NIKKI HALEY NEEDS TO GET REAL ON CRIMINAL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
|| By MIA McLEOD || Last Thursday, I sat through the plea and sentencing of the man who shot and killed my cousin, Zelda, after she broke off their engagement and decided she didn’t want to date or marry him. Less than two hours later, a domestic violence murder-suicide shook the University of South Carolina, the State House and all of South Carolina.
The list of women, men and children who have been gunned down as a result of dating, breakup and intimate partner violence is growing. And instead of fiercely protecting precious lives, our elected officials become fiercely protective of the seats they hold and the guns they carry.
So, Governor Nikki Haley, after four years of doing nothing you can keep your grassroots task force. We’ve been there … done that. Although important, grassroots efforts obviously aren’t enough to keep us out of the #1 and #2 spots.
Try taking guns from abusers before they murder…and not vetoing much-needed funding for domestic violence shelters and rape crisis centers. That would do much more to save lives than a 30-minute press conference and photo-op.
We keep hearing, “guns don’t kill people. People kill people.”
Yes, people do kill people … with guns. So if we wanna protect the rights of law-abiding citizens who are licensed to carry a gun, I’m all for that.
Like many of my legislative colleagues, I grew up around guns and have a concealed weapons permit. And, while I support the right to own and carry a firearm, that right isn’t absolute. Those who abuse it should lose it.
But, sadly, our elected leaders seem more obsessed with “gun rights” than distressed about “gun wrongs.”
Only in this gun-totin’ Bible-belt would we even consider putting “gun education” before a “quality education.” Where else would we teach kids how to shoot before we teach them how to read?
What happens … Governor, Senators and Representatives … when her right to live collides with his right to bear arms?
Where are you when someone who claims to love her, threatens her life daily? Does it matter that she has repeatedly sought protection from physical, verbal and emotional abuse under the laws you’ve created, only to learn that it’s not worth the paper it’s written on?
Why, with a well-documented, violent criminal history, does her abuser still have the right to legally buy and possess a gun?
Perhaps you think she enjoys being a prisoner in her own home … waiting for her abuser to decide when to pull the trigger of the weapon that you still allow him to legally own. What other recourse does she have, when your compassion and concern are contingent upon who she loves and why she stays?
When you carry her lifeless silhouette in front of the news cameras every October, does her story bear “silent witness” to the true torment she endured before she was murdered? Are you reminded that while she lived, her pleas for help went unanswered or that your indifference silenced her and enabled her abuser?
Do you regret that your laws provided the ammunition he needed to harass, threaten, intimidate and eventually kill her? If so, why do you continue to defend his right to bear arms instead of her right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
What happens when your sons, daughters and other “innocent” bystanders get caught in the crossfire of those deadly, stray bullets that are meant for her?
Will you change the laws then?
How many more murder-suicides and senseless homicides will it take for you to force these violent offenders to surrender their firearms? Don’t you care that while you’re debating and deliberating – women, men and children across South Carolina are dying?
Funny how easily you use God when it suits your own interest and play God when it comes to protecting hers. Will there ever be a time when “mercy triumphs over judgment?”
Surely not, in this blasphemous Bible-belt we call South Carolina.
And while we continue to allow the privileges of the abusers to trump the rights of the abused, none of us are safe.
My Bible says, “No weapon formed against ‘me’ shall prosper.”
So, I can’t help but wonder…what does yours say?
Mia McLeod represents District No. 79 in the South Carolina House of Representatives.
WANNA SOUND OFF? Submit your editorial for consideration HERE …
140 comments
Well said, Mia! You and I would disagree on many political issues but you are honest and call issues as you see them. I am proud you are my representative.
Wow Will, keep on with these shrill commentaries which ignore not only 2a issues but greater issues of due process and maybe HuffPo will buy out your site and your stable of “writers”.
please don’t let me hit your ass on the way out, not sure they can wash that kind of funk out!
Sorry! I didn’t mean to offend your delicate sensibilities. Let me hike up my skirt and have a hissy fit in a gesture of solidarity with you and others who choose to let emotion supercede logic and common sense.
you didn’t offend me, ma’am! just letting you know you arent shit and if you leave nobody will miss ya! nobody here is that important! not even me! i’ll let you go back to pmsing about will letting people post different opinions! looks like you’re the delicate flower, aren’t ya darling! leave your skirt down, it is a bit more modest ma’am!
