The article answers your question (but on a localized scale...not national yet).healthinsp wrote:Who do you think is going to come and take them and on whose orders?
So the same who and under the same authority (who = police, whose orders = government) as when the firearms are taken after a domestic violence conviction or subject to a final restraining order. Everything will be "legal" because the government makes the rules (and enforces them). The only practical way this can happen though is if the government has a gun registry, which D.C. has...hence why they can now successfully take the next step of confiscation.Temporary restraining orders generally are given for a two-week period to allow time to set up a court date for the accused to defend himself or herself before a judge.
Under these proposals, firearms could be taken during that period -- as opposed to current law which only allows for that to happen when someone is convicted of domestic violence or subject to a final restraining order.
So the point is that we have a domestic example happening right before our eyes or a place that has gun registration, and now they really are trying to confiscate. But notice it is another baby step...it is only taking them for the 2 weeks. It is a "common sense" step that will be used as precedent to expand further.