What you are doing to Cat on this thread is actually against the board rules if you bothered to read them. Maybe you haven't been around WTM to know the etiquette, but you are the one violating it here. Not Cat.

That's incorrect. It's 16 in Michigan.

Multiple major US cities are no longer prosecuting an assortment of violent crimes by choice, so it would appear as if you aren't actually attempting to reduce homicides and violent crimes using even existing laws. Do you think these prosecutors will be more likely to enforce new laws than ones that already exist against violent crime? Of course additional laws can reduce crime, but if no one prosecutes the violators, they are just as impotent as the laws and court officials you have now who actively promote not prosecuting crimes in the name activism. If you are fixating on suicide and school massacres, those are very specific instances, but the vast majority of gun violence (as the name of this thread indicates) committed against other people are neither suicide nor school massacres, and it seems that you already have laws in existence to address many many forms of gun violence. Why isn't there more outrage against the lack of prosecution and prison sentence against gun violence in general? From the outside, it seems like Americans think that something new and improved is going to help but you don't even avail yourselves to what you have. Aren't prosecutors elected in most municipalities? People are voting in prosecutors who are actively opposed to prosecution it would seem.

I am not a citizen. I am in the States occasionally, and have lived in the States at various times though.

Predictive models by default end up discriminatory though in any scenario I can think of. Because they are proactive, not reactive, therefore there must be an element of profiling, or typecasting, whatever terminology you want to use. Would it not be more simple to strengthen your country's laws against already violent criminals. Domestic violence, criminal violence, repeat violent offenders? While that would not likely have stopped this individual from possessing a gun, isn't strict and harsh prosecution and high prison/jail sentences a better deterrent to the overall problem with gun violence? I have read many many US news stories that detail very violent criminals committing crimes with guns and then being released on bail, and also in many cases having the charges dropped, not because there were. not grounds, but as AnotherNewName outlined, because the state chose not to prosecute.

Asking in good faith- do you think it is a sound principle to give federal authorities access to the health records, including mental health counseling of all citizens? It sounds as if she had never been institutionalized, therefore wouldn't you be opening up the records for all private counseling? Wouldn't this make private counselors responsible for deciding whether or not a person was stable enough to own a fire arm? Also curious what personality disorders people here would think of being exclusionary to own fire arms, were such a law enacted? If I am understanding correctly, certain mental diagnosis would be used as red flags in such a situation? Would that include gender dysphoria? Autism? Obsessive Compulsive Disorder? I am unclear how this would work, or how it would not be extremely prejudicial against large groups of people. It seems that it would in fact end up with people being less likely to seek counseling or treatment?

OP, I hope someone tells your daughter that separation, even divorce, from a murderous spouse, is not a moral failing. It's not a religious failing. If her religion tells her otherwise, then her husband is not the only abusive relationship she is involved in. Nothing about subjecting your children to a man who physically attacked you is noble. She has been under a tremendous level of stress and may be incapable of seeing that, which is when other people, those who state they care for her, need to hold that truth up to her right now. Her religious larger family needs to be showing her truth, not enabling an abuser. Resolution in the face of something that is seen as a moral failing is difficult in the best of times, and people need to be lifting her up and illustrating this separation, this EPO is not a moral failing. She is not better or on higher ground for disregarding her safety. That stands for morally as well as legally. This whole situation is tragic. I hope you see we are not piling on you. We are all, I think unanimously quite deeply concerned for everyone involved here.

Completely agree. Abundant red flags. I am struggling to understand how you can swing from the extreme of him being a life or death risk in a matter of weeks to thinking that this is a positive development, GardenMom. If they still exist, I wonder if it would be helpful for you both you and your dd to reread your own threads and words on the topic and see how very urgent and dangerous the situation was in the moment. He still has the guns. He is not a different person. Drugs can make people do crazy things, yes, but plenty of people take illegal substances without becoming psychotic and threatening to murder their mother in law. It's not as if he was forced into a straight jacket and padded room while in hospital and tranquilized. He was quite clearly functional while issuing these threats and physically attacking you and yours. He was able to clearly function in a reality to some level to do all of the things he was doing. One can be altered and still be completely responsible for their actions. There is much more at play here than many who are supporting her in this seem willing to admit.

Bad advice does not cause one to chase one's wife, Mother in law, and young children with a shovel. Someone said an axe? Bad advice does not cause one to change locks and take money away from a wife and children leaving them at the mercy of others. No one recovers from an addiction as you described in a matter of weeks. Wanting to be married is well and good, but he has not had enough time to work on himself much less his marriage. I agree with @thatfirstsip that blaming your daughter is not helpful, however, people who push your daughter into blindly walking into a reconciliation after being terrorized should absolutely be subject to blame when this goes badly. Optimism for reconciliation through proper time and methods is one matter. Blindly advocating for reconciliation in the face of substance abuse and domestic terrorism is folly to put it mildly. It is straight endangerment of your daughter and those innocent children caught up in this, as well endangerment to you as you are there with them. You can support your daughter and still be firm that this is insanity.

