Should people convicted of domestic violence lose the right to own guns? | The Tylt
Should people convicted of domestic violence lose the right to own guns?
The Daily Beast reported Hodgkinson "had a long history of domestic violence that included the use of a gun." Gun control advocates say Hodgkinson is just one more perpetrator of domestic violence who should never have been allowed to legally own a gun.
Literally every domestic violence advocate when ppl say a mass shooter had a history of domestic violence re: James T. Hodgkinson pic.twitter.com/hS1qUa87Al
Everytown for Gun Safety released a chilling report on the connection between domestic violence and mass shootings. They also detail the massive loopholes in the gun laws for convicted abusers. Here are just a few highlights:
The laws prohibit convicted abusers from buying new guns, but 41 states allow people convicted of domestic violence to keep the guns they already own.
Despite the fact that unmarried partners kill more U.S. women than husbands do, federal law only applies to people convicted of abusing spouses or family members—what's known as the "boyfriend loophole."
People convicted of misdemeanor stalking are still allowed to buy guns.
And why does a man w history of domestic violence own a gun @ GOP? Good 2 know u r protecting his rights. https://t.co/we3o0foB1F
But gun-control advocates argue people convicted of crimes lose all kinds of rights—the right to free assembly, the right to vote, the right to drive. Shouldn't we all agree that people convicted of violent acts have lost the right to bear arms?
@jaketapper Perpetrators of domestic violence should never, ever be allowed to own guns. Zero tolerance. Zero.