USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “A judge last month ordered [Harvey] Weinstein to submit to round-the-clock GPS monitoring and to restrict his travel to New York and Connecticut,” The Los Angeles Times reported in early June. “Weinstein also surrendered his passport, and one of the alleged victims has obtained a restraining order against him.”
“Restraining order”? Don’t those generally include firearm prohibitions? Since Weinstein has long made clear his contempt for the right of the people to keep and bear arms, including notoriously boasting he would make NRA members “wish they weren’t alive,” his being ordered a “prohibited person” before being convicted of any crime would seem fittingly ironic. Unfortunately, as draconian as its state laws are, the authority of a court to order to remove firearms on a non-domestic violence charge against someone who has maintained residences in West Village, the Hamptons, Westport, CT, and Hollywood, CA, is unclear.
Intuitively, you’d think someone indicted by a grand jury on criminal counts including “Sexual act in the first degree … Rape in the first degree [and] Rape in the Third Degree” would be subject to a TRO on guns,(Update- since possession is illegal under federal law) but wanting to be sure, I submitted a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office:
“I am requesting a copy of the restraining order issued at the request of Manhattan District Attorney’s Office lead prosecutor Joan Illuzzi and issued by New York City Criminal Court Judge Kevin McGrath on or about May 25, 2018. I am particularly interested to report if the order included a requirement to surrender firearms.”
The only anticipated problem was it might contain the unreleased name of the person obtaining the protective order, but that could be overcome by a simple redaction. The only anticipated problem…
“Access is necessarily denied to any records pertaining to an active prosecution, since disclosure would interfere with a criminal proceeding, as well as with any further investigation and future judicial proceedings that might be necessary,” Records Officer Robin McCabe replied, denying the FOIL request.
How that would be any more interfering than the published record of indictment is unstated, particularly since a petition to the State Supreme Court by the Attorney General is also a public record. (Note it was filed in February by then-AG Eric Schneiderman, himself a committed gun-grabber who has since resigned in disgrace after he was accused by multiple women of “nonconsensual physical violence.”)
It’s almost like there’s a common thread here.
Scneiderman’s 40-page petition makes for an interesting read. With the understanding that allegations are not the same as findings of guilt, some of them, if proven, say much about “progressive” hypocrisy and the elitist mindset. Case in point, big “liberal” Democrats represent themselves as the arbiters of social justice and tolerance, and the champions of the little guy.
Look on page 10 at how Harvey is reported to have treated powerless, low-level employees, and what he really thinks about another important “progressive” constituency:
“…HW told a male assistant he was fired for—as reflected in an email sent by the assistant to the head of Human Resources about the incident—being “just a f-ing f-got boy, a stupid f-ing f-got boy.” HW routinely used similar epithets attacking employees’ masculinity.”
That’s relevant because, rather than embrace the right of all people to possess the means of defense, the radical LGBT community has joined with Parkland “survivors” and come out strongly in favor of citizen disarmament, something that enabled the Pulse Nightclub attacker to commit mass atrocities unopposed. Marginalized-by-the-“left” groups like Pink Pistols aren’t afforded anywhere near the media forum or recognition within “progressive” circles.
As much as Democrats try to paint gun owners as haters it’s not us trying to keep minorities (and everyone else) disarmed. Gun owner rights advocates properly understand that there is no more egalitarian power-sharing arrangement than the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
It may turn out that Weinstein does not personally own any firearms and relegates the task of carrying them (in places “ordinary” citizens may not) to bodyguards (but I wouldn’t bet on it). Regardless, those he would see disarmed (including those whose families he allegedly said he would kill on page 12 of the petition) have every right to see if a judge has temporarily ordered him to be a “prohibited person.” Manhattan DA Records Officer McCabe’s rationale for refusal to produce the protective order smacks more of toeing her oath-breaking gun-grabber boss Cyrus Vance’s line than anything legitimate, and an appeal will be filed in the coming days with the Special Litigation Bureau.
- Harvey Weinstein Won’t Be Keeping Promise to Make NRA Members Regret Being Alive
- Dare Harvey Weinstein to Make Good on Anti-Gun Movie Threat
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.
In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.