I’m not a ma’am. The “hiking up my skirt” reference was sarcasm.
“WHOOOSH”!
well boy i do apologize! never seen a man pms before! you should get that checked out! just tell the good doctor that when someone gets to disagreein with ya, ya just go crazy! ain’t natural i tell ya! good luck to ya boy!
Does that mean you’d like a good poke? I’ll go easy at first,until you get to liking it…
Why did the NRA take the first part of the 2A off their exterior wall sign–the part that talks about a well regulated militia?
Because that indroductory phrase as was common for those times had nothing to do with the intent of the Amendment, which was to guarantee that free men not be denied the use of arms.
So your saying the vaunted constitution is open to a bit of the old “interpretation”
Ah, the old “only I/we can read the minds of the Founding Fathers” show. Brought to you by the Gun Manufactures of the World and the NRA, their lobby.
Their personal letters were full of references that cree men should not be denied the use. or possession of arms. It’s really not rocket science.
free men
And those references were about arming free men in case the non-free men decided to have an uprising. So maybe the context has changed since then?
I guess you ignorantly refer to”slaves” with regards to “uprising”. The right to keep and bear arms was inserted into The Constitution to allow a means to fight tyranny from government, be it our own or a foreign power such as was the case with the British in those days.
It had nothing to do with keeping slaves.
“And instead of fiercely protecting precious lives, our elected officials become fiercely protective of the seats they hold and the guns they carry.”
Rock on, Mia.
When I was a child there were not as many guns floating around so men just used butcher knives to kill their wives! If laws were the answer America would never have violence. People were killing each other before guns were invented. Awaken Mia!
So, you’re 800 years old?
Newsflash: The national crime rate is the lowest it’s been since 1967. Those good ole days you remember never existed. You’re having Brian Williams memories.
Even if I disagree with Mia, she gets points from me for being a hot little monkey.
Well done. A sexist and racist double word score.
You’re jealous, aren’t you?
I know it’s tough in our current race baiting society, but consider that sometimes the word “monkey” isn’t a reference to blacks.
Also, finding a women attractive and calling her hot isn’t sexist in many circles, especially heterosexual ones.
I guess “Jungle Love” is kosher too?
I have confederate flag toilet paper. I love it. Everyday I get to wipe my ass with it. Today I think I’ll have greasy Mexican food.
“I guess “Jungle Love” is kosher too?”
Why wouldn’t it be, was it bad when Morris Day was singing it?
I’m glad you wipe your ass with the Confederate flag, it helps support manufacturers of Confederate toilet paper.
I buy mine from the Black Panthers.
lol…as long as you support small business I don’t give a *shit*.
:)
For that, I’ll give two.
Gun are made for one reason only…to kill. Keep them out of the hands of those who have proven they cannot control their actions. Also, anyone on anti-depressants or mood altering medications. Nearly, every mass shooting on American shores in the last fifteen plus years has involved the killer on anti-depressant meds.
Leaving most of your point aside…
“Nearly, every mass shooting on American shores in the last fifteen plus years has involved the killer on anti-depressant meds.”
Just curious, but wouldn’t a prudent discussion also do a little further research into anti-depressant meds?
Indeed, correlation and causation are two different things.
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3030529/infographic-of-the-day/hilarious-graphs-prove-that-correlation-isnt-causation
depressed? Likely. Even more likely (in my opinion, Your Honor), co-morbid personality disorders with depression
I completely agree with you that it would be very prudent to ban the sales of guns to people on anti-depressants.
2nd Amendment NRA style dude. NO discrimination against anyone. All must have guns. The minute we start picking and choosing who can’t have guns…the minute Hitler’s corpse will reanimate and come back to take our guns.
Let’s get the devices designed only to kill out of their hands first. Then we’ll worry about medicines that have actual benefits for some people.
Gun are made for one reason only…to kill.
