(Rick Egan | Tribune file photo) W. Clark Aposhian, seen in this 2005 photo, has been charged with four misdemeanors, including domestic violence. Aposhian has taught concealed-carry classes for legislators, public officials and the governor and hundreds of other Utahns, but a conviction could cost him his right to own guns.
The Salt Lake Tribune
Utah’s foremost gun advocate and his ex-wife had a contentious divorce wrought with conflict, emotional distress and pain.
At times, Clark Aposhian may have been annoying and intimidating but, a judge ruled last week, he wasn’t dangerous.
Third District Judge Andrew Stone denied a protective order request from Aposhian’s ex-wife, Natalie Meyer, last Tuesday and ruled the woman has no reason to fear the gun lobbyist.
It’s a long-awaited victory for Aposhian, who has been embroiled in several legal disputes stemming from a Memorial Day incident in which he was accused of driving a 2.5-ton military vehicle onto his ex-wife’s driveway and threatening to run over her new husband and his car.
Aposhian still faces misdemeanor domestic violence charges in Holladay Justice Court, but his attorneys hope Stone’s ruling, which states there was no abuse or criminal trespassing on the Meyers’ property, will help them in fighting that case.
No physical violence • The judge dismissed this fear of physical abuse, noting her interactions with Aposhian had never escalated to physical violence in the past, and there was little evidence to show they were likely to in the future — two legal requirements of granting a protective order under Utah law.
You have to wonder if a guy who makes threats and does intimidation is really safe. Aren't these exactly the types who need to be disarmed BEFORE they escalate into out-and-out violent behavior? Is it reasonable to expect people like this to gradually calm down and not get worse over time?
Or it could be that he didn't do what his ex-wife claims he did.
ReplyDeleteThat's why they have judges to get all the facts together then make a ruling rather than the few selected by the media. Hey Mike, I think we ought to lock you up for good because you have gotten mad before and who knows how far you will take it?. Lock your ass up before you kill someone.
DeleteI don't necessarily think the guy should be in jail, but he should be disarmed before his temper gets him in trouble and someone hurt or killed.
DeleteIf he's too dangerous to be armed, he's too dangerous to be walking about in public in the first place. Do you really believe that a man with a 2.5 ton truck is safe, but put a gun into his possession, and he magically crosses over into being a problem?
Delete"If he's too dangerous to be armed, he's too dangerous to be walking about in public in the first place."
DeleteSo any released felon (who is prohibited by law to own a gun) should not be allowed to be released after he served his debt to society? I guess you think convicted felons (after serving their debt to society) should be allowed to own and carry guns.
It's too simplistic to say that if a person can't be trusted with guns he needs to be locked up. There are many examples of people who can't safely own and use guns but don't need to be incarcerated.
DeleteIf someone is making credible threats of violence against another, that act should itself be a crime. But yes, once a person has served the sentence and passed through any probationary period, all rights should be restored.
DeleteInteresting you would support giving gun rights back to a convicted killer (he used a gun to kill) even if he had served out his full sentence. I'm glad your judgment is not making that decision. Another one of those great Greg laws to live by like revenge is justice. You can bet that killer is seeking his revenge, I mean justice. with his newly restored gun rights.
DeleteAnonymous, stop lying. I've said many times here that murder deserves a life sentence or the death penalty. But you can't resist lying or twisting words. That's why I insist on links when you quote things.
Delete"once a person has served the sentence and passed through any probationary period, all rights should be restored."
DeleteWe already incarcerate more people than any other developed country in the world. Your black-and-white world-view would increase that number. There are many who cannot be trusted with guns based on their history but no longer need to be locked up.
Mikeb, we lock up a lot of those people because of our stupid War on Drugs. I'm on record here and elsewhere as supporting legalizing drugs and pardoning anyone convicted of possession. Take drugs out of the mix, and our incarceration rate would drop precipitously.
DeleteI'm in complete agreement with that, but there's still a middle ground of offenders who cannot be trusted with guns but who don't need to be locked up either.
DeleteYou clearly said you would give gun rights to killers as long as they had paid their debt to society. Funny how you always deny what your own printed words say.
Deletewhere are the "threats" you speak of??? Just because she is intimidated doesn't mean that he was intimidating. Some people are afraid of everything. The judge even stated that her fear was "unreasonable". Meaning she either lied about it or was psycho. Take your pick, either way Aposhian is lucky to be rid of that wack job.
ReplyDelete" he was accused of driving a 2.5-ton military vehicle onto his ex-wife’s driveway and threatening to run over her new husband and his car."
DeleteAccording to you she made that up, right? That behavior doesn't sound at all like a macho asshole gun owner, right?
By the way, when this is made into a movie, I nominate David Hewlett to play the role of Aposhian.
ReplyDelete