, though. at this point, you are only making yourself look ridiculous. remdi95

. . . niyad Jan 2014 #1
I am not a lawyer, but I suspect the Supreme Court will overturn this ban. nt Demo_Chris Jan 2014 #2
You're probably right... Wounded Bear Jan 2014 #3
not to mention, women do not seem to count (witness them discussing the "safe zones" at niyad Jan 2014 #5
think you are probably correct. niyad Jan 2014 #4
I can't see them doing that. NutmegYankee Jan 2014 #6
I suspect (no expert) that the issue will be the permanent loss of rights for a misdemeanor... Demo_Chris Jan 2014 #7
the fact that domestic abuse is a misdemeanor is pretty disgusting. niyad Jan 2014 #11
There are degrees JJChambers Jan 2014 #14
Think this through all the way. Some domestic abuse SHOULD be a misdemeaner at best. nt Demo_Chris Jan 2014 #17
do you work with domestic abuse victims? have you seen what happens? I have. niyad Jan 2014 #20
Work with them? No. Seen what can happen? Yes.... Demo_Chris Jan 2014 #29
try telling that to the victims I have seen and worked with. niyad Jan 2014 #30
Round them up and I will tell them. They will say "Yeah, no shit." Demo_Chris Jan 2014 #32
not surprised at your response. now, kindly cite the link where I ever said what you italicized. niyad Jan 2014 #33
No, it's a debate over some minor phrasing in the law. NutmegYankee Jan 2014 #13
incorrect. It's whether the conviction must include violence as an element. geek tragedy Jan 2014 #39
I don't read it as a question of overturning the Lautenberg Amendment, but petronius Jan 2014 #9
Dream on. nt geek tragedy Jan 2014 #40
Re-arming domestic abusers? Lunacee_2013 Jan 2014 #8
The threshold for permanently losing a civil right should be high hack89 Jan 2014 #28
domestic abuse is non-violent? really????? niyad Jan 2014 #31
They are trying to define the limits of "physical force" hack89 Jan 2014 #34
absolutely amazing. non-violent domestic abuse. niyad Jan 2014 #35
The law was poorly written - what can I say? hack89 Jan 2014 #36
what can you say? how about one iota of concern for the victims? niyad Jan 2014 #37
I am just pointing out the legal issues at stake hack89 Jan 2014 #38
This. redqueen Jan 2014 #10
given the other insanity of the supremes this week, have to wonder what in the hell they are smoking niyad Jan 2014 #12
Did any of them happen to visit... Lancero Jan 2014 #18
you almost owed me a keyboard. niyad Jan 2014 #21
I am terrified frazzled Jan 2014 #15
I think you are quite correct, although the word irrational is a very mild description of the niyad Jan 2014 #16
The victims and everyone around them kcr Jan 2014 #19
Indeed. See the "Azana Spa shooting" in Brookfield, WI in 2012. PeaceNikki Jan 2014 #25
That was was I was thinking of kcr Jan 2014 #26
Gun clutchers will state that he was in violation of the law when that happened, and that is true. PeaceNikki Jan 2014 #27
+1000 nt ecstatic Jan 2014 #22
. . niyad Jan 2014 #23
K&R Solly Mack Jan 2014 #24
... redqueen Jan 2014 #41
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»supreme court will decide...»Reply #33