Does the Federal Government Pay States to Prosecute Domestic Violence by Males

[aardvarc]

Carl, let's get together and work on a grant to provide clues. Some are sorely needed.

[cdwjava]

Civil process, huh? And if you violate that "civil process", you get police officers up your ass with the handcuffs out.

Yes, if you violate a judge's order to stay away, you SHALL (as written in the law) be arrested. Easy to avoid ... don't violate a judge's order!

I am educated on the concept of splitting hairs, and that's what you are doing here.

I answered the question that was written, some of you are the ones trying to extrapolate a statement that the state is somehow paid to prosecute males by referencing tangential ideas (largely referring to the operation of NGOs) through links to opinion websites.

- - - Updated - - -

I am sure that CA is like most states, in which a protective order can be granted through civil, family or criminal court. The order is granted by the court. Which means any breach of that order will " ...get police officers up your ass with the handcuffs out." The is no splitting hairs. We are 100% responsible for how we choose to handle a situation. The government is not paying anyone to prosecute men. What they are doing is providing money for much needed services.

Agreed.

And, as a means of clarification, for us in CA this is "splitting hairs" as a restraining order is something sought through Family Court and is a civil matter, and a protective order is something initiated by the DA or the court when a subject is charged or convicted.

[Disagreeable]

What it was Carl was a group of agencies that decided males were the abuser and did not edit their posters before sending out. After I complained, the posters were updated. I do not understand why everyone is trying to pretend this is not one of our countries dirty little secrets.

[cdwjava]

What it was Carl was a group of agencies that decided males were the abuser and did not edit their posters before sending out. After I complained, the posters were updated. I do not understand why everyone is trying to pretend this is not one of our countries dirty little secrets.

Because no one pays us (the police, the prosecutors or the courts) to prosecute MALES. There are grants and funding available to aid the government in pursuing abusers and protecting the victims. The fact that the abusers are overwhelmingly men and the victims are overwhelmingly women naturally skews the perception that the system is geared to pursue men. The law is gender neutral on the subject. Private services - such as shelters and advocacy groups - tend to be private organizations and are often geared towards addressing the concerns of their primary constituency - women, and even women with children. It would be fiscally impractical to provide equal services to both men and women given the frequency of the need for certain services (such as housing) towards men.

Men are most often the abuser, and women most often the victim. It's a fact. Funding from the government pays for programs geared towards addressing the problem on a gender neutral basis. That, too, is a fact. As a result of the dynamic, most the services are focused towards women and most the prosecutions are focused on men. It's the nature of the beast. Time to acknowledge DV for what it is, for the most part, abuse by males against females.

[LawResearcherMissy]

Tech42, I already spoke to you today about shutting up on topics where you are not sufficiently endowed with clue.

Since you can't follow instructions, and I can't be bothered to babysit you, guess what?

Yeah.

[drthyrd]

What it was Carl was a group of agencies that decided males were the abuser and did not edit their posters before sending out. After I complained, the posters were updated. I do not understand why everyone is trying to pretend this is not one of our countries dirty little secrets.

I always find it interesting when people wish to argue that women are as violent as men. Women as a gender are not better than men, but statistically they are less violent. Crime statistics support that domestic violence perpetrators are primarily men. This should not come as a surprise (or evidence of a vast conspiracy) since similar statistics and percentages are found in all other forms of violent crime: homicide (90% male offenders), assault (around 80% male offenders), burglary (over 80% male offenders) and so on. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...abledatadecpdf

Given crime statistics by gender for other types of violent crimes show similar ratios of males versus female perpetrators, and this holds true whether the statistics are based on arrests, convictions, or victimization surveys (DOJ), it should bolster confidence that the statistics reported regarding domestic violence are trustworthy. It would actually be rather curious if women were perpetrators at equal numbers as men in only one area of violent crime, domestic violence, and behaved in a relatively non violent manners with all other persons. Gender equality in the US is amazing, but crime statistics still bear witness that the use of violent force to gain control or commit a crime is an action taken more frequently by men. The fact that men are more violent to each other, and toward women, does not mean that some women are not violent. Nor does it mean women do not commit crimes. Currently, women are found equally in offender populations for some non-violent crimes, for example embezzlement, and surpass men as offenders for prostitution.

[aardvarc]

And while we're on the topic of the existance of male victims of domestic violence, let's not forget that a person of any gender can be a victim at the hands of another person of any gender. Just as women can be victimized by both men and women, men can be victimized by both men and women. Such realizations are relatively new in the realm of victimology, but more and more, just as in other areas of law, equality is creeping into the mix.

As to the issue of male victims, some may find interesting perspectives on the problem here:

http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/malevictims.shtml



PS. Nice ta see ya, drt =)

[viol8te]

Being male, I am confounded by the hypocrisy that we operate under. Most of society as a whole has operated under the prmeise that the man is the provider, protector and head of the household. It has been long established rhetoric that we are the rational ones and womes are (the operative word amongst my defendants nowdays) bi-polar. Yet when it comes to domestic battery, we say that the "woman kept pushing my buttons." "If anybody needs to be doing these classes, it should be her." "I was just defending myself!" "So what would you do? You woulda just kept lettin' her do that shit?!?"

For a gender that claims that we are so rational and in control of our behavior, we sure don't mind blaming her for our actions and beliefs.

Now, we are on this board trying to justify violence by, using tainted articles and fallacious allegations that is a federal conspiracy to saddle every man that it can scrounge up with a domestic battery conviction. Please, there is no conspiracy. But dammit if ain't a lot of denial!

[cdwjava]

I have also found that abusers (yes, most often men) are perfectly willing to let their victim lie (recant or claim to have lied to the police) and risk jail in order to protect him. The victims risks punishment to protect the abuser, but the abuser is rarely ever willing to jump on the grenade for the victim. It's all part of the dynamic involved.

[Teach42]

Tech42, I already spoke to you today about shutting up on topics where you are not sufficiently endowed with clue.

Since you can't follow instructions, and I can't be bothered to babysit you, guess what?

Yeah.

You're a pig, and I hope that you get cancer.

As for my knowledge of the law, I've won 7 legal battles in the last 15 years, and I needed an attorney for only 1 one of them . So, my knowledge of the law is just fine, thank you.