Legal trap - domestic violence - attorneys pay attention!

[artherd]

It's hard for me to accept that yelling (or "hollering and pushing", as was specified) is "violence".

You do NOT touch another person if the contact is unwelcome! PERIOD!

You sure don't plead it down to 'spare her the trial...'.

There will not be a trial withought a cooperative whitness, pure and simple.


This guy is either a moron, or a wife-beater, and in either case should probally not be carrying.

All that said, the DV statues are too far-reaching for my taste.

 

[Curare]

The Bureau of Justice Statistics and the writers are all over the map and contradicting in their various studies. In their 2002 study and plotted graph, it shows just under 500 men were murdered by an intimate (defined as a spouse, ex-spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend). Just under 1200 women were murdered. Using basic mathematics, a 500:1200 ratio is approximately 1:2.4 or 29.4% men murdered an 70.6% women murdered. That’s not anywhere near 95%. According to the same graph, which goes back to 1975, about 1500 from either gender was murdered by an intimate, with women victims slightly higher in 1975.

70.6%--exactly!!! Look at my post above:

70% of intimate homicide victims are female.

You've proven the numbers correct--thanks for verifying that. The 95% figure wasn't for homicides.

 

[Cesiumsponge]

You've proven the numbers correct--thanks for verifying that. The 95% figure wasn't for homicides.

That 95% figure supplied by the BJS is contradicted by another one of their own figures I previously posted, specifically from the Nov. 1998 Department of Justice report on the National Violence Against Women Survey

-1,510,455 women and 834,732 men are victims of physical violence by an intimate.

Oops, now we have contradiction from the same source, except mine is 4 years newer. Its also an often used tactic to pick out one mistake in a long post, focus on it, and casually dismiss the rest

 

[beerslurpy]

No one has really addressed the question of whether the government should be trying to fix everyone's marriage, nor whether they should be denying the constitutional rights of people based on how loud they fight with their spouse.

If your husband mistreats you, leave him.
It isnt the government's responsibility to put an end to wife-beatings.
It is the wifes responsibility.
It takes two to have an abusive relationship.

Anyone who proposes a government solution to maritial strife is a socialist trying to squeeze something in through the back door. We have all seen the wonderful effect of government action upon marriages in this country in the past few decades. We have what, a 70 percent divorce rate? Scandalous.

 

[Curare]

Personal responsibility

We have all seen the wonderful effect of government action upon marriages in this country in the past few decades. We have what, a 70 percent divorce rate? Scandalous.

It's interesting that you ignore personal responsibility as a major component in marriage. It's convenient to blame the government for our ills--isn't it? Just like some of my patients blame their parents for their bad choices.

People have suggested in this thread that domestic violence is most often the fault of women--do you advocate this position? Do you ignore the cold hard fact that 70% of domestic murder victims are women?

FYI, my wife and I have argued, but we've never struck eachother. My stunning wife and I chose mates without substance and physical abuse problems. We dated for years to make sure we were happy, stable, and compatible. My wife and I own our own home, paid cash for our modest cars, invest heavily, and have no credit card debt. My wife and I share 5 degrees, including my MD. We have many polar opposite political, social, and religious views--and we thrive off the diversity and learn from it. We've made made good decisions and we are reaping the rewards of our hard work. I view my wife as my equal, and I will never raise a hand to her. This is the reality that we've created.

 

[beerslurpy]

The source of the problem of wife beating is personal. Obviously. Just like the sources of poverty, crime and stupidity are personal. The question is whether the solution should be a government one.

The government creates a solution to prevent a rare tragedy and ends up breaking the entire system through its constant interference. Domestic violence laws dont just extend to stopping wife beating. It also extends to stopping potential wife beating, taking children from their parents and allowing women to more easily expel their husbands from the house and use the government to extract money from them. It is an attack on the institutions of Marriage and Family in this country.

