I am still steamed about this.

[JayG23]

It's likely that as soon as he completes the condition of his Family Service Plan, they will close the case and he can get his guns back.

LycanalthoughIdon'tknowthedetailsthrope

If someone picks on him again with Child and Youth sometime down the road, and his gun was discovered, would they howl about 'violation of an earlier condition' and rake him over the coals?

[max384]

Ok, at a bday party today I found out that a second judge ruled that even though the child and youth felt threatened by my nephew having a gun - he is allowed to have it.

However the judge said, "I have my personal feelings about guns but legally he has a right."

So he has his gun back.

Good to hear that a second judge has some sense about him. It's refreshing to hear that even though the judge sounds anti-gun, he still recognizes that he must uphold the law, not his personal opinions.

[headcase]

Good to hear that a second judge has some sense about him. It's refreshing to hear that even though the judge sounds anti-gun, he still recognizes that he must uphold the law, not his personal opinions.

^^^^^^^^^^this^^^^^^^^^^

[grandmaterkathy]

As a former case manager (years ago) I saw so many times that the men got the short end of the stick. This has just gotten even more so since NO Fault divorce came into PA.
The children have been forgotten (again IMHO) since the sexual revolution of the 60s. Both men and women should held responsible for their actions.
No one should have their guns removed because someone is afraid of guns. Our 2nd rights should over shadow another's unfounded fears.
I had one family where the man would wait outside of the courthouse and then follow me in his car for a couple of hours. I did not go near where I lived for fear of my families safety. This did not stop till I drive into the parking lot of the PA State Police. So I do see both sides.