The Democrats in Washington are trying to shove the renewal of a bad law down our throats again. The Democrats see it as a chance to do politics as usual in Washington. A few Republicans are starting to stand up to this really bad law.
What is it?
It is a monstrosity called the Violence Against Women Act.
VAWA was originally passed during the Clinton Administration and has been periodically up for renewal since then. This is one of those years.
The Democrats and their allies in the drive-by media love to set the stage for this horrible bill. They love to shout Republicans support beating women and violence against women.
VAWA has been a sop to feminists and simply bad law.
Under VAWA, money is made available to the states if they do what the Feds want. What the Feds want is mandatory arrest policies, overuse of restraining orders and the funding of feminist infrastructure.
I have seen VAWA first hand. When VAWA was first enacted, I was working as a prosecutor. During the existence of VAWA, I have worked as both a prosecutor and a defense lawyer. VAWA created a new bureaucracy of “domestic violence advocates.”
Under VAWA, mandatory arrest policies were created. There is no proof that these policies do anything to stop domestic violence, but the Feds know best. Prior to VAWA, domestic violence was prosecuted. But many times, police officers would respond to a domestic violence call and decide there was nothing going on and tell the people, “If we have to come back here tonight, someone is going to jail.” Now with VAWA, the police operate on the belief that if they go to a domestic call, someone MUST go to jail.
VAWA pressured the states to create “Protective Orders.” If someone claims they are a victim of domestic violence, they can go get a restraining order. First, the alleged victim can get what is called an “ex-parte” order. That means the person who the restraining order is sought against, is not notified until after the order is in effect. Ex-parte orders can direct that someone vacate their home with no notice and no time to collect belongings. They can award child custody without a hearing. It can award child support and alimony without a hearing. They strip someone of their Second Amendment Rights, again without a hearing.
One judge I know calls Orders of Protection, as they are known in Tennessee, “a poor man’s divorce.” He calls them that because if a woman goes and gets one, the divorce is basically decided at that point and the man will have little chance to have any of it reversed.
Think about it for a moment. You’re a man who comes home from work one day and you’ve lost your home, your kids and everything based on an accusation with no proof.
If you ask almost any lawyer in either the criminal justice system or the domestic or family courts, they will tell you these orders are the most abused procedure in the justice system.
Tacitus said, “the more corrupt the society, the more laws it has.” This is very true with VAWA. Perhaps the worst part of it is for the people, mostly men, who are arrested as a result of this law.
Often they will not have the resources to try and defend themselves. The punishment that is often imposed is anger management or as some jurisdictions use the politically correct term, “Batterer’s intervention programs.” The men accused must endure what amounts to political indoctrination that can last up to a year. They are forced to pay for these classes so they will not go to jail.
All of that aside, there is no proof VAWA works. All it does is create a new class of criminals. These are mostly men, though sometimes women, who twenty years ago would have never been arrested.
Instead, thanks to VAWA, more men and women are forced through the system so it can perpetuate itself.
VAWA is an expensive failure and should be allowed to expire. The Republicans should counter the Democrats’ mantra about battered women with the stories of men and women whose lives have been ruined as a result of the misuse of the legal process under VAWA.
The Republicans should do this. Given the lack of political courage the Republicans show, they probably won’t.
They should fight to end the phenomenal waste of money that is VAWA.
Unfortunately, they probably won’t.
First we have to find a politician that has some balls that will not allow this to continue. And from what I have seen non of them have any.
As an example I called my Senator and asked what can be done since harry ried decided not to create a budget and was told nothing can be done. SO if that can happen what can we do about any of this with the exception of voting them out.
And even though we vote in so called good people they change and we get screwed once again.
I feel we should protest in their offices and tell them to just resign.
VAWA is an constitutional end run. If you go back to the '80s, you may recall the news stories about women who couldn't get the courts to protect them and were then killed by their estranged husbands. While there were certainly instances when this occurred, the media took it on as one of its causes for promotion working with those who sought what came to be known as VAWA laws. The problem, other than the mere lack of constitutionality, is that the application of the law is heavily abused. Women know that it's advantageous in a pending divorce to file such a charge. I've heard that the organization that works to defend abused women in my area - Turning Point - which also has an office down the hall from the courtrooms on the divorce floor at the county government building, regularly encourages women to take advantage of the law. As it's been told to me, this encouragement may well come with or without any basis in fact. The same person who told me this, a female counselor in the area who has worked with a lot of people on both sides of the issue, said, "In McHenry County, the joke is that the first person to claim abuse in a pending divorce wins." And she agreed that it's usually a woman making the claim.
My thought is that, if there is a necessity for 'temporarily' infringing on someone's constitutional rights, there's a much better way to go about it than VAWA provides. The basis is that the accused is denied due process and treated as though guilty prior to any trial. This, of course, is done to protect women and I understand that the Supreme Court has upheld this notion with the idea that, even if some are wronged by the process, it is appropriate since the law is a necessity in order to protect women.