-Greg
Many have a dual purpose for their firearms. While I have “killed” many a paper target or clay, my firearms have never killed a living thing. Not that I’m opposed to hunting, just hasn’t been my thing. I have been entertaining the idea of shooting and cleaning one of each species for the purpose of preparedness skills. As long as Publix or Harris Teeter stay in business Bambi is safe around me.
What you decide to shoot at it up to you. Guns are designed to kill. Always have been.
… and automobiles, which were NOT designed to kill, kill somewhere over twice as many people as guns in this country each year, despite tight regulation, licensing, and insurance requirements.
What about the many thousands who are maimed for life or die due to medical malpractice and incompetence each year in this country. Their numbers exceed the carnage by guns and automobiles combined. What are we doing about THOSE numbers?
Cars: designed to transport people and things. The medical profession: designed to save millions of more lives than it doesn’t. Guns: designed to kill.
It’s nice of an adult to let you use the computer, child. What’s your point, again?
So, just because guns are (usually) designed for killing, we focus on the relatively small amount of carnage caused by them in this country, to the exclusion of far more problematic issues? Makes perfect sense… oh wait…
Guns are designed to kill. Always have been.
Absolutely.
No one argues this.
What’s your point?
Hint: Knives are designed to cut. Hammers are designed to hammer things….
Don’t forget dildo’s and nipple clips!
In case you haven’t noticed, on occasion some people need killing, such as the home invader, car-jacker, wannabe rapist, or armed robber. When a good citizen or cop makes that happen, it is probably a good thing.
or a citizen and a good cop for that matter….
So why do you have a gun then?
Hitler outlawed guns too.
who is trying to outlaw guns?
Obama wants to…and it has been done in ULTRA leftist Chicago and DC…you uneducated F*#k trying to PREACH to everyone else..
Do your homework before you open your mouth…Dumb@$$….
Maybe you should do yours. This is not a piece about Obama. It is about legislation to prevent CDV in South Carolina by Mia Mcleod. Try to keep up.
LMAO…changing the subject now…are we???…Hahahaha..Don’t blame you…
He also had a mustache.
“Like many of my legislative colleagues, I grew up around guns and have a concealed weapons permit. And, while I support the right to own and carry a firearm, that right isn’t absolute. Those who abuse it should lose it.”
What is unreasonable about that?
Really, sounds just like Bill Clinton talking about how he supported the right to keep and bear arms, around the time he borrowed a shotgun to shoot at a duck for a media photo op.
Her statement is really no different in nature than the oft-condemned -as-racist remark that some people make about their best friend(s) are Black when criticizing some issue surrounding Blacks on a given day. She’s just using the ploy on a different topic.
Um… actually no, it is VERY different. She is talking about limiting access to firearms for abusers. She is talking about saving lives. Again, what is unreasonable about that?
Mama it is already against the Law. Can’t a woman pick up a phone and say “Hello 911, my well-documented, violent criminal fiance has a firearm”? I have never known someone in LE to say violent criminals have a right to bear arms. Please point out who has advocated arming Felons like Rep. McLeod purports.
Where does she say that, exactly?
The list of women, men and children who
have been gunned down as a result of dating, breakup and intimate
partner violence is growing. And instead of fiercely protecting precious
lives, our elected officials become fiercely protective of the seats
they hold and the guns they carry. – Mia McLeod
She is alleging that there are no Laws to keep her cousin’s killer from gun ownership and that elected officials won’t pass such Laws. I call BS. Why don’t we have a Law forbidding Counties or Cities from having Banks or Convenience stores if there are people committing robberies?
Yes, there are laws. Laws that clearly aren’t working. The new legislation proposes stiffer penalties for known abusers.
So, if stiffer penalties and/or restrictions on gun ownership isn’t the answer, then what is? Clearly, something must be done. How do we fix it?
IDK, when I say let all the non-violent and minor drug offenders out to make room for these aholes the right wing posters jump me. When I suggest harsh enforcement the left wings accuses me of supporting the LE/Corrections Complex so we are left with doing nothing. Really I understand her pain, but don’t think for a moment I would KNOW my daughters or any female friend or family members were with someone like that and not bring awareness to LE about a guy like that. I’d rather my kid hate me for the rest of her life than see it end that way.
