Violence Against Women Act
By debrakcarey
@debrakcarey (19887)
United States
March 16, 2012 12:58pm CST
Men are always presumed guilty until proven innocent when it comes to domestic violence. and women must always be believed without fear of being punished for perjury. The Violence Against Women Act assumes there is no violence against men, and it doesn't provide services for men who are victims of domestic violence.
Th definitions of domestic violence include overbroad concepts such as emotional distress, harassment, annoyance, or merely unpleasant speech. I know this for a fact, my son was jailed for calling his ex wife a b!tch when she sold her wedding ring to her brother so he could buy drugs. Yet he could not bring up her repeated infidelities and her stealing from the family's bank account to fund her boyfriends.
Feminist recipients of federal Violence Against Women Act money use the money to train legislators, judges and prosecutors in feminist ideology and goals. This has resulted in dozens of state laws calling for mandatory arrest and no-drop prosecution. Someone must be arrested and they will prosecute even if the woman changes her mind.
Instead of promoting divorce, breakup of marriage, and hatred of men, the Violence Against Women Act should be revised to encourage counseling when appropriate and voluntary. Instead of spending money to influence judges, maybe some of that federal money should be used for programs to help marriage partners to get counselling for drug and alcohol abuse which is the cause of most domestic violence.
Any man who is accused of domestic violence effectively loses his right to due process, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, equal treatment under the law, the right to a fair trial and to confront his accuser. Again, my son's ex wife went and got an order of protection during their divorce and the judge allowed her to speak but not my son.
The woman is provided with legal representation even though she has not presented any evidence of injury or harm. The man gets no such help.
I am the victim of domestic violence, yet I do not believe this is a fair law. I do not agree with how this law is implemented or interpreted in the courts. The man is NOT automatically guilty and the woman is not automatically innocent.
Any men out there want to comment, or maybe even the ladies?
2 people like this
4 responses
@Runite (307)
• United States
16 Mar 12
I believe that everyone regardless of age and gender should be punished the same as what they did to the victim. If they murdered someone, they should be murdered as well. If they raped, they should be raped also. Let the lesson be learned, let them feel what their victims felt.
2 people like this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
16 Mar 12
Welcome to myLot.
That is rather harsh, what if a person is falsely accused and convicted?
1 person likes this
@TheMetallion (1834)
• United States
16 Mar 12
Punitive rape is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard in my life. Seriously, Runite, have a seat.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
16 Mar 12
That's most likely going to happen to a rapist anyway after they're sent to prison.
1 person likes this
@dragon54u (31633)
• United States
16 Mar 12
I'm not a man but I know that the laws deal with men unfairly in a lot of cases. It is getting better, slowly, as you can see by some men having custody or joint custody of their children. But mostly the law seems to favor women.
I know of a case where the woman ran at her boyfriend with a knife and he fended her off by punching her in the face. Yet he was jailed because he couldn't prove she attacked him even though the knife was on the floor and his shirt was sliced open. That is NOT fair. On the other hand all a woman has to say is that a man pushed her and he gets hauled off to jail if she presses charges.
There is way too much violence in our homes today. In my mother's time, in the 30's and 40's, a man who beat his wife or children got a visit from the neighbors and woe be to him who continued such cruelty! Today neighbors could not care less about it as long as it doesn't involve them. So we have laws in place of what the community used to do.
2 people like this
@purplealabaster (22085)
• United States
17 Mar 12
Dragon54u - You say that in the 30's and 40's a man who beat his wife and/or children would be paid a visit from the neighbors essentially to teach him a lesson and make him stop such actions. That was my grandparents' time, and perhaps it depended upon where you lived, but I can tell you that definitely was not the case everywhere. If a man outside the family hit a woman or child, then he would definitely be taught a lesson by the community. However, if a man hit his own wife or child(ren), then the neighbors would not do a thing, because it was not their business not to mention that they believed it was his "right".
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
16 Mar 12
This law is really about one thing and one thing only, making republicans look bad. If it were simply a renewal of the existing law, it wouldn't be a problem. Instead, what it does is increase funding to domestic violence programs, increasing the deficit, while expanding the definition. Democrats don't really believe this will pass. It's not about passing it. It's about getting republicans to vote against it so they can say there is a "War on Women's Rights." That's what the whole birth control crap was about. We all know it wasn't about money since even a homeless person can scrounge up $9 a month. It's a game and women on the left, sadly, are dumb enough to let themselves be used as pawns in this game.
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
16 Mar 12
The pres is campaign mode. Can't Republicans stand up to him?
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
17 Mar 12
The main stream media may be working for the White HOuse, did you read the DailyCaller's expose' on MediaMatters? They enjoyed a weekly telephone call with the White House, then fed their talking points to the networks. Also had a 'hit list' (with Rush at the top) of alterntive media anchors, bloggers, and editorialists whom they were going to follow around and gather dirt on. They hired people to do this!
When the press is owned by the left and feeds the people lies, distortions, and half-truths and avoids, no forbids, any opposition to the administration in power, we have a dictatoral regime in the making.
@RebeccaScarlett (2532)
• Canada
21 Apr 12
This is a problem in Canada, too. My friend's brother and his girlfriend got into a fight one night when she was drunk. She yelled her intent to spend the night at a friend's. He took her by the arm, sat her down, and said "I don't care how mad at me you are, I will not let you drive drunk. I can call a cab, I can leave for the night, whatever you want, but don't drive."
Guess who ended up in court on trial for "assault" and "forcible confinement?"
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
22 Apr 12
absolutely ridiculous, and they'd have probably arrested him IF she went out driving for allowing it!
