Indiana Protective Orders and Firearms

[SaintsNSinners]

He is my kids babysitters husband.. So up and till all this went down we were kinda chummy....

Since all his drama went down I haven't even talked to him (got my own problems to desl with)

He texted me out of the blue while I was st work tonight. Accusing me of calling his work and getting him fired.. Which I didn't do.

Here are some snippets of his wisdom

 

[Dobber]

I'm gonna ask the simple question:

Did you call his work? Do you know anyone at his work? Could you reasonably be the cause of his undoing?

If not: Any repetition is harassment. Proceed as such.

-Dobber

 

[VUPDblue]

The load of horse crap is, that you think that all it takes is a phone call and the cops will fly in like some kind of super hero and save the day. You think its "simply not true", but I have seen it both ways. I have seen where there was a PO on a guy and not only did he harass and stalk the people, he was also video taped in there yard. City cops were called, and they blew it off, county was called, they blew it off, state said it wasn't there deal and the prosecutor wouldn't do anything either. So tell me how it's not true. Tell me about how you are everywhere and how you know everything.

you're right. im not everywhere. I can say with certainty that the way you describe things is contrary to anything I have ever experienced.

 

[SaintsNSinners]

I'm gonna ask the simple question:

Did you call his work? Do you know anyone at his work? Could you reasonably be the cause of his undoing?

If not: Any repetition is harassment. Proceed as such.

-Dobber

Nope didn't call his work.. I had no involvement in anything till now

 

[Trigger Time]

I don't agree with a judge being able to take away a persons guns via a PO based solely on someone's word (one side of the story). In today's day and age no judge wants to be the one on the news that didn't issue one and had the claimant killed. Sure there are some legit loons that need it but what if a person is innocent and then can't have their guns till a trial? What do they do for defense in between? This is rights infringement from the bench. If a person (man or woman) is such a danger to society then lock them up immediately. Don't just **** them off and then let them stew on the street. Then you end up with what happened up north with the bus and the kid and woman. No real criminal will turn in their guns if told so. Not would most average people if wrongly accused. I think this is an area we need to have fixed by our lawmakers. And it's nothing against the police who are just doing what they are told. But also as stated above in a post that the police do not have to witness a violation of the order to arrest. Well there again it's based on possibly a non credible persons word. How many times do we prosecute the people crying wolf? I'm asking because I don't really know.
I'm sure from a law enforcement persons viewpoint it can be frustrating to see a bad person get away with stuff, but also please look at it from a innocent persons viewpoint too who can see the possibility for improper abuse by a person who jus wants to get back at someone and see their guns taken.
No this hasn't happened to me, but it's just concerning.

 

[VUPDblue]

protection orders arent granted on a whim. they are getting progressively more difficult to issue. just FYI

 

[Trigger Time]

protection orders arent granted on a whim. they are getting progressively more difficult to issue. just FYI

That's good news to a point. Thank you. But I also (no one does) do not want to see necessary ones not get issued to those who rightfully earned them. There's no happy medium on some things I guess.

 

[bwframe]

Sure sounds like something to distance yourself from. Report those txts, change your number, get a new babysitter.

 

[SaintsNSinners]

I'm going to roll an IMPD officer out to talk with him when they aren't busy...

But yeah I found a new sitter till this is over...

 

[Spike_351]

The load of horse crap is, that you think that all it takes is a phone call and the cops will fly in like some kind of super hero and save the day. You think its "simply not true", but I have seen it both ways. I have seen where there was a PO on a guy and not only did he harass and stalk the people, he was also video taped in there yard. City cops were called, and they blew it off, county was called, they blew it off, state said it wasn't there deal and the prosecutor wouldn't do anything either. So tell me how it's not true. Tell me about how you are everywhere and how you know everything.

did you read his post? He is a police officer, you would have known that had you bothered to read the posts first.

 

[Stang51d]

did you read his post? He is a police officer, you would have known that had you bothered to read the posts first.

Yea, I read it/them, and yes, that was clear.. What's your point?

 

[Mango]

Be careful, some on this forum will accuse you of being dramatic, "one of those guys", and a snitch. Wish I was kidding.

Put on your big boy pants. He's got evidence, you've got suspicions.

 

[seabassz]

I have seen protective orders in IN that did not require the respondent to temporarily surrender possession of his firearms to some other responsible person outside his residence. Rare, but I have seen them.

Don't know how to find out if the protective order in question has the condition or not. Call the court's clerk.

 

[iChokePeople]

I have seen protective orders in IN that did not require the respondent to temporarily surrender possession of his firearms to some other responsible person outside his residence. Rare, but I have seen them.

Don't know how to find out if the protective order in question has the condition or not. Call the court's clerk.

It's not rare at all. In Vigo county it's exactly the opposite. Can't speak to other counties.

 

[VUPDblue]

yeah, IME the Brady disqualification is fairly rare for the number of POs I come across

 

[Cowboy76]

I have a huge problem with protective orders in my opinion they clearly violate the constitution. A person is deemed guilty until proven innocent.

I was served with one during my divorce, totally BS. Yes I did have surrender my guns. The PO was dropped but I had to wait to get my guns back, (partly lawyers fault).

Yes I will be that guy don't be a snitch. If he is truely unstable when he comes after you deal with it. Most people aren't in there right minds during a divorce, all kinds of head games are played by both sides to manipulate the system.

 

[Movealongmovealong]

If you didn't call his work, then I'd just tell him.

You could also ask him "Who told you that I am the person who called?" because someone might trying to direct some crap at you. It would also show him that you are concerned and probably make him feel a lot less apprehensive toward you.

Don't let someone else make their problems with this guy your problem, too.

A simple text like "Hey man, I can tell you are pissed, but I've got to tell you that I did no such thing as contact your workplace about anything. In fact, if someone did tell you that I contacted them, I would like to know who it was because they are slandering me. Your personal business is your business, and I respect that boundary."

I'm going to take a not-so-wild guess that your former babysitter is using your name without your knowledge to divert Mr. Guy's attention away from herself.

 

[in625shooter]

I am a little late to this but (DISCLAIMER, not defending anything just merley explaining what happened etc) Actually it is agaisnt Federal Law to have any firearms while you have a Protective Order. I use to work for the U.S. Marshals Service. I had to pick up a guy that a county arrested for an unrelated charge and ATF had a detainer on him because when he was pulled over the local LEO's found a shotgun in his car while he had a restraining order. There was more to it than that with some other history with him but that was the ATF's and the U.S. Attorney's office call.

Personally if it was up to me it should be a case by case basis instead of a blanket policy but I'm not running things or will I ever be.

http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/i/atf-i-3310-2.pdf

 

[iChokePeople]

Um... did you actually read that? The part in bold italics? Are you under the impression that most protective orders meet those requirements?

 

[in625shooter]

Um... did you actually read that? The part in bold italics? Are you under the impression that most protective orders meet those requirements?

Yes I did. I posted this as an in general FYI kind of thing. While there are stipulations on everything if it is not specified in the order by a Judge (like would be in a case if say an LEO or Military member had a restraining or protective order agaisnt them but they were required to use a firearm for work) there "might" be an exception to a firearms possession wwhile having an order against them but that is a rare exception.

Does every case get prosecuted? No. Could it? prosecutory discretion aka maybe! We all can find some kind of exception to everything but like with the example I gave the ATF pushed to be procecuted, there is usually more to the story or the person in question is on the radar in a bad way. If the ATF or US Attorney prosecuted every case where someone with an order had a firearm they wouldn't have time for anything else. But everyone is free to do what their career or checkbook can handle!