Illinois Order of Protection 2005-2025 Form

This pretty well sums up my opinion of David Hogg. He has been coached, coddled and cosseted by Michael Bloomberg and has capitalized on his celebrity as the survivor of a tragedy that was allowed to happen through ineptitude and failures of the Broward County school board, the administration of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, the sheer incompetence and cowardice of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and a failure to properly route information by the FBI.Sheriff Scott Israel was removed from office by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis in part because of the failure to properly respond to the incident.But David Hogg and his coterie of schoolmates gave a free pass to the sheriff’s office, Deputy Scot Petersen and everybody else in order to focus blame a Smith & Wesson rifle and a small business that had done nothing wrong at all. The business, Sunrise Tactical, was forced to close its doors after the shooting.It is highly ironic that a person supposedly damaged for life because of the actions of a person who passed a background check is such a strong proponent of them. The shooter was able to pass the background check in spite of the fact he had a long history of interactions with law enforcement due to his violent behavior. He had no criminal background, no record because he was never prosecuted for his offenses. That’s because of the policies of the Broward County school district and the Broward County Sheriff’s Office.This is not NRA propaganda. These were among the findings of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas Commission created by the state of Florida in response to the incident. The commission released its preliminary report in January of this year.On to my opinion of polls and the people that participate in them.Last week, NPR (National Public Radio) and the PBS Newshour conducted a Marist poll of 880 adults. The poll was conducted from February 5th through 11th.The poll showed that 82% of adults believed that background checks would make a difference. Just 15% said they would make no difference. 68% of self-identified gun owners were in favor of background checks but 30% said they would make no difference. The poll also found that 60% of respondents favored a ban on “assault weapons” and 64% favored creation of a national gun registry. 65% also believed a ban on high-capacity magazines would make a difference.The last question in the survey was, “From what you have read or heard, do you think, compared to 25 years ago, the per capita gun murder rate in the U.S. is higher, lower, or about the same?”In an odd coincidence, 82% of those surveyed believed that the gun murder rate had remained the same (23%) and the majority (59%) believing it was higher. Only 12% believed the rate had gone down.The latest data we have is from 2017. the 25-year period that includes both beginning and ending years starts in 1993. According to data complied by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the gun murder rate fell by more than 36% from 1993 to 2017.So 82% of respondents had no idea what they were talking about. That’s not surprising; they have been fed a stream of distortions and lies by politicians and media and by celebrities who don’t know what they’re talking about, either.Political party didn’t seem to matter except in the percentage of ill-informed people. Only 8% of Democrats and 9% of Republicans were aware of the truth. I am almost embarrassed to say that gun owners did no better than the average of the respondents.David Hogg’s comment is interesting. I am not afraid of a background check, I have gone through far more of them than he has, especially considering that he can’t even legally purchase a gun since Florida raised the minimum age to 21.But the background check law currently being rammed through the House isn’t about buying a gun. It’s about transferring a firearm, which is a whole different ball of wax.The federal government considers anything that shifts the physical possession of a firearm from one person to another, even temporarily, to be a transfer. If I hand my wife a gun for her to look at, that’s a transfer. When she hands it back, that’s another transfer.The bill currently being marked up does exempt me and my wife handing guns back and forth. I can even give her a gun to keep. I can do the same for my children.I can also let a friend use one of my guns at a shooting range or while hunting. But, if I let him keep the gun after the trip to clean it as a favor to me, that’s a felony, even though he is going to return it the next day.As a sop to the NRA and gun rights advocates, the bill specifically prohibits national gun registration. In the first place, that’s stupid. Establishment of a federal registry of guns or gun owners has been illegal since 1986. So this bill does what? Makes something that’s already illegal “illegaler?” In the second place, it makes the law impossible to enforce.If the government doesn’t know who owns what guns, how is it going to monitor the transfers of those guns? How is it going to make a case for prosecution? Why wouldn’t a police chief or county sheriff figure that they have better uses for their resources than chasing down cases they can’t prove. Are we going to have sting operations to catch Mr. Jones selling his old hunting rifle to his next-door neighbor? What if Mr. Jones and his neighbor said that it was actually sold before the law went into effect?Noted gun control advocate Garen Wintemute did a study of three states that enacted universal background check laws, Colorado, Delaware and Washington state. Only Delaware had a signNow increase in the volume of background check inquiries. The volumes in Colorado and Washington remained essentially flat. The homicide rates in all three states rose in the years after the laws went into effect. Wintemute concluded that the laws were ineffective because people ignored them and, in some cases, county sheriffs weren’t enforcing them.Moreover, results from other states with universal background checks are mixed. Illinois and Maryland, both of which require checks on every sale outside of immediate family, consistently report some of the highest homicide rates in the nation. Washington, D.C. is at the top or near the top every year.The thing is that I am not afraid of a background check: I am concerned about what will happen when they continue to prove to be worthless.

