A judge in Ardmore, Alabama twice denied Debra Ann Rivera protective orders against her ex-husband, Darwin Brazier — including requests that his firearms be taken away from him due to alleged stalking. On Sunday, Brazier killed Rivera, two other people and himself.
The Decatur Daily reported Tuesday that Brazier on Sunday killed his ex-wife and her husband Radex Rivera, along with the couple’s roommate James Hayward-Boger.
Rivera had most recently filed for a protective order on March 1, 2018 after her ex allegedly called her so much that she had to change her phone number. Limestone County Circuit Judge Chad Wise granted the order on a temporary basis, but on April 10 declined to make the order permanent.
In March of 2017, Rivera petitioned Judge Wise to issue a protection-from-abuse order against Brazier and asked that his firearms be surrendered. The judge denied the request.
“In the 2017 petition, Rivera alleged that Brazier had stolen her personal contacts and had placed a GPS tracker in her car,” the Daily‘s report noted. “She claimed he provided personal information about her to a convicted felon so the felon could harass her.”
Photo: Mugshot for alleged killer Darwin Brazier (left) and official photo for Limestone County Circuit Judge Chad Wise (right).
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
4 Dead and 4 Injured With 2 ‘Shot in the Back of the Head’ in Second Chicago Mass Shooting in Four Days
Four people were shot to death and another four people were injured in the second mass shooting in Chicago in four days. Two of the injured were “shot in the back of the head,” according to WTTW.
Citing police, the report says “shots were fired following an argument. The shooting occurred at roughly 5:42 a.m. and four victims were pronounced dead at the scene.”
“This is the second mass shooting Chicago has seen in the last four days” ABC affiliate WLS adds. “A 29-year-old mother of three was killed in a Chatham shooting that left nine others hurt on Saturday morning.”
Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot “blamed illegal guns for the mass shooting, and said the city needs federal help to help stem the flow of violence. Lightfoot said the White House reached out early Tuesday to offer assistance.”
According to the Gun Violence Archive there have been 275 mass shootings this year. 19,920 people have been killed by guns this year, including by suicide.
This is a breaking news and developing story.
‘Guns Apocalypse’: Legal Experts Deliver Warnings After Supreme Court Decides to Take Up Big Second Amendment Case
Could Make It ‘Easier to Have a Gun Than a Car’
Legal experts are issuing warnings after the U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday it will take up a major Second Amendment case, its first in a decade – and warning of a “guns apocalypse” given the extremely conservative makeup of the Court.
“This case is likely to pave the way to the Supreme Court declaring a constitutional right to concealed public carry, overriding many state and local restrictions on the ability to bear concealed arms in public,” Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern writes.
In theory what that might mean is not only an explosion of people carrying guns, but people carrying guns that you cannot see – until it’s too late. It quite literally is the Republican Party’s dream.
Vox’s Ian Millhiser warns “The Supreme Court guns apocalypse is now upon us.”
The case is New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett. Millhiser says the Supreme Court’s ruling in the case, which would come in about a year from now, “could transform the judiciary’s understanding of the Second Amendment and lay waste to many of the nation’s gun laws.”
In short, he says, it “could make the NRA’s dreams come true.”
The case, as Millhiser describes it, focuses on a 108-year old New York State law that requires anyone who wants a gun to obtain a permit, and to show “proper cause,” in other words, to prove they have a need for it. Someone “who merely wants to carry a gun, because of a general belief that it would be useful if they are ever the victim of a violent crime, cannot obtain a license.”
The Second Amendment has just 27 words: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The 6-3 “Trump Court” is more than likely to strike down the New York law.
“Indeed,” Millhiser writes, “Corlett could potentially dismantle more than a decade of judicial decisions interpreting the Second Amendment, imposing prohibitive limits on lawmakers’ ability to reduce gun violence.”
To paraphrase Oprah, “And you get a gun, and you get a gun, and you get a gun.”
