When someone has a restraining order should their firearms be held by the local sheriff?

No. A restraining order restricts contact and has absolutely nothing to do with confiscating weapons.

Taking and holding someones possessions against their will is confiscating.. What else would you call it?

You received one very weird answer and one very boiler plate answer from a vertical cop. Neither one was a good answer. The firearms should never be confiscated or held by anyone other than the owner. Restraining orders are often used as a way to punish the male partner in a divorce by the wife and her attorney. Doing so will often get the man to deal with her more generously, as is an accusation of child abuse or spousal abuse. It is a shame that these tactics are used in this way but all is fair in love an war.

I don't know that it would make a difference. You get a restraining order if you don't feel safe around that person. It doesn't mean that person won't violate the restraining order. As morbid as this sounds, the perpetrator will kill you (with or without a gun) if his/her goal is to kill you, restraining order or not.

You shouldn't have firearms in first place make love not war, we are butterflies we need to fly towards the light which is god and he does not like people using firearms, you should go to church and pray for your sins, and then maybe become a priest to make it up to god

No. I have seen to many wives pull that trick cause their husband wants to go to deer camp for a week.

If they didn't commit a crime then no. And if there is a crime, there should be charges, courts, and finally a judgment. Only then should a person's civil rights be curtailed.

You are comparing apples to sex. One has nothing to do with the other.

Yes..