Banning guns based on how they look versus how they function.Banning guns based on a projectile being 1/1000th inch bigger than others equally capable.Banning guns based on the diameter or markings on their barrel that have no bearing on its ability to function.Making existing gun owners wait 8 days to take possession of a gun as a “cooling off” period.Banning possession of sheet metal or plastic boxes with springs because these, after all, are some of the most dangerous objects on the planet.Banning and not banning aforementioned boxes based on the number of rounds they hold but allowing the exact same box to be sold legally if it possesses the correct markings on the bottom.Having a one-gun-a-month law to prevent gun trafficking or straw purchases but allow anyone a lifetime waiver of that restriction by simply sending a form to the state saying they are a collector. Any reason for collecting is permissible (“In the event of a zombie apocalypse” is an acceptable reason).Where you live determines your ability to own a gun in the same state.Telling victims of home invasion they are to be arrested and treated as criminals because of the property someone else took from them.Being so concerned about privacy rights that you demand any would-be gun owner waive their HIPAA rights for life to make sure they aren’t “dangerous”.Declaring 18 through 20 year olds children and barring them from exercising their right to own a gun. But that’s the only right they are too immature or unable to exercise as a legal adult at those ages.Compiling lists of guns and gun owners in the utterly illogical belief that a couple pieces of paper solves crimes.Banning the publication of computer code or plans for firearms that are freely available in printed form without restriction. Hating two parts of the Bill of Rights is pretty impressive stuff.Demand that we have noise dampening devices on vehicles and hearing protection on around machinery that can damage hearing in an instant as a public safety measure but regulate the same for firearms to the point it takes 9–10 months and Federal and State permission to own. And not all states will allow you to protect your hearing.Requiring a person to be fingerprinted, photographed and provide a background check and at least two days of training at their own expense and submit the application within 3 days for a license to allow them to apply to purchase a handgun. It is not a “permit-to-possess” but merely a permission slip to fill out a form.Declaring that items meant to safely hold a firearm in order to use it are too dangerous to have fitted to a gun.Buttons are verboten.Changing the color or finish on a gun makes it illegal to sell as “unsafe”.Declaring any semi-automatic rifle an “assault rifle” regardless of age, caliber or feed type.Declaring a Marlin or equivalent tube-fed .22LR semi-auto rifle an “assault weapon”.Allowing anyone via hearsay to claim someone is suspicious or may have violent tendencies and have their guns taken away from them without Due Process.I can go on. And on and on. All strange and ones I could have never come up with on my own.Note for the Irony Challenged: Every single item on this list is an actual law or regulation in force today somewhere in the United States.

Absolutely nothing beyond the word of the complainant. I heard about something known as an "ex parte" restraining order, and even asked several professionals on Quora. A court can kick you out of your home from a few wekks to a few motnhs without even hearing you first.Completely biased against the accused. If you go to the same university, workplace as the accuser or live in the same house, you will not be able to go there, on pain of a criminal penalty. Furthermore, you will have to bear the costs of finding a temporary residence. People who obtain orders under false testimonies are almsot never prosecuted, because "who's got time for that?"If you are rich enough to still be able to affoard a lawyer after having your life become a complete mess, you can sue them for dmaages in civil court, which means they might spend a day or two in jail.....Yeah, scary right? Legislators havent even implemented mandatory minimum sentences for abusing ex parte orders.

