Mission creep?

This is a minefield of a topic, but one that I feel must be discussed, so I will tread carefully.

Currently, under Federal law, all persons convicted of a crime of domestic violence, even minor misdemeanors, lose their right to own a firearm for life. Appropriate? That's an easy call in most of these cases, a tough one in a small minority of them. (Let me finish my thought before anyone gets upset with me.)

While I have absolutely no tolerance or sympathy for people who physically or mentally abuse their partners and children (yes, women can be guilty as well), and I think that the government is perfectly correct to deny people that commit such crimes their future firearm rights, I'm sure that more than one person, both male and female, has been falsely accused and charged in a "he said, she said" situation, or had something get overcharged by a prosecutor with an agenda. Because of these cases, a blanket policy with no exceptions or appeal policy may not be the correct answer in every case, although admittedly this does catch all of the truly abusive people, albeit at the expense of the aforementioned falsely accused or overly charged.

A theoretical example: I've had an argument with my wife, and I try to leave the house in an attempt to cool off the situation. She physically blocks me from leaving, in order to continue loudly enumerating my shortcomings. Domestic violence? I move (not shove, or push, or hit, but move) her to the side so that I may exit. Domestic violence? I don't think so in either case, but the local police and prosecutor may disagree, in which case one or both of us may be in real trouble.

Irregardless, this policy is the current law of the land. (I'm still going somewhere with this, hang in there.)

Now we have a group called the Anti-Spyware Coalition, which recently met with people from Google and McAfee in order "to discuss the extent to which spyware abuse also constitutes domestic abuse."

"Where does one draw the line between the minor abuse of a suspecting spouse logging on to an e-mail account and the major personal and psychological trespass attendant to domestic abuse?"

In the near future, will we see the government try to make confirming evidence of cheating by a partner, or logging on to see if Junior is watching Hungarian fetish porn instead of doing his homework, "domestic violence" crimes? The reason I bring up the question is that I'm a little concerned that the government may latch onto a policy of collecting innumerable crimes with a tenuous connection at best to true abuse under a very large, poorly defined umbrella of "domestic violence", which will automatically serve to deny large numbers of people their Second Amendment rights for things that just do not warrant that action.

I'm not saying that jaywalking is currently under consideration for being reclassified as domestic abuse, but I do think that this is a topic worth watching and discussing.