American Bar Association Continues to Attack Gun Owners, Due Process

[RugersGR8]

https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...on-continues-to-attack-gun-owners-due-process
American Bar Association Continues to Attack Gun Owners, Due Process
Friday, August 18, 2017

Fleshing out the proposal, the ABA resolution states that the legislation should contain the following three provisions,

1. That a person (a “petitioner”) with documented evidence that another person (a “respondent”) poses a serious threat to himself or herself or others may petition a court for an order temporarily suspending the respondent’s possession of a firearm or ammunition;
2. That there shall be a verifiable procedure to ensure the surrender of firearms and ammunition pursuant to the court order; and
3. That the issuance of the gun violence restraining order shall be reported to appropriate state or federal databases in order to prevent respondent from passing a background check required to purchase a firearm or obtain a firearm license or permit while [the] restraining order is in effect.

The ABA resolution contains no provisions or language meant to secure, or even acknowledge, the rights of the target of a gun violence restraining order.

 

[chuter]

Maybe a lot of lawyers in the lib population centers....?

 

[Dave70968]

The ABA has long had a liberal bent.

 

[dennishoddy]

The ABA has long had a liberal bent.

Why? If they had a proper education, they would not look to the left, but be in the middle looking at both sides. If you're defending or prosecuting the law, you have to be in the middle to not be biased.
I know that's a unicorn and rainbow dream, but that is the way it should be for that profession.

 

[KOPBET]

I'm with Garth on this one...

 

[Chuckie]

Correct me if I'm misguided but the way I read this is that if someone thinks you might be a danger to them, they can get an order that would take your firearms and ammunition away [never to be seen again]?

 

[RugersGR8]

Here are some lawyer jokes. The second joke(Two lawyers had been stranded on a deserted island for several months ...) seems to be especially appropriate in describing the barrister/counsel "profession".



http://www.emmitsburg.net/humor/archives/lawyer/lawyer2.htm

 

[Annie]

Why? If they had a proper education, they would not look to the left, but be in the middle looking at both sides. If you're defending or prosecuting the law, you have to be in the middle to not be biased.
I know that's a unicorn and rainbow dream, but that is the way it should be for that profession.

That is NOT how the legal system works, nor are attorneys "educated" to be unbiased. They are taught to defend their position, based upon the facts placed into stipulation, and the evidence, to the best of their ability to reach a certain outcome. Their ethical obligations are to their "client" -- for the DA, that client is "the people"; for a criminal defense attorney, that client is the guy paying his bill, and his representation of said client is not based on being unbiased. It is based on presenting "the facts" in a light most beneficial to his client. To do anything less is an ethical breach and can be grounds for a conviction to be overruled in an appeal.

Same is true in civil cases. An attorney's duty is to represent his clients best interests without actually committing a crime himself. Lots of room for a bazillion shades of grey.

There is NEVER "one truth" in the vast majority if cases out there.

 

[dennishoddy]

That is NOT how the legal system works, nor are attorneys "educated" to be unbiased. They are taught to defend their position, based upon the facts placed into stipulation, and the evidence, to the best of their ability to reach a certain outcome. Their ethical obligations are to their "client" -- for the DA, that client is "the people"; for a criminal defense attorney, that client is the guy paying his bill, and his representation of said client is not based on being unbiased. It is based on presenting "the facts" in a light most beneficial to his client. To do anything less is an ethical breach and can be grounds for a conviction to be overruled in an appeal.

Same is true in civil cases. An attorney's duty is to represent his clients best interests without actually committing a crime himself. Lots of room for a bazillion shades of grey.

There is NEVER "one truth" in the vast majority if cases out there.

I know that. My post was in sarcasm. I don't live in a bubble.

 

[Annie]

I know that. My post was in sarcasm. I don't live in a bubble.

Haha! Need to push that sarcasm button a little harder next time ... I had a houseful of boys and was there for unfamiliar with unicorns and rainbows until just now ...