Editor’s Note: The following letter is in response to a column in the Feb. 22 issue by Jodie Sinclair.
This column relies heavily on information in a Texas Tribune article. In her column, Ms Sinclair expresses considerable emotion and concern that a man can possess guns even tho the subject of “a protective order.” Presumably her concern applies to all significant others, not just men, but more important is the collision in our legal system of a local court’s restraining order, often filed as a matter of routine in petitions for divorce - whether any violence or threat of same has been made - and the 2nd Amendment right that has been a part of the US Constitution for well over 200 years.
Obviously, if one party in a relationship is in danger of physical harm rendered by the other, our often overworked law enforcement and judicial system need to take steps to ensure it doesn’t happen. At the same time a restraining order, and the looming confiscation of firearms (with or without due process), are not going to stop a determined individual bent on doing harm.
Domestic violence is very difficult issue and one that almost all law enforcement officers dread. But right now it appears to many of us that women are in a greater danger of violence by criminals released on the streets by liberal courts and, e.g., George Soros-funded district attorneys, than they are of a three judge panel of Trump and Reagan appointees. If I were advising my sister, or niece or female friend in a domestic violence situation, I would suggest they arm themselves and get firearms training.