The real solution to wifebeating is found with the people who are participating in it. If they dont want it to happen any longer, then they should take efforts to make it stop happening. It is that simple. If they cant resolve the probem themlselves, what makes you think that having a 3rd party intefere will be any more effective?

It is not my business to interfere with the miserable (but voluntary) relationships of other people. Nor should it be the business of government.

 

[Curare]

It is not my business to interfere with the miserable (but voluntary) relationships of other people. Nor should it be the business of government.

I absolutely agree--where have I suggested that it's the responsibility of the government to resolve domestic violence or the threat of domestic violence?

I think the goverment should stay the hell out of our homes--if people were responsible and used good judgement, government wouldn't have to get involved.

 

[Jammer Six]

It isnt the government's responsibility to put an end to wife-beatings.

A favorite refrain of wife beaters everywhere is that it's no one else's business.

Here's a flash, stud: I make violence, either direction, my business, and I only vote for politicians who will turn that view into policy.

 

[Barbara]

No, one45auto, you're the one saying the problems are equal. I was asking for evidence of it. .

If 3 times as many women are dying as men, I'd say domestic violence against women is the bigger problem right now. Feel free to donate all you want to men-only shelters..I'm not going to stop you. I won't even start a thread complaining about it.

I've noticed this pattern time and time again here.

Poster 1: Such and such happens to women (rape, domestic violence, whatever.)
Poster 2: It's those evil women. They're making problems out of nothing. Lautenberg Amendment! Evil Temptress! Feminazis liberal dogs! Wah! If they do get beat, its their own fault for putting up with it! They probably dress like hookers, too!
Poster 3: Well, it happens to men, too. Not very often, but it does and that's wrong, too, and should be taken into account when looking for solutions.
Poster 2: See, it is a huge problem! but those evil women don't want to admit its a problem for men! Why don't we see men being treated as the victims we are? It's all a scam to create single family homes where men are nothing more than sperm donors and all women can suck off their hard work through welfare! If men get beat, its because they're sweet and kind. If women get beat its because they're too stupid to end it. Those poor, poor men..there oughta be a law banning women who hit men from owning guns!


Seriously, folks..more women don't post here because this stuff gets old really, really fast. Most of us are not obnoxious enough to stay where we're not wanted, me apparently being an exception.

(and lest we hear more complaints about me not posting gun-related stuff:
I own a SA XD-9, a Sig P232, a S&W .22 A, and a Marlin Model 60. I'd really like a 20 ga. to shoot trap with, but alas, more guns will have to wait until my children are grown, I'm afraid. I also have an M1 Garand that is not mine but is on long term loan, and I shoot it about every two weeks, although it gets pretty pricey and not being supported by any person or government agency (despite being one of those evil single parents!) I sometimes have to make a decision between gas and ammo. I'm also president of a gun rights organization comprised of several hundred people, mostly, believe it or not, men, most of which who actually like me and stuff..go figure. This, however, would be why I post more on gun rights than I do on shooting itself. I prefer to read and learn about guns and don't feel I have anything of much value to share on shooting, (although I am trying to get a friend to make me some of those Nylatron bullets to try!) Obviously, I believe my knowledge of gun rights and women's issues is better than my knowledge of ballistics and firearms models, so that's what I post about.)

 

[dfaugh]

Thank you Cesiumsponge

For researching and coming up with REALISTIC (if still possibly biased by under reporting) statistics. Those numbers are far closer to what I have seen "in real life", as well as what my gut tells me is reality.

As far as "walking away" from an abusive relationship, well, I just don't get this sometimes...In the past few years, I've dated 2 different women who came from abusive relationships.

The first, admitted to being verbally abused (never admitted to physical abuse, but suspect it was there at least occasionally, from things she said) as well as being totally controlled by her husband for 27 years. Marriage ended when HE left her, abruptly. Had all sorts of rationalizations for his behavior (and hers). I treated her as a woman SHOULD be treated....But to make a long story short, she wasn't (at this point anyway) able to have a "normal" relationship.

