gmhowell
Not Banned Yet
I'll be more impressed when politicians begin cracking down on false claims of DV.
Many politicians, members of the gun control crowd in particular, totally fail to grasp the concept of deterrence.
Restraining order against offender != deterrence
Weakly enforced laws with light prison sentences != deterrence
Gun pointed at offender = deterrence
Domestic violence is a huge problem but in actuality most people don't really get hurt. In DC its usually a push, a smack, a threat, or a kick with very little to no physical injury. Please don't misunderstand that to say that there are not serious victims out there.
My impression is that the real government issue with DV is the amount of money spent. We keep free 911 phones in out patrol cars, we (the gov) pay for the restraining orders to be processed, multile officers time on scene then processing then court, the advocacy programs and shelters subsidized by the government, Judges, civilian witnesses, social workers and CFSA. Each one of the above groups is being paid to deal with the same domestic violence incident, that's a crap ton of money.
The real issue with DV isn't arming victims the real issue has nothing to do with guns. In situations like this guns are a temporary band aid that honestly might lead to more problems (and you'll probably never hear me say that again). It's a sociological issue that needs to be addressed. Is it maturity? A cultural thing? An economic thing?
I used to deal with DV A LOT!!! Thankfully not so much anymore. What I find in is that in lower income areas pride is held to an insanely high regard. When someone's pride is hurt they end up lashing out physically. Who better than to hurt your pride but the one who you care most for?
DV is a real problem. I have seen it. protective orders are at best a fig leaf that deters only those who are not a genuine threat. Because they are now routine, they are not taken a seriously as they would be if they were only used when truly needed.. It appears to be a "boy who cries wolf " thing. Particular when over privileged housewives use them as leverage in custody disputes.
If i am off the mark or out of line please call me on it, but if you get a DV call and find out that there is a OP on the guy, do you treat it as a likely violence imminent situation, or have you reach the point were OP is so standard that it tells you nothing?
I only know from NY. They Given as a matter of course, and the police might not even run a red light to get there any quicker as it means nothing now..
Domestic violence is a huge problem but in actuality most people don't really get hurt. In DC its usually a push, a smack, a threat, or a kick with very little to no physical injury. Please don't misunderstand that to say that there are not serious victims out there.
My impression is that the real government issue with DV is the amount of money spent. We keep free 911 phones in out patrol cars, we (the gov) pay for the restraining orders to be processed, multile officers time on scene then processing then court, the advocacy programs and shelters subsidized by the government, Judges, civilian witnesses, social workers and CFSA. Each one of the above groups is being paid to deal with the same domestic violence incident, that's a crap ton of money.
The real issue with DV isn't arming victims the real issue has nothing to do with guns. In situations like this guns are a temporary band aid that honestly might lead to more problems (and you'll probably never hear me say that again). It's a sociological issue that needs to be addressed. Is it maturity? A cultural thing? An economic thing?
I used to deal with DV A LOT!!! Thankfully not so much anymore. What I find in is that in lower income areas pride is held to an insanely high regard. When someone's pride is hurt they end up lashing out physically. Who better than to hurt your pride but the one who you care most for?