Via Uncle: Investigation Leads To Gun Permit Suspensions

Tennessee:

More than 150 people, most in conflict with women, have had their handgun carry permits suspended as a result of a Channel 4 I-Team investigation.

The investigation not only exposed people served with orders of protection allowed to have handgun carry permits despite a state law but also a major hole in a system to protect domestic violence victims.

First, this is the law so it’s the legal thing to do. If someone doesn’t like it, the law needs to be changed.

Second, this represents about 0.08% of the concealed carry permit holders in the state. Not 8%. Not 0.8%. 0.08%. One out of every 1,250.

The article ends with

Not everyone served with an order of protection has a propensity for violence.

But everyone served with an order of protection has their carry permit revoked.

Why not get someone to rule on whether they should have their permit pulled on a case by case basis, with the burden of proof on the court to revoke it?

Are they saying that someone who is going to break a protection order to commit murder will change their mind because they cannot legally carry a concealed weapon?

I wrote about protection orders and other feel goodness last week.

UPDATE: A couple of additional thoughts. It might be that getting a protection order requires a threat of some sort, in which case that would satisfy my “rule on whether they should have their permit pulled” suggestion.

Also, in Michigan it appears that firearms possession restrictions are optional when personal protection orders are issued. If someone knows better please let me know.

The killer in the story I linked to on Friday had a PPO issued against him.

Tags: MI, TN

This entry was posted on Monday, December 22nd, 2008 at 6:55 pm and is filed under CCW, Crime and Violence, Legal. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.