Fair enough. Thanks for the discussion.
I try not to be a flame thrower but I have to admit, her column really got me heated. Probably, hopefully the passion of her grief made her write such a misdirected piece. While I’m not a “National Expert”, I am very very experienced in the subjects of guns and with CDV(please see below). Always enjoy all points of view, I’m not beyond changing my mind from good, civil, debate. Gay Marriage comes to mind.
I get it. It is a hot-button topic for me, as well. I volunteer at a women’s shelter. I have been exposed to stories of unspeakable violence. Hard not to get emotionally involved.
I would also like to add that passing additional laws to keep guns out of the hands of known abusers would open the door for jilted lovers or angry wives/ girlfriends to threaten or actually cause problems for innocent men.
We already have NUMEROUS laws against murder, assault, spousal abuse, possession of firearms by murderers and abusers, and use of weapons in these acts. Gun laws only inhibit those who should not be a source of worry or concern to begin with, the law-abiding. Believing that heaping more laws upon existing laws will stop criminals from doing what criminals do is, to put it as kindly as possible, a fool’s errand.
Keeping the real abusers who severely (and often repeatedly) batter women in jail might help. Making criminals out of someone who raises their voice in frustration or who causes a minor bruise or red mark in pushing an irrational or even violent partner aside to leave the residence , not so much.
SXT, same exact thing. If you prefer, “same shit, different topic”.
When Leftwing Gestapo @$$holes like you and Obama define ABUSE…that’s what’s wrong with it…
Voting ‘R’ is likely a crime to F*#king idiots like you….See what Obama did using the IRS and the NSA…
You D*#n sure have no right to make any rules restricting ANY right of any REAL American, after what you’ve been caught doing….
smh
Knowing how much you loooove those slippery slopes, then why do we define wrongdoing at all? Why have ANY rules & restrictions? Why not let children own firearms?
Why not follow the US Constitution you Leftwing Religious Zealot????
I guess you missed that “well regulated” part of the 2nd amendment.
It is well-regulated Dumb@$$..but that’s not enough for you radical Zealots…
Well-regulated per whom? Why do you get to define that?
The US Constitution and the majority of the American PEOPLE Define it…you ignorant NAZI…
well tango boy if they let you own one i would have to question that! why would they let an escaped looney bin boy own a gun! that ain’t right!
It is illegal for a felon to own a gun. Problem solved right?
The crazies chiming in with their daily Hitler reference.
lather, rinse, repeat
So it’s Spurrier’s fault…and you’re claiming my blog failed…LMAO…
You’re just a lemming, FITS, MoRon Dumb@$$…devoid of any original thought…Hahahaha…You want to keep Ward, and fire Spurrier…you F*#king idiot…LMAO…
what the hell would YOU know about original thought?
I know you had to steal mine to even post about it…Dumb@$$….LMAO…
You people are so STUPID you have no idea how you reveal yourself in attacking me…Hahahahaha…
Liberals…Wow…You are ignorant people…
if it aint flippy boy talkin bout muslims it is tango boy talkin bout hitler! what a hoot! guess nobody gives him attention on his site so he comes here! well here you go boy! attention! woo!
Not too proud of who you are…are you?
Really????… a Hitler reference..ahh the last resort of a weak mind andargument..but why state the obvious..please continue.
Is it true that Hitler, the Communists and the American left have the desire to outlaw guns in common?…..
Answer that, or STFU…or is that what you meant by STATING THE OBVIOUS???…LMAO….
Speaking of weak minds… Again, where is Ms. Mcleod expressing the desire to outlaw guns?
well you sure want to prove his point now don’t you tango boy! you got a weak mind! hey that aint so bad now is it! at least people will think ya got a mind at all!
So are you suggesting that if all those people had their guns back which Hiltler took, they alone would be able to defeat Nazi Germany?
I guess they were much better than the entire French army, the Polish Army, the Russian Army up to 1943, the Belgian army, the Greek army, the British army (Dunkirk)….