The second had lived with a guy for several years, and apparently they fought alot...From what I could gather (and then from my own experience) she was frequently the instigator (especially when drinking, which it turns out she had a big problem with.) On more than one occasion she tried to "pick a fight" w/ me(always after too much to drink), not physically (although I'm sure she was capable of it) and was only made angrier when I wouldn't play along (Usually I just left.) Always apologetic the day after,but unable to change the pattern she'd grown used to, as it would always happen again.

Not even sure entirely what my point is here, other than DV can be "enabled", and that apparently some people (my examples are women,but could just as well be men.) feel that this is an acceptable....lifestyle?

Not trying to judge anyone here either, but I wonder what statistics wouldbe like if we removed some of the instances where someone stays far too long....

 

[Barbara]

Yeah..you konw the thing is, I know violent women, and some of them are flat out psycho and should be locked up..but its a short path from saying that to having someone tell you that violent women are a *bigger* problem than violent men.

 

[Barbara]

Dfaugh, I think location matters a lot, too. I know here, there is a huge pressure on women to make the relationship work, regardless of the problems..a lot of women, especially older ones, stayed out of a sense of duty. I'm not sure its like that everywhere, and definitely not so much in the past couple of decades.

 

[dfaugh]

OK,Barbara (and Curare if you're still with us)

Where did I once say that violent women were a bigger problem than violent men?

I'll go over the points of my posts, in abbreviated form:

1) Women are more likely to be considered the "victim" in any case of MUTUAL DV. Because of this they are also more likely to be believed if they lie about supposed abuse.

2) DV can be one sided, but it can also be two-sided. And it can be one-sided with the female being the agressor.

3) There are often "irrational" motivations/justifications on BOTH sides.

4) In most cases of he said/she said, the women wins, OFTEN wrongly(See #1).

Sounds to me like you have BIG chip on your shoulder (Yes, I have one too....being falsely accused of abuse will do that to you....but mine's a small one.)

 

[Intune]

Who is dismissing the right to self defense here?

You are.

Also, "your woman" may imply familiarity with--not ownership. Nuances, nuances...

Precisely. I was yanking your chain. Well, me & the old lady were.

We also enjoyed your post detailing your careful selection of a mate. Good thing you didn’t marry “down.” It would have never worked. Don’t get yer scrubs in an uproar, I’m yankin’ again. Her parents just celebrated their fifty-year anniversary with his eighth-grade education and Mom’s nursing degree. Good thing for that sheepskin or they’d have never made it! Oh, their net worth of well into seven figures that he brought in through his oil & cattle acumen just about covers the counseling they receive to avoid pummeling each other on a daily basis. It’s just hard to resist a good right cross that results in a satisfying cartilage crunch. 50 years of pure hell, ask either one of them. My wife & I are at 15yrs & look forward to the rest of our lives together in that WWF ring called Home. It’s where our hearts & 8oz gloves are.

I view my wife as my equal, and I will never raise a hand to her.

Who is dismissing the right to self defense here?

Ya did it again Doc!

All sarcasm, thread drift, chain yanking & meant in good humor remarks aside, were the children placed in any potential danger by going off into the frigid night with a drunk mom? Was the father instigating violence against his wife or protecting/fending for his children? With the minimal facts available, Dad would have wanted me on the jury.

 

[Barbara]

Oh, I have a huge chip on my shoulder. A big old freaking boulder. That doesn't make me wrong. Nor does it really have anything to do with the attitudes I see here.

However, I wasn't directing my comments at you, either.

 

[2nd Amendment]

Fantasy land is in full bloom around here, it appears. Men 95% of abuse and abusers? That''s painfully absurd. Let me see, the last ten instances I am aware of would be recorded as male abuse, but yet each was instigated by the woman, called in by the man and, when the cops arrived he went to jail. Three different couples. One I've been present for a couple times. The other two women I was present for their open statement that "Yeah, I knocked him around and then the cops hauled him off. Great, ain't it". So how much did that tilt those percentage do ya think?