Payoff.com is a social finance platform enabling communities to fulfill their individual and collective dreams. We launched public beta in January 2011 and have collected 1,000+ dreams, of which over 90% are related to money. Payoff helps people fund their dreams and signNow their goals, like saving for a house or vacation, adopting a child, paying off credit cards, and starting a business, in addition to connecting them with other people working towards the same things. The current product enables users to share their dreams, set up goals, link and track financial accounts, earn badges, and receive cash Sur-Prizes for progress. We provide tools from top-quality partners, as well as educational content to help move users to action and success. Ultimately, we provide a more intuitive way for users to understand how they are spending their life -- it’s not about the dollars, but it’s about the positive use of money, time, talent, and charity. We aim to own dreams and achievement on the web.  Payoff will create meaningful social connections and dialogue through dreams, goals, implicit communities based on personal transactions (the “real-life check-in”), and our partners.  In addition, our relevance and recommendation engine is guided by a Science Advisory Board, with leaders from Cal-Tech, USC, and Northwestern. We recognize that achievement and financial behavior, like most decisions, is driven by emotions, not budgets and lists, and we are signNowing people in this emotional space. One user told us, “I feel more encouragement from these badges than I think you will ever know.  I'm not the most emotional person but I have been so poor for most of my adult life trying to get through school that the day  [the] "STASH" badge was awarded to me I cried!” Payoff is founded by Scott Saunders (Walz Group, Inc 500) and Eden Warner (pre-revenue to profitability CFO at Fandango), along with folks from Yahoo! and SpotRunner. You can view a video about us at and contact us at scott@payoff.com. Also, check out what folks are saying: AOL WalletPop: http://www.walletpop.com/2011/01...Business Insider: http://www.businessinsider.com/p...U.S. News Money: http://money.usnews.com/money/bl...

Fiancee and I moved into our townhouse a year ago. Became great friends with many of the neighbors. weekend get togethers, drinks at the gazebo after work etc. I became president of the HOA . My fiancee did some contracting work for our closest “friend”, across the street. It all went south from there. They had a disagreement about what work should or should not have been done. He refused to pay $900 of the work he had done. Then he lost his job, got dumped by a girl he was dating and it all got worse.Eventually, he teamed up with 4 other neighbors who disliked my fiancee and they started using the legal system to harass us. They filed FIVE protective orders, 1 disorderly conduct and a violation of the protective order. We had to go to COURT and pay a ton in lawyers fees . Thank goodness all charges were dismissed. Boy, were they mad after that. Then the harassment really began.We’ve had the police called on us for trimming bushes and a tree, because they claimed he was “staring” at them amongst other ridiculous things.The 4 angry little neighbors went door to door through the neighborhood to badmouth my fiancee that he was a “menace to society” and a “criminal” and a “bigot”-none of which is true. They said since I was the president of the HOA I needed to be removed because I brought him into the neighborhood and didn’t do anything about it. Myself and our friend, who was on the board as well, were both recalled and kicked off the board. Three out of the 4 got themselves replaced to the board and now have made it there sad little life work to harass us.We have been recorded wherever we talk, walk or go in the neighborhood. We recently received “cease and desist” letters from the management company because one of them claimed my fiancee was walking across the street and obstructed one of the jerks from driving down the road. Really? How? did he throw himself on the car? no………..They also have ordered us to remove a donated firepit (a silly propane fire feature table you find at any restaurant/hotel/bar) and chairs from a common area that we set up to bring the neighborhood together for social gatherings. The worst part is, the neighbor who started all this, he’s the one who put together the original petition to allow it! Now that he hates us and is on the board, he is demanding it be removed What a hypocrite!Most recently, my finacee was at the mailbox with another neighbor. He knew she has signed the petition to have me removed from the board. He asked her why she would do that. Especially since he had helped her with power washing her deck and some other things around her condo. She said it was the “principal” of it. They talked/disagreed and then my fiancee said “whatever “and “have a good day” and walked away. Her husband comes down to our house thumping his chest and fisting his hands yelling that my fiancee better never “f%&king” talk to his wife without him around ever again. They had words. They then called the merry band of 4 jerks as to what they should do. They were advised by the HOA BOARD to file a protective order and disorderly conduct. They even told them how to fill out the forms and what to do.We get to back to court AGAIN next month. Yes, I know, we are MOVING!