Perhaps if every Jewish family or like “undesirables” the Nazis had come to round up had had the means with which to kill a few Nazis as the Nazis came to round them up, fewer Jews and others would have died horrible, slow , deaths in concentration camps from disease, exposure, starvation, torture, and being worked to death. I don’t know about you, but I would prefer death with dignity in combat to the aforementioned. Surely, the progress the Nazis enjoyed in rounding up defenseless and compliant victims would have been slowed and not as many would have perished in concentration camps. IMHO, that alone would have been well worth the armed resistance effort. Of course, there will always be those who disagree and believe that being herded like sheep to slaughter is a better option.
Right, so the Jews would have been able to do all that without a standing army, without an air force, without heavy mechanized armor, without a navy, without artillery and without a military chain of command?
Forget it. If anyone ever tries to round you and your family up and take you and them away, just go with them. They are doing it for your own good or that of your country.
No use trying to explain to someone devoid of comprehension skills.
I’m not the one suggesting that lightly armed and untrained Jews could almost single handedly defeat the most powerful and modern army of it’s time.
I said nothing about defeating them. My point was that Nazi progress would have been greatly slowed had they been met with armed resistance each time they went to round up Jews or others. They necessarily would have required many more troops for the job, either draining forces from combat with the Allies and/or slowing the roundup efforts. Instead of simply hearding compliant victims onto trucks or trains, they would have had to move cautiously and tactically, slowing the number of captives taken in a day. If troops were pulled from combat duty to assist with roundups, an Allied victory may have occurred sooner, again saving many lives.
herding
Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn’t it. Let’s not forget the Nazi’s defeated Poland in 2 weeks, they defeated France in 2 months and if not for bungling by Hitler they would have captured over 300,000 British troops.
Also, there were assassinations and other acts of armed defiance against the Nazis but what did that get you? They would round up your family, your extended family, your friends, their friends, and anyone inbetween to kill them publicly as a lesson. One Nazi life would often be exchanged for hundreds of citizens’ lives. There was no cogent awareness of the death camps, just that they were interment or labor camps. People thought they would eventually return back home. What would you have done?
AFAIK, I wasn’t there, then. In the here-and-now, awareness that history DOES repeat itself and taking steps to deal with such WHEN it does is wise, IMHO.
I’m sure Hitler would TOTALLY agree with you…but NO, I will NEVER let you FILTHY corrupt Leftwing B@$t@rds be the arbiter of who can have guns, and who cannot….
No worries. I’m not concerned. I have a funny feeling you’ll end up bleeding out on the floor of a bar in 5 points after your concealed gun shoots your nuts off. Your last thought will be…”Limbaughsaphatkhunt was right…guns do kill people”….
“Why, with a well-documented, violent criminal history, does her abuser still have the right to legally buy and possess a gun?” – Mia McLeod
The simple answer is that he can’t, not legally. What are the chances your cousin was aware that her criminal boyfriend possessed a firearm? Why was she engaged to a well documented criminal? Did you report him to the authorities? Why in the hell aren’t you investigating the NICS process instead of attacking the 2A? I’m sure good ole’ Eric can help you out. Was he a drug cartel guy? Eric may have sold him the gun. Why do we need more Laws to enforce Laws that already exist? Your rant is nothing more than a finger pointing exercise to avoid self examination. The loss of a loved one is horrible but not a reason to take away the rights of law abiding citizens that you are supposed to be representing and defending.
Excellent and logical post, my good friend!!!!!
Well Stated! and the real issue. Courts have the right now to impose restrictions. Doesn’t mean they will, or should in fist time cases, but no law will ensure compliance if they do. But, if they do, you do have a legal means without creating more laws that still don’t work. Enforce what you have, and ensure the Justice system knows they can pass judgments based on the offenders history.
“Yes, people do kill people … with guns.”
People also kill people with knives, baseball bats, hatchets, explosives, bare hands, cars, sticks, stones, rope, etc. The problem is not the implement used, but the person undertaking a violent action.
Sorry for your loss, and if there was some way to absolutely identify someone planning a violent action against someone, I would be on the list to implement the plan. Most of these people who commit murder with a gun are also capable of murder with a variety of other instruments.
You know what bores me, is people try to convince others that violent against someone would go away if we outlawed guns.