My former best friend from highschool married a gorgeous blonde. Things were grand, till after the first kid. Then she took to a pattern of instigating violence. She'd yell, scream, curse and push and when he would try to leave she'd corner him and keep him in place. Did I mention she was of the Amazon gorgeous blonde pursuation? Meanwhile my little buddy was just that, one of those little guys.

Eventually he'd have enough and push, and when that didn't work he'd swing. And then she'd beat the hell out of him and then whine to everyone about how he hit her. Another damned abusive male, eh?

I was there. I saw it. Any number of times.

My first wife spent the last part of our marriage trying to get me to hit her. I never did. Frankly, looking back, I wish I'd cold cocked her a couple times. She deserved it. Yeah, you read that right: Deserved it.

My wife of now 12 years was the other side of the coin. She was abused before we got together. I scored a broken nose from him when they were breaking up because he blamed me. It was a statement of my own self restraint he's still walking and the .45 stayed in my belt. The guy has abused every woman he has been with since so maybe I shouldn't have been so restrained.

Men do more damage when they abuse. Society doesn't accept that women manipulate this fact. So we wind up with male abusers who jack up a system designed to see abuse from men in everything and women smart enough to use that system for their own benefit. It's a curse on men today and it damages the credibility of women who actually are abused. I for one can't manage to take any accusation seriously at first blush anymore. Then when crap like "95%" get's parrotted around it makes it even more impossible to take this "poor abused women" concept seriously.

 

[beerslurpy]

I've never beaten or even raised a hand against any woman and no one in my family has either.

However, I still beleive:
-women who are mistreated and dont leave or fight back deserve no sympathy
-the government has no business intruding into marriages

You people who keep crying for government interference on the ground of "its for teh children! its for the beaten women" make me sick because you are being intentionally blind to the way this policy works in day to day life.

Its just like with the TSA- once in a great while they accidentally catch someone like Richard Reid (or not), but the day to day effect is that everyone is harassed and inconvenienced.

The day to day effect of the educational system, CPS and domestic violence laws (which are all part of one system designed to break up families) is that children are encouraged to rat on their parents, wives are encouraged to accuse their husbands of being abusive and familes are generally encouraged to break up and rely on the government to settled disputes and supervise the welfare of the family members.

Or maybe this is only occuring in Florida and no other states have this problem.

 

[dfaugh]

Never Again Lyrics

He's drunk again, it's time to fight
She must have done something wrong tonight
The living room becomes a boxing ring
It's time to run when you see him
Clenching his hands
She's just a woman
Never Again

I hear her scream, from down the hall
Amazing she can even talk at all
She cries to me, Go back to bed
I'm terrified that she'll wind up
Dead in his hands, She's just a woman
Never Again

Been there before, but not like this
Seen it before, but not like this
Never before have I ever
Seen it this bad
She's just a woman
Never Again

Just tell the nurse, you slipped and fell
It starts to sting as it starts to swell
She looks at you, she wants the truth
It's right out there in the waiting room
With those hands
Lookin just as sweet as he can
Never Again

Seen it before, but not like this
Been there before, but not like this
Never before have I ever
Seen it this bad
She's just a woman
Never Again

Father's a name you haven't earned yet
You're just a child with a temper
Haven't you heard "Don't hit a lady"?
Kickin' your ass would be a pleasure

He's drunk again, it's time to fight
Same old ????, just on a different night
She grabs the gun, she's had enough
Tonight she'll find out how f---ing
Tough is this man
Pulls the trigger just as fast as she can
Never Again

Seen it before, but not like this
Been there before, but not like this
Never before have I ever
Seen it this bad
She's just a woman
Never Again

-Nickleback

 

[Curare]

The Pro-Wife Beaters are really starting to make sense now!

I must confess, I've been wrong all this time. I'm sorry to post such vicious attacks and facts. I'll never do it again. Take me back just one more time. I wouldn't have done it if you hadn't of pushed me so far. You know, in a way you kinda deserved it, though. Please Wife Beaters--take me back just one more time. I'll never post anything to do with reality again.

