I live in So Cal and the restraining orders are automatically granted at three yrs.

Previous two PPs need to work on their reading comprehension. What is unbelievable about the OP is a *three year* restraining order for *only* posting lyrics on the web.

Highly unlikely.

Also, what state, by default, grants three year restraining orders? It looks like CA ROs can go up to five years, and are three years after hearing, but I can't find a state that automatically grants three year ROs.

Anonymous wrote:Depends on the judge and the state.My ex got a restraining order against me simply by filing for it and saying that I attacked him.
We went on to fight over custody of our son and he lost even the visitation rights because the other judge believed that he lied.Restraining order stayed in place though but he was punished by losing his son.
Shortly, restraining orders are too easy to get.

I agree.

I cannot believe some of these people responding saying that there must be more to OP's story than she is letting on and that no judge would grant a restraining order on someone threatening to slice someone's tires or crack someone's headlights.

People can be quite clueless these days.

Most people who file protective orders get them granted. It is quite rare to get one denied. Very rare. Because a judge doesn't want blood on his hands should the victim end up dead.

Depends on the judge and the state.My ex got a restraining order against me simply by filing for it and saying that I attacked him.
We went on to fight over custody of our son and he lost even the visitation rights because the other judge believed that he lied.Restraining order stayed in place though but he was punished by losing his son.
Shortly, restraining orders are too easy to get.

I think it depends on what state you all reside in.

The state I reside in, all restraining orders by default are 3 years.

So yeah, I can see this going for 3 years.

And if a judge doesn't know this song and isn't familiar with it, he will just take the lyrics literally and ver batum and he can grant a protective order against someone based on that because the person is basically saying on a public forum that she will use a blunt object to break his property which is a felony.

How can you guys say a judge will not issue an order of protection based on just that?

So if he doesn't, and this lady bashes this man's car lights out and slices his tires and seats and there is evidence the judge had knowledge of it, but dismissed it, I do not think that would bode well for him.