Taken from Minnesota Judicial Branch Domestic Abuse and Harrassment and contains all the info you need plus links to the law. PS, it is very easily found in a Google search.“What is Harassment under Minnesota lawRegardless of the relationship between the parties, under MN Statutes § 609.748, harassment is defined as:a single incident of physical or sexual assault;repeated incidents (more than one) of intrusive or unwanted acts, words, or gestures that have a substantial adverse effect or are intended to have a substantial adverse effect on the safety, security or privacy of another (e.g., repeated phone calls, following a person, repeatedly coming to the Petitioner’s home after having been asked not to do so);targeted residential picketing; ORa pattern of attending public events after being notified that their presence is harassing to anotherWho can file?The Petitioner does not have to have had a personal relationship with the Respondent. An adult can ask the court (petition) for an order for themselves or on behalf of their minor children if there have been incidents of harassment against their children.The Respondent could be any adult(s) or juvenile(s) alleged to have engaged in harassment, OR an organization alleged to have sponsored or promoted harassment.NOTE: A harassment restraining order is a matter handled in civil court and is brought by an individual seeking protection. A "no contact order" is a type of order usually issued by a judge in criminal court that orders the criminal defendant not to have contact with someone.Back to topHow to get a Harassment Restraining OrderRead the law on harassment restraining orders at MN Statutes s. 609.748.If you believe that someone is harassing you, you may ask the court for a Harassment Restraining Order. This order can help:prevent further harassment,order the Respondent not to contact you and your family at any time, andallow police to arrest the Respondent without a warrant for violations of the order.A victim does not have to report the harassment to the police to ask for a court order. Depending on the facts, there may be a filing fee to start a harassment case, which may be waived if you qualify based on low-income for a fee waiver (IFP). See Forms & Instructions to Ask for a Harassment Restraining Order.If you start a case, you are called the "Petitioner" and the person who committed the acts is called the "Respondent."Where to file?You can start a Harassment case in the District Court of the county where:you or the Respondent lives, ORthe harassment occurred;You must write details in your petition form about how:the Respondent has physically or sexually assaulted you (only one incident is required); ORthe Respondent has done acts, words, or gestures on at least two different days, ANDthe actions have caused, or were intended to cause, substantial adverse effect upon your safety, security or privacyStep 1: Complete your Petition for Harassment Restraining Order forms and take them to the courthouse to be filed either where you or the Respondent lives, or where the harassment occurred.Step 2: A "signing judge" will review your Petition forms and will decide if a Harassment Restraining Order should be issued and whether a hearing will be required.The judge will sign an order that does one of three things:Dismissal - meaning that the incidents you described in your papers do not rise to the level of harassment. In order to re-file, there will need to be a new incident or incidents that you believe are harassment.Denial - meaning that a temporary order is not granted, but you may request a hearing to present your case to the judge.Ex Parte Harassment Restraining Order - meaning that a temporary two-year order is granted without a hearing.Step 3: If a temporary Harassment Restraining Order was NOT issued, the parties may request a hearing within 20 days from when the petition was served. It a temporary Harassment Restraining Order was issued, the Respondent may request a hearing within 45 days from when the order was issued.”

Something so profound, so unlikely, that it’s an often cited as fundamental proof for intelligent design.The evolution of the eyeball.The evolution of the eyeball is something that so often, people have claimed to be too complex to have evolved naturally. And indeed, it’s perplexing. That something so intricate, so sensitive and precarious, could have evolved naturally through trial and error.Thankfully, we happen to have enough living creatures who’ve progressed linearly enough and far apart enough to be able to map the progression unto complex creatures.Eye spots:You see those two weird, cross-eyed looking spots on top of this ugly creature? We can’t really consider these things to be “eyes”. However, they are evolved little patches of ultra sensitive nervous material.Think about how it feels to be in the sunlight. The sensation of warmth on your skin. Even with your eyes closed, you can tell that light’s landing upon you. Or not, if you happen to feel the coolness of the shade.That’s quite a bit like how the eyespot works for our primitive flatworm here. Given enough time, they’ll even start to make little depressions for their eye spots, so as not to confuse the sunlight on the horizon with the sunlight directly above them.Pinhole eyes:The Nautilus here is an example of an animal with pinhole eyes. With depressions now fully formed where eyespots once were, the fluid filled cavity is now capable of distinguishing the world around it with vivid detail and incredible clarity.