MarketBoyfriend loophole
Company Profile

Boyfriend loophole

The boyfriend loophole is a gap in American gun legislation that allows physically abusive ex-romantic partners and stalkers with previous convictions or restraining orders to access guns. While individuals who have been convicted of, or are under a restraining order for, domestic violence are prohibited from owning a firearm, the prohibition only applies if the victim was the perpetrator's spouse or cohabitant, or if the perpetrator had a child with the victim.

The Lautenberg Amendment
of the United States CongressThe primary gun control legislation in the United States is the Gun Control Act of 1968 (CGA). This is one of the United States federal laws that regulates firearm owners and the firearm industry. This provision, however, did not restrict alleged or convicted domestic violence abusers who continued to purchase guns for self-defense. Therefore, an amendment was introduced in 1996. This amendment is officially called the Gun Ban for Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence, but it is most commonly referred to as the "Lautenberg Amendment". This law was an amendment to the existing felon-in-possession laws and forbade the possession or commercial sale of a firearm by all convicted domestic violence abusers. Specifically, it prohibited this firearm access from anyone who used physical force or threatened to use a weapon against "a person with whom the victim shares a child in common…a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or…a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim". Therefore, the Lautenberg Amendment did not include restrictions for intimate dating partners. This gap is what created the boyfriend loophole. In order to help pass the bill, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and the National Network to End Domestic Violence gave testimony. Additionally, in his address, Senator Lautenberg said that his bill "stands for the simple proposition that if you beat your wife, you should not have a gun". == Constitutional challenges to increase governmental action in response to domestic violence ==
Constitutional challenges to increase governmental action in response to domestic violence
Historically, some believed that domestic violence was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. However, the Supreme Court rejected such arguments, instead stating that the clause does not impose duty upon states to protect people from injury caused by other private individuals. This position was amplified in 1989 in Deshaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, where the Court held that a "State's failure to protect an individual against private violence simply does not constitute a violation of the Due Process Clause." In the case, the Fourteenth Amendment rights of a 4-year-old child were not held to be violated after the child suffered near-fatal abuse that was alleged to have been partly the fault of the state's child protection agency. The Court held that the Constitution does not impose an obligation for the government to provide help, "even when such aid may be necessary to secure life, liberty, or property interests of which government itself may not deprive the individual". Therefore, the police's nonintervention in response to calls of domestic violence, or intimate partner violence, is not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. This being the case, the police or government's inaction in response to intimate dating partner abuse involving firearms is constitutional. Hence, some believe that it is important to implement laws that prevent those who perpetrate intimate partner violence – including dating partners – from obtaining weapons, since there is no guarantee that victims will otherwise have government protection. == Research on intimate partner violence and firearm access ==
Research on intimate partner violence and firearm access
There is a connection between intimate partner violence and firearm use for both dating partners and spouses. Moreover, according to data released in 2018, this continues to be the case. Additionally, reports published by The United States Department of Justice showed that firearms were involved in over two-thirds of ex-spouse homicide incidents over the period 1980 to 2008. Moreover, the Preventative Medicine journal published research on whether intimate partner violence differs based on the type of relationship (spouse or significant other) and relationship status (current partner or former partner). By studying cases of intimate partner violence that occurred in Philadelphia in 2013, researchers found that more than 80% of over 30,000 cases of intimate partner violence involved non-marital intimate partner relationships. In fact, compared to current spouses, current unmarried significant others were found to be most likely to exhibit violent behavior, although they were no more or less likely to use guns in those acts of violence than were spouses. Therefore, the researchers determined that unmarried partners posed an equal or greater risk of intimate partner violence, compared to married partners. The researchers found that the strength of these protections are significant only when they apply to current and former dating partners, rather than only current and former spouses. Additionally, Everytown for Gun Safety conducted an analysis of mass shootings in the United States from 2009 to 2020. The data showed that in at least 53% of mass shootings, the perpetrator shot a current or former intimate partner or family member. In fact, Everytown for Gun Safety reported that domestic-violence related mass shootings account for nearly half of mass shooting deaths in the United States. == Gender and the boyfriend loophole ==
Gender and the boyfriend loophole
Despite its name, the loophole is not gender-specific. However, according to research conducted by advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety, intimate partner violence disproportionately impacts women. Moreover, women of color are disproportionately affected by intimate partner violence perpetuated specifically by men. == The Violence Against Women Act ==
The Violence Against Women Act
In 1994, two years before the introduction of the boyfriend loophole, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. VAWA provides funding for federal investigation and prosecution of domestic violence, and incentivizes states to require the mandatory arrest of abusers. VAWA was reauthorized in 2000, 2005, and 2013, and each reauthorization strengthened its protections. However, in 2018, VAWA lapsed under President Donald Trump. During his candidacy, President Trump was endorsed by the National Rifle Association (NRA), which is the oldest firearm advocacy group in the United States. According to NRA spokeswoman Jennifer Baker, VAWA is "too broad and ripe for abuse". During the 2019 proceedings when Democrats tried to reintroduce VAWA, the NRA issued an alert to members of Congress against its reauthorization. In 2022, there was a Democrat-led movement to close the boyfriend loophole in the reauthorization of VAWA under President Joe Biden. However, according to the NRA, the boyfriend loophole is simply an attempt to increase gun control by Democrats. Hence, Republicans would not agree to passing VAWA if the boyfriend loophole was closed, since they did not want to narrow access to guns. In order to reauthorize VAWA, Democrats limited the scope of the bill. == Current legislation and new federal restrictions ==
Current legislation and new federal restrictions
The Zero Tolerance for Domestic Abuse Act was introduced to Congress on January 15, 2019. This bill would partially close the boyfriend loophole, but it has not yet passed. Additionally, S. 2938, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Biden in June 2022. The Act has significantly narrowed, but not completely closed, the boyfriend loophole. Under the new law, someone convicted of a violent crime against someone with whom they currently are, or previously were, in a dating relationship, is barred from having firearms. ==See also==
tickerdossier.comtickerdossier.substack.com