Ever wonder what the argument against protecting domestic abuse victims

[flamin lib]

from gun violence is? Just check out the article here:

NRA opposition forces New Orleans lawmaker to gut anti-domestic violence bill
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/05/nra_domestic_violence_louisian.html

The House's Administration of Criminal Justice Committee was hearing a bill aimed at strengthening laws to protect victims of domestic violence. Among the provisions were enhanced penalties for strangulation, enhanced penalties for violations of protective orders and an expansion of the type of offenders who qualify to be charged with domestic abuse battery.
=====
The last two to testify before the panel vote were Tara Mitchell, with the National Rifle Association, and Bradley Gulotta, from Guns Across America. They opposed the bill.
=====
Opponents said "dating partner" can be too broadly interpreted; the 10-year firearm prohibition could apply to a much larger group of people. It might apply, one witness said, to someone who has been on a single date. Another opponent said the proposed law would invite false accusations.

"We don't need to rush to take away people's rights just because they made a mistake," Gulotta said. "Not everyone who got in an argument -- had a push, had a shove -- is gong to come back and do more bodily harm or be a danger to other people."

Mitchell said the NRA could support the provision that increases penalties for violating protective orders. But a 10-year prohibition "on a constitutional right" applied under such broad terms was "just not something we can support."

Four paragraphs can't do justice to the arguments on this bill. The sponsor of the bill, Phillip Gouaux, testified that his ex-SIL had drown his current wife, came to his house and wounded him, killed Goraux's wife and shot his daughter. The provisions of the proposed bill might have prevented this bastard from getting or owning a gun.

The NRA opposed expanding the definition of domestic abuse to dating partner because it would expand the number of people subject to a 10 year gun ban. They opposed the addition of strangulation to domestic abuse as a felony because Federal Law prohibits felons having guns. They opposed the dating partner inclusion because it "might invite false accusations". They opposed increasing stalking in domestic abuse cases because Federal Law prohibits felons owning guns (75% of Domestic abuse homicides are preceded by stalking).

More than half dozen people testified in favor of the bill. Only two opponents were able to kill it.

Un-fucking believable.

[BainsBane]

1. Don't take away the right to kill

God forbid. Truly evil, to the core.

[-none]

2. How can you sell more guns if the customers are defined as felons because of abuse?

What of the Rights of abusive felons to have guns? They haven't lost control and shot anyone yet.
Aren't they good guys with guns until then? If they shoot anyone, they are criminals, so they don't count anymore.

The stupidly of some people knows no bounds. Guns are deadly weapons and we need to treat them as such, by restricting them from those that are obviously, or even suspected of being a danger to others.