Here’s what some other legal experts are saying:
Former DOJ prosecutor:
Get ready to see exactly what a 6-3 Republican stacked supreme court means in this case that will decide whether or not people have a personal right to carry a concealed weapon in the city while walking around.https://t.co/dHqdA4rWDY
— Michael J. Stern (@MichaelJStern1) April 26, 2021
Law professor, Georgia State Law:
I have a bad feeling there’s going to be some truly atrocious 14th Amendment originalism about gun ownership and Reconstruction that will irk me for the next year.
— Anthony Michael Kreis (@AnthonyMKreis) April 26, 2021
Former US Attorney, now MSNBC/NBC Legal analyst and Law Professor:
Given the views of Trump’s justices, this case likely furthers the jurisprudence of making it easier to have a gun than a car, with no training, in an environment where mass shootings frequently take lives. So, not exactly the well regulated militia the 2nd Amendment envisions. https://t.co/4cpPJ286xp
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) April 26, 2021
Slate’s Stern (quoted above), author of “American Justice 2019: The Roberts Court Arrives”:
Just last month, the conservative Judge Jay Bybee penned an extraordinary 127-page opinion canvassing the history of firearm laws and concluding that there is plainly no constitutional rights to public carry. Do not expect his view to prevail at SCOTUS. https://t.co/SuPl6w2tj3
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) April 26, 2021
Attorney, politics and law reporter at NY’s Fox5:
Next SCOTUS term could very well include major guns, abortion, and affirmative action cases that will end with decisions revealing the true legacy of Trump’s four years in office https://t.co/yPH4FvjEKR
— Mike Sacks (@MikeSacksEsq) April 26, 2021
NRA Snuffs Out Background Checks Bill as a ‘Non-Starter’ – and Falsely Claims Its ‘5 Million’ Members Agree
On the same day a group dedicated to protecting children from gun violence released a difficult-to-watch viral video, the top gun lobby group issued a statement insisting universal background checks legislation is a “non-starter.” The NRA also falsely claimed its “5 million members” oppose background checks too.
“This missive is a non-starter with the NRA and our 5 million members because it burdens law-abiding gun owners while ignoring what actually matters: fixing the broken mental health system and the prosecution of violent criminals,” Jason Ouimet, the executive director of the NRA’s activist arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, said, according to Politico.
The “missive” is a draft of a gun background check proposal the White House has begun circulating among lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
While House Democrats have sent several gun control and background check bills to the Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has totally deferred to President Trump, as if he were the Senate Majority Leader. In fact, McConnell says he will not even consider any legislation until President Trump gives it his blessing.
Despite that President Trump more than a month ago promised America he would sign a background check bill, as usual he caved when the NRA came calling. He then started claiming – falsely – that mental health, not easy access to guns, is the real problem.
The NRA has the exact same position, as they noted today.
Meanwhile, polls show that “83 percent of gun owners support expanded background checks on sales of all firearms, including 72 percent of all NRA members.”
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days ago
Principal Ordered Librarian to Take Down Holocaust Survivor’s Famous Quote Just Days Before Holocaust Remembrance Day
- News2 days ago
$1 Billion Campaign From Group ‘Linked to Staunchly Conservative Causes’ Will Try to ‘Redeem Jesus’ Brand’ in Super Bowl Ads
- RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM2 days ago
Trump-Aligned Christian Nationalist Group ‘Taps Into Unholy Well’ That Threatens Democracy
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days ago
‘Ran a Bribery Center Blocks From the White House’: Comer Mocked for Claiming No Evidence of Trump Influence Peddling
- News1 day ago
Stefanik Was Once ‘Laser Focused on Electing Santos’ – Now She Blames Voters for Electing Him as She Backs Away
- News2 days ago
Fort Worth ISD Drops Sex Ed Despite $2.6 Million Purchase of Materials in April
- COMMENTARY23 hours ago
Another SCOTUS Scandal: Chief Justice’s Spouse Makes Millions Placing Attorneys at Top Law Firms That Argue Before the Court
- BREAKING NEWS1 day ago
Santos Recuses Himself From Committees Amid Possible Criminal Investigation