“Camera” eyes:With pinhole eyes now fully developed, membranes have evolved over the opening of the eye for added protection. The trapped fluids inside the optical cavity serve as a clarifying liquid, paired with “lenses” that evolve over time. Several animals evolve to allow their eyes to shift around inside of their heads, allowing them to see in different directions, without moving their body around.But did you know that eyeballs have evolved separately in multiple species?This is a side by side diagram of a human eye (left) compared to an octopus eye. Although they look identical at first, note where the optic nerves protrude into the eyeball for both.For the human example on the left, the nerves actually interrupt the retinal functions where 4 is marked. This means that while it might appear as though we’ve evolved in close relationship with the cephalopods, this example demonstrates that multiple groups of animals have evolved to have these complex organs independent of one another.You can test this below.The blind spots in your eyes are just to the left of your left iris and to the right of your right iris. So try closing your left eye, staring at the left cross, and moving yourself slowly closer to the screen until the black spot disappears. (Or, closed right eye, staring at the dot on the right, and moving closer until the cross disappears)Now, remind yourself that octopi don’t have this problem.Pretty neat, isn’t it?(Source: Evolution of the eye - Wikipedia)

Let’s start with the issue of service. Your mother must be served personally a formal Notice and Petition for the relief you need. Generally, police do not travel out of state to serve this notice. It’s a step that must be assumed by the Petitioner, you. Your letter is not a Notice or a Petition.It’s not difficult to do this. But it must be done correctly.YOU CANNOT PERFORM THIS STEP YOURSELF. Anyone over the age of 18 — your BFF, your cousin, a volunteer — can give this a shot. But it is better to engage the services of a professional process server in that state who knows how to do it correctly and can supply you with the signNowd affidavit of service. Supply pictures of your mother, a description of the car she drives and the license plate, and anything else that will help them follow her around and give her the legal papers.N.B.: There are many ways to serve legal documents. Those don’t apply to you. Personal service is required.This is easy. But it is also easy to screw up. Once performed, you win.Here’s what you serve. You fill out a petition. Here’s the Instructions. Indiana has people who will help you do this. There are other forms to fill out, which will also be supplied by the agency that handles this. (Which is not the police.)Your letter is helpful. The fact that you sent it demonstrates how important this is to you and the lengths you have gone to already. Judges like that.In Indiana, your situation falls under Indiana’s Code Title 34 § 34-6-2-34.5 “Domestic or family violence”:Sec. 34.5. “Domestic or family violence” means, except for an act of self-defense, the occurrence of at least one (1) of the following acts committed by a family or household member…A list of acts follows that may apply to you: Physical harm, acts that cause a fear of physical harm, sexual abuse, or harm to a family pet. This section ends with this:For purposes of IC 34-26-5, domestic and family violence also includes stalking (as defined in IC 35-45-10-1).So let’s look at that clause.“IC 34-26-5” refers to the Indiana Civil Protection Order Act. Under § 2 (a) of that law:A person who is or has been a victim of domestic or family violence may file a petition for an order for protection against a: (1) family or household member who commits an act of domestic or family violence; or (2) person who has committed stalking under IC 35-45-10-5 …Note the language. The words “has been” relate to you.“IC 35-45-10-1” defines stalking:Sec. 1. As used in this chapter, “stalk” means a knowing or an intentional course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another person that would cause a reasonable person to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, or threatened and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, or threatened. …Emphasis is added by me, to make this crystal clear.Go down to your local courthouse and fill out a petition. Describe your situation, your relationship, and your FEELINGS OF FEAR and INTIMIDATION caused by this THREATENING conduct.Include details about the history of DOMESTIC OR FAMILY VIOLENCE between you, i.e., the victim, and this person who lives in another state.Include your mother’s date of birth and/or her Social Security Number. If your petition is approved and you obtain an order of protection, her name will be on a database accessed by law enforcement all over the country.Pick up all the police reports and include them with your petition.Submit any original proof you sent this letter. It will show who signed for it and that you asked this person to stop. It also has an address, which is convenient.Request an ex parte order if asked.Note this “violence” does not require physical violence by person A to person B. This is not the dictionary definition. It’s a legal definition that the State of Indiana has described which specifically includes feelings of fear, intimidation and/or terror — stalking.And anyway, the judge may view the banging on the door in the middle of the night to be physically violent. What reasonable person wouldn’t crawl under the bed and be afraid to come out?You should also become familiar with THIS law, which explains what constitute a felony in Indiana:Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure Indiana Code § 35-45-10-5Paragraph (a) says:A person who stalks another person commits stalking, a Level 6 felony.The threat of being charged with a felony would stop a lot of people from making that drive across state lines.A little bedside reading wouldn’t hurt. I recommend ‘Federal Domestic Violence and Stalking Crimes Case Law’ by the National Center on Protection Orders. Pleasant dreams.