Domestic cases can complicate Iowa gun laws

The right to bear arms is a protected and cherished liberty among citizens in Iowa and nationwide. But safety, on occasion, trumps that right - like in cases involving domestic-related protection orders.

Iowa has a law mirroring the federal regulation, which can force the subject of a domestic-related protection order to surrender his or her guns.

Iowa's law, enacted in 2011 to align with the federal statute, goes further than some states that either don't have a law or leave gun possession in cases involving protection orders to the discretion of a judge.

But, in light of recent gun violence and legislative debate over stricter gun laws, advocates are calling for stronger regulations in states that don't have laws and better enforcement in states that do.

“The failure to disarm domestic abusers can have devastating consequences for victims,” according to the Center for American Progress, an independent, nonpartisan educational institute.

The center argues that, despite laws aiming to protect victims from “domestic abusers,” the system suffers from several weaknesses. For one, authorities don't always adequately enforce the laws by following through on disarming those ordered to be without guns.

“There is not a lot of evidence that these laws are being properly enforced, and that they are being enforced in a consistent way,” said Chelsea Parsons, associate director for crime and firearms policy for the center. “You might have the best intentions, but if you're not enforcing them, they mean very little.”

Shortfalls

Iowa's law, like the federal law, says that - in most cases - subjects of domestic protection orders can't possess guns as long as the order is in place, said Ross Loder, chief of the Iowa Department of Public Safety's Program Services Bureau.

But the subject of a protection order that is not domestic related, or one that is not yet permanent, is not automatically disqualified from having firearms, Loder said.

And, he added, the definition of “domestic” is very specific. Spouses, former spouses, co-parents and intimate partners living together are in domestic relationships, according to the law, Loder said. People who are dating but not living together, and roommates who are not dating, don't qualify.

“A protection order that is not domestic in nature does not prohibit the possession of a firearm,” Loder said. “But a judge could include a firearms prohibition in the order.”

That's what happened with a North Liberty couple who came into the spotlight earlier this year when police were called to their home regarding a domestic disturbance and a fatal shootout erupted.

Taleb Salameh's girlfriend in February filed a request for a domestic protection order in Johnson County Court. She said in her request that Salameh physically abused and threatened her, describing one incident on Feb. 6 during which she said Salameh “choked me down to the floor” after she failed to turn on the humidifier when their daughter had a fever, according to court documents.

The protection order, which was temporary and never became permanent, came with a “firearms warning” for law enforcement, and Johnson County Attorney Janet Lyness said a judge made Salameh give up his weapons for a period of time.

“He did put his guns away,” Lyness said. “But once the order was dropped, he could have his guns again.”

The order was dismissed March 1, after the girlfriend failed to appear in court, according to online court records and documents. That allowed Salameh to get back his firearms, and days later - on March 10 - he was involved in a gunbattle with police that ended his life.

Local authorities say Iowa's law requiring subjects of protection orders to surrender weapons has been helpful for enforcement - they can't enforce federal laws, and federal authorities aren't always available. But Lyness said the domestic violence definition could be expanded to include dating relationships.

“We see the same type of pattern in dating relationships, even if they don't fit the definition of domestic abuse under law,” she said.

‘Proactive policing'

Laura Roan, assistant attorney general in the prosecutions division for the Iowa Attorney General's Office, said Iowa's move to create a law mirroring the federal statute protecting domestic violence victims was significant.

But making Iowa's law stricter than the federal law by expanding protections to include dating relationships would make enforcement more complicated, she said.

“If we restrict more people than federal law, the result is uneven application of the laws,” Roan said. “If it's not kept uniform and specific, then you have more confusion.”

As for enforcement, Roan said, the Polk County Sheriff's Office has designated a specific deputy assigned to track individuals ordered to give up weapons and make sure they comply.

“That is extraordinary,” Roan said. “It has to have an impact.”

Loder, with the Iowa Department of Public Safety, said a lot of states with laws mirroring the federal statute don't follow up to make sure people comply. But, he said, Iowa wrote into its law a requirement for judges to inform the subjects that they must get rid of firearms and give them a time frame to do it.

If someone doesn't comply, the sheriff's office can go back to the judge, who can initiate contempt of court proceedings, Loder said.

“We have a more well-rounded and complete approach to this issue than other states,” he said.

Linn County Sheriff Brian Gardner said he thinks the enforcement system works well here. In his office, every “no firearm” order is assigned to a person working “weapons permit duty.” That person pulls the defendant's gun permit, suspends the permit and sends a letter to the defendant.

“If we have trouble getting mail to them, civil deputies will go deliver to them,” Gardner said.

Linn County Attorney Jerry Vander Sanden said Iowa's law seems to strike a good balance between respecting the right to bear arms and providing additional protection to those who need it.

“I believe these protective orders in domestic abuse situations place a rational restriction on gun possession,” he said.