I was in the ER last night and it was amazing how many battered men came in. Their spouses came with them and said that the men had just fallen down the stairs. Thankfully we have a safe house for them and we were able to get them a safe place to stay through our Battered Male social worker team. I've seen a few unusual front page articles about women abusing their husband--America just doesn't realize how big of a problem it is. Those damn women better stop. Then again, the men are at fault too because they were probably just asking for it (or they were drunk, which is a perfectly acceptable excuse).

 

[beerslurpy]

Your ad hominems and your attempts at sarcasm and emotionalism dont justify government intervention any more than the facts you presented earlier.

Lets put it another way. If the government has no duty to protect people against crimes committed by strangers, why should they have a GREATER obligation to intervene when the offender and victim are voluntarily acquainted with one another?

 

[Intune]

A. Would you let the drunk wife drive?
B. Would you let the drunk wife drive with your children?
C. Would you let the drunk wife take a cab to parts unknown with the children?
D. Would you let the drunk wife wallow in her anger while subjugating the children (one of which with a known compromised immune system) to potentially dangerous temperatures while dressed in pj’s?
E. Yes to all the above to avoid a confrontation? Priceless.
F. Don’t breed.

 

[Monkeyleg]

Sheesh, I should be downstairs reading the paper and watching "Sixty Minutes."

Let's just distill the question at hand to this: should the government be able to deny Second Amendment rights to a man or a woman based on the testimony of one person, or the presumption of guilt, or for slapping another (not punching), or for just shouting?

Way back when, my wife threw a pizza at me. Enough cause to deny her Second Amendment rights?

My niece had a spouse who locked her and her kids in their trailer from the outside. That seems pretty clear-cut as far as definitions of domestic abuse go.

My BOL got into a shouting match with his fiance. No slapping, no pushing, no physical contact at all. In fact, she told the police that there was no physical threat or contact. Yet he's now prohibited from owning a gun.

My SOL had a boyfriend who stalked her everywhere she went. He beat her. He didn't stop until he got jail on another offense.

So, who decides, and what are the parameters?

 

[Curare]

Reality check

I've never suggested anywhere in this thread that the government should intervene in marital affairs or take away someone's 2A rights. If I have please quote me.

My point is that domestic violence happens more frequently and more severely to women--70% of murder victims in domestic disputes are female--Cesiumsponge crunched the government numbers and supported that figure. Kind of hard to argue with that cold, hard, statistic.

Furthermore, it seems that some have put more time into selecting their next handgun purchase than they have in selecting a mate. You marry someone with a violent temper, control issues, self destructive behaviour, or substance abuse problems and you expect marital bliss? Time to start making responsible decisions.

 

[Intune]

Life is not a petri dish. People change, fall down and degenerate. From my previous post, at what point in the alphabet would you intervene?

30% are males. Insignificant?

 

[Jammer Six]

Your ad hominems and your attempts at sarcasm and emotionalism dont justify government intervention any more than the facts you presented earlier.

My vote, on the other hand, justifies exactly that, government intervention. It's how I tell government where I want them to intervene.

It's our business, it's their business, and not only are wife beaters a morally bankrupt, self-pitying, cowardly bunch of children, but they're a tiny minority at the polls.

Because our government pays attention to large blocks of voters, wife beaters everywhere need to know that they're going to have our government, the police and the rest of normal, descent citizens in their homes, their lives and their faces, every time they make a fist.

Sheesh, I should be downstairs reading the paper and watching "Sixty Minutes."

Yeah, I know what you mean. Watching "Gilligan's Island" is better than trying to talk sense to wife-beaters.

If they had sufficient sense to listen and the ability to learn, they wouldn't hit the people they think they love.

So, who decides, and what are the parameters?

The courts decide, and the parameters are what we as citizens say they are.

We change them. We update them, then we vote.

There is no excuse for violence, and engaging in violence in your own home is a mark of the pathetic.