It should on the other hand be relatively easy to get a restraining order. Why not? If someone doesn't want you around, why do you need to be around?
Restraining orders are not used in those cases.
Restraining orders are used for those cases where one side continues to stalk, threaten, abuse the other side.
it's more a case of "someone doesn't want you around, why do you keep coming around?"
You are wrong, but that doesn't change my point. What is the standard of proof in getting a restraining order? Should that be sufficient for you to lose any legal rights?
There are all kinds of restraining orders, so which ones suspend your 2nd amendment rights? Any other rights that are suspended?http://info.legalzoom.com/restraining-orders-standard-divorce-24933.html
A restraining order prevents a person from taking a certain action, and two types of restraining orders are common in the context of divorce: automatic restraining orders and domestic violence restraining orders.
And in the case of a divorce, would a judge set a high bar to issue a restraining order prohibiting them from contacting each?
Why should you have to go to court to fight a restraining order in order to be able to go duck hunting?
A disgruntled ex could really screw over her cop or security guard husband if she request a restraining order and he couldn't do his job or just wanted to screw up his hunting season.
You should be able to not contest it and not lose anything by not contesting it. Otherwise, the law could force you to contest a restrain order from someone that you believe is freaking insane and you want nothing to do with. BTW, restraining orders are typically reciprocal meaning that that nutjob ex cannot come near you either, so it's a win-win unless they take your rights away.
If the individual did not break the law, he should not be punished. If he did
Innocent until proven guilty means you get to keep your 2nd amendment rights.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.