Posted on 09/02/2010 5:21:40 AM PDT by FreeManDC
From what I have read Gay couples are not immune to domestic violence. The last thing they should do is weaken the law. I have a feeling they will, though.
Immune???? They beat each other all the time. Take passion and add testosterone. That’s a recipe for violence.
Domestic violence laws do not just apply to married couples but the law is more focused on married couples.
I must be a victim of domestic violence then.
I disagree with that. SHE took her own life away by her own actions. He didn’t have anything to do with it.
This article tells it like it is. We had a nephew that had nearly the same thing done to him and it took two years of court battle to finally win custody of his kids after the bitch was convicted of several crimes. It all started with a false claim of “pushing” during a otherwise civil divorce.
She made the claim a day after..had him arrested and told the police he was suicidal..so he was stripped and held naked in a cell. A restraining order was issued and wasn’t dropped even though she didn’t show up in court on the domestic violence charge. (She was too drunk or high to bother).
Finally..her drugs led her to a life of other crimes and she ended up in jail. Otherwise she may have won.
My ex-wife tried that crap. Said I hit her many times. My son, before I could say anything, looks at his mother and says, “you’re a damn liar, mom!”....
He is 11, 10 at the time. I just sat there, stunned.
stopped reading at “biden” for some reason.
lucky for him it was not in massachusetts.
he would still be pickin and stickin in blaze orange along the masspike.
A lot of the domestic violence ( I have read ) occurs between Lesbian couples and generally ends with some one being killed.
Such as...?
Going back to the judicial system is very broken idea: The courts, unless faced w/ undeniable, in your face evidence, always side w/ the woman. Seems pretty sexist to me. Theres nothing inherently perfect or pure about females. I think the idea behind it is they’re supposedly the nurturers. However, todays feminists seem to look down on that role. LOL, seems a tangled web of lies to me. Anyway, to say women possess an exclusive ability to nurture is false. Dad’s do that too just in a different way. To be successful both are necessary.
LOL, its for the children you know. :) In this case thats no lie or hubris.
Once easy divorce hit the scene it was down hill from there. Now you can invent any lame excuse and be released. Only thing is when you invite the govt into your life expect nothing but trouble.
People who are actual victims usually display some kind of evidence. Bruises, behavior problems, etc. No doubt, the woman you mentioned had plenty of evidence, or she wouldn’t have gotten a restraining order.
It comes down to investigating and determining the truth, which is always the case with law enforcement. People undergoing divorce are known to be vindictive; a good investigation should reveal if that is the case, or if there is actually something going on.
Exactly. I won’t marry a woman in America until the laws are fixed, so that means probably never. The only problem is, eschewing marriage alone doesn’t protect you from this, since the VAWA can be applied to you if you are dating a woman, or even if you have no relationship at all with the woman but she claims you do. Not to mention, palimony and other things are still applied by judges outside of marital situations as well.
They won’t weaken the laws to shield gay couples, they simply won’t apply them. Just like they don’t apply them when men are abused by women.
I would never have mistaken it for that. It looks more like the tale of a malicious, evil woman sorely in need of a prison term.
Terrorist activities.
It is not about reducing "domestic violence. It is about eliminating the family unit and smothering the masculinity that is a roadblock to total control by the functionaries of the nanny state.
Life isn't fair, and it isn't government's job to try to make life "fair".
If the choice is between government punishing innocent people, and the government sometimes not catching criminals until after they commit crimes, the answer is the latter.
If we put every person in jail, nobody could commit a crime. But our goal is not to pre-judge future criminal acts, it is to stop criminals once they are acting, and prosecute criminals if they do act.
That means people do get robbed, and people do get harmed, and people do die. It's one of the many prices we pay for a free society -- until a person commits their first crime (which could be PLANNING for an action, the best case we can hope for in criminal prevention) we can't go all "Minority Report" and imprison them for what we think they might do.
So, a woman is murdered by someone when they have a restraining order. A Restraining Order is a legal order, and won't always stop people who are bent on illegal behavior "Well, I was going to murder my ex-wife, but I didn't want to violate the restraining order".
Doesn't mean we can just throw everybody under a restraining order in jail, or even follow them around and violate their privacy rights, without proof that they are guilty of a crime.
Better to let 100 guilty go free, than to imprison one innocent man. Well, that used to be some principle, but when it comes to domestic violence, and also child abuse, way too many people think it should be "better to imprison 100 innocent men, than let one guilty person go free".
Here’s a solution. Follow the Constitution. To prosecute and jail the male, there must be proof. No “he said, she said” crap.
Then women can buy guns and protect themselves since the law doesn’t do it anyway.
We had a good system, not perfect but good, till idiots of the SC and Congress messed it up.
We had a good system, not perfect but good, till idiots of the SC and Congress messed it up.
Add it to the list!
This is just another example of liberalism on display.
“Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.”
Whether it is Affirmative Action, Title IX, VAWA, etc...
liberals always discriminate against someone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.