I do not know the ins and outs of American law by any means, but if there were a legal separation with defined visitation and terms set forth by a court that were adhered to on her end, she should be fine unless she does something that falls under negligence herself. With proper representation, as it appears she can afford and is seeking from what her mother describes, she should be protected in many ways from any criminal prosecution as a result of his actions. Properly set up, it should also protect her financially. "Should" of course being the defining word. Her solicitor should be able to advise her on that and the potential problems on legal separation versus divorce. It has not been my experience that all American courts are a complete and total fiasco for all women. Proper counsel and proper preparation and having eyes wide open is key. It seems that getting blindsided is often the case of either poor advice or insufficient funds to afford proper advice, rather than a completely incompetent system, as with so many other areas of life. No legal document can guarantee physical safety, but financial safeguards are doable in a situation where the concerned spouse has the means for good counsel. Even without a legal separation there are financial options she can pursue both in the US as well as out of the US with international accounts that would allow her to legally shield some assets away from her spouse. Ex-US assets are not subject to US property division laws, but rather the laws of the country the accounts are maintained in. It may temporarily make that money unavailable to her, but there are legal options to shield assets from irresponsible spouses. A sound family law advisor should be aware of these options in her jurisdictions, and if they are not, an experienced financial advisor familiar with ex-US banking in particular countries will. It is fortunate that she is financially stable on her own accord. That gives her a large advantage as compared to many women facing a similar situation with an unstable spouse.

I am assuming he is still also dealing with a significant amount of physical pain, whether or not this is a technical addiction. That is going to need to be managed in some way. I know that is not your focus at this moment, and understandably so, but pain can have a major effect on behaviour even if it seems from the exterior that the pain is being treated. On top of the medications there is still the real physical pain that must be dealt with in some way, which makes it not an either/or situation necessarily. It is not a simple case of "If he loves his wife, he will stop these medications that are being legally prescribed, and simply carry forth in pain out of sheer devotion." It is more a case of "He is in pain. He is being treated legally by physicians. He is also acting irrationally and threatening violence and therefore there are now multiple issues at hand." Not to be contrary, but I do not think this is as black and white of an issue as you are describing it, but I fully acknowledge that none of us have the background information that you do which is obvious. Pain management is never simple. Addiction is never simple. Spousal relationships never simple. There is clearly much complexity to be dealt with here. Hopefully his parents are available to take over for his care consulting with the medical facility while you and your daughter can search out her legal and safety options and the best course to keep her and their children safe. Would it be possible for your daughter and her children to come stay with you and she take a temporary leave of absence from her job? From your descriptions he sounds unlikely to take a long flight to track her down and maybe things will be able to settle down and everyone take a breath. The stress level on them both has to have been incredibly high throughout all of this.

Agreeing with this. I do not know the legalities from state to state within the US. I would take this slowly on a legal front. It's good she is seeking a family law solicitor for advice. Drug addiction or substance use does not necessarily preclude visitation or shared custody. In the cases where it eventually does, it appears to rarely be permanent. She may be able to keep more control by being legally separated if that is an option available in her location, and not legally divorced. She cedes much control over the children in many jurisdictions if she divorces him. A solicitor should be able to make that clear. More than one opinion may be beneficial to seek out, as in, speak to more than one to ensure the advice is sound and the outcome being promised by the initial consult seems probable to another experienced in that particular court system. Judges do matter on outcome as well. Divorce seems rash at this stage because it will instantly rob her of a good deal of control over the children once it is finalized, and as it sounds they are quite young, this will be a long road and a long fight unfortunately.

The legality of such advertisements.....I will admit that it is easy to make the assumption that most Americans are on board with them in that one, they legally exist, and two, that they are so financially lucrative that they make up what would seem to be a large amount of advertisement which would indicate they are effective. I am not an advertising "Mad Men" or something though, and it is just a perception. Also, I did not mean to rankle the Americans! I love your country. I will send myself off to bed now before I step in it further.

I highlighted a sentence in your post, so that is why it quoted you. I am not sure of how to quote without that. Specifically your comment that it is "all over the globe." I have lived in the US. It is not the same as any other fill in the blank country. I have no currency in the game of what measures you do or do not take and was remarking that these threads tend to underestimate the differences between your country and others. Feel free to disregard the observation.

Oh, I am sorry for your loss! He was beautiful though!