So, if we're going to abuse the constitution in the interest of protecting women, shouldn't we at least do it with some sort of respect for the constitution and those who are subject to the law? In other words, without malice and with complete respect, a judge should, almost apologetically, tell a man, "You have been accused of abusing your wife. We have no evidence at this time to substantiate the accusations. However, in order to ensure your wife's safety, I am going to apply this Order of Protection, which will require you to vacate your home and stay away from your wife until this matter is settled. I will, however, apply this measure with a commitment that it not, in any way, influence the outcome of your pending divorce.
"I want you to know that, considering that you may be innocent of the charges against you, I regret the application of this Order of Protection. However, if we discover evidence that the charges against you are true, I will bring down the full weight of the courts upon you with both feet. On the other hand, if it becomes conclusively apparent that the charges against you were wrongly applied, in other words, if it turns out your wife has abused you, the courts and this law to protect women, by lying, I will bring the courts down on her with equal enthusiasm.
How about INSTEAD we obey the constitution. If a spouse [male or female] fears for their safety let the State pay for temporary shelters for them until lawful courts hears cases and decide them. Protect the rights of both spouses.
It is impossible to prevent all crime, even violent crime. This is why we NEED a moral and religious citizenry.
The same tactic was used in the 1980's to get the healthcare law passed that has enabled anyone to show up at emergency rooms and get medical care even when it is not an emergency. They cannot be denied evaluation for even the most minor crap, and rarely are they going to pay anything. The rest of us have been paying for it ever since.
Once again, the cause sounds noble, but the effect was more government at our expense.
I saw this as a cop. Woman goes to Family Law Attorney [Divorce]. Next files removal order to get "him" out of the home. Sometimes these guys have only 10 minutes to grab a razor and a clean pair of pants. Next comes the Restraining Order and reassignment of custody of the kids. Next comes the accusations of abuse and all. Then comes in most cases, unsubstantiated claims of physical abuse. Next comes the mans loss of home, visitation with kids, loss of gun ownership and on and on................................... Divorce Attorneys are notorious about planting the seed and then liberally watering it to have the total devastation of divorce and distruction of a family. When you declare war, everyone you see is carrying a gun; its a mindset
Donald is correct - no constitutional authority just another liberal 'feel good' law...Congress needs to say 'unconsitutional' but I suspect the democrats would draw out the 'pursuit of happiness' ... 'welfare'.....and use these as their rationale.
"Vote for VAWA to your peril at the ballot box in 2012 #teaparty"
To GOP Reps and Sens.
We have such a law here in Colorado. If the police are dispatched to a home on a domestic violence call - then they MUST MAKE AN ARREST. Want to take a guess who is usually removed from the home in handcuffs? No evidence of abuse is needed - no signs of violence need to be present - only the woman's word that she "feels frightened."
Now I know many of you guys don't like to think badly of the 'fairer sex', but the fact is there are some among us can get pretty vindictive when we're of a mind to. Many a wife has boldly used this law to exert control over her husband's life and habits, and many a husband has been hauled out of his home for having committed the crime of not giving his wife her way.
If this law passes then you better watch your back boys.
As a Woman I am offended by this law!! Now let's see how they handle that one! This is rediculas. If my husbands Ex-wife knew about this, she would have used it, reason is she would do anything to hurt him. He is a very good man that would never hurt anyone mostly a woman. She lied in court about it to start with and she got a restraining order on him based on that lie. He was not allowed too see his kids allowing her to continue to brain wash them (Thankfully it only worked on the oldest and NOT the youngest!) We went to court and we could have proven that she was lying but a stupid hurricane came in and the court said they were only going to hear agreements. He caved and she got to keep the kids and not go to jail. She should have, she was claiming that he hit her and was choking the kids while DRIVING (btw) and the day she claimed that he did this, he was out with me and my Family celebrating my Brothers birthday. It was nasty. But if she had known about this, she would have used it. There are too many laws against men and they get abused like all laws that liberals implament. 99% of the time the man is innocent and yet HE is the one that has to pay. There is no reason that she should have gotten everything including all his money and he STILL have to pay child support on a child that refused to see him or talk to him. Had the court taken that money away from that greedy little pig then the oldest would not have been so brain washed, and she would have seen us and had been happy. Now all she cares about is money and hurting others like the mother. That's what happens when you get a divorice in NJ! Liberal land at the time. I have had enough really, I am sick of men alway's being the bad ones. NO it's not alway's true. Most men that have too suffer that I know, are really good guy's! ENOUGH PICKING ON THE MEN!!
Judson, thanks for the insight on this. I was aware of the domestic violence "rules" the police are required to follow, but had no idea about the Federal origins and unintended consequences!
Thank you Lynda for your red white and blue attitude. Your kind of message is important to let those planners of the real revolution know those they can count on for support. Surely as they plan and wait, they find great comfort reading posts of the many who agree with them that this must end and politicians are not the answer. They are the problem that needs eradicated. To those who grow tired of talk and wish action. Be patient as the time grows near that you will wish we were only talking. With the signing of the IO for martial law it is clear they are moving closer to the forced action that will result in revolt. You too will be counted among the many looked to for support. America is sick to death of the communist crap. This great displeasure is what drives our rhetoric.