What a stupid argument. How can someone go into a school and stab 21 people in less than 130 seconds? First off, none of the gun laws proposed in the past 50 years outlaw guns. No one is saying that, only idiots who don’t know how to debate with real people. Secondly, no one is trying to convince anyone that violence is ever going away. We are only saying the fall out from a violent act might be less damaging if certain weapons weren’t as easy to obtain legally. Get your head out of your ass, listen to what people are actually saying, and come up with an argument that fits the debate. Or, conversely, go debate the mirror, he’s the only one that is forming arguments that match your vapid response.
What a stupid person who cannot comprehend logic because their mind is blurred with shrill emotion!
“What a stupid person who cannot comprehend logic because their mind is blurred with shrill emotion!”
Yes. Very well-said, but misdirected at Charlie. You should take your own advice.
Osaka knifing in Japan, Kunming attack in China, other school knifings in China from 2010 to 2012…
Va Tech, Columbine, Colorado Theater, Sandy Hook, Springfield, Oregon, USC in Columbia, ahhh fuck it…just google US mass shootings. My fingers are getting tired from typing.
I bet the USC professor might still be alive today had he had a concealed weapons permit and allowed to carry it at work.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/defensive-gun-ownership-myth-114262.html
Most of the venues you listed were gun free zones at the time of the tragic incidents theh are noted for. How much good did that do in averting tragedy?
Ok, how about gun loaded zones. Fort Hood 1 and Fort Hood, the cop who blew off his finger in a gun store (hilarious video by the way), the gun range instructor killed by a 9 year old girl. America’s own sniper killed at gun range, twin girls at Colorado gun range committing suicide….the list goes on.
Sadly Fort Hood IS a gun free zone, and we’ll enforced, EVERYWHERE except in tight exercises and then ammunition in rationed.
Yea you are wrong on that, current DOD policy prohibits personnel or civilians carrtying firearms on military installation and DOD property except under the following conditions:
a. The authorization to carry firearms will be issued only to qualified personnel when there is a reasonable expectation that life or Department of the Army (DA) assets will be jeopardized if firearms are not carried. Evaluation of the necessity to carry a firearm will be made considering this expectation weighed against the possible consequences of accidental or indiscriminate use of firearms.
b. DA personnel regularly engaged in law enforcement or security duties will be armed.
c. DA personnel are authorized to carry firearms while engaged in security duties, protecting personnel and vital Government assets, or guarding prisoners.
Soldiers or DOD personnel do not have readily available access to firearms or ammunition on military installations.
Sorry, I don’t think it is illogical to turn the the concentration of understanding these crimes toward the individual instead of an inanimate object. Violence perpetrated by individuals with a gun have become a political problem to some instead of personal behavioral problem.
Excuse me, I have to run and stick my head back back up my ass to avoid your ignorance and rudeness.
There are plenty of ways to kill 21 people in less than 130 seconds; a homemade bomb – Timothy McVay style, for example. Oh yeah, and let’s take into account that criminals and wife beaters never STEAL guns.
Can knives fire at a rate of 120 rounds per minute?
I bet I could stab something about 100 times per minute if that makes you feel better.
Perhaps. But could you coldly and calmly walk around a high school cafeteria frenetically stabbing one victim to death after another to the rate of say…20 students in total…within the span of two minutes?
No one can handle a knife as fast as you can whack off.
HeeHee
33 Dead, 130 Injured in China Knife-Wielding Spree
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/33-dead-130-injured-china-knife-wielding-spree-n41966
China Knife Attack: Man Kills 4, Wounds 11 In Stabbing Spree
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/26/china-knife-attack_n_3815300.html
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/15/not-just-sandy-hook-china-s-terrifying-knife-attacks.html
Talking about reasonable gun control is impossible in this country because the NRA lobby has complete control of the conversation. The “gun control” issue has absolutely nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment and 100% to do with the amount of money the NRA makes in donations by keeping people afraid and angry. It’s about money, not safety, not the defense of liberty, and certainly not not anything to do with the constitution. Being outraged over a waiting period for the mentally ill isn’t reasonable. It’s a pavlovian response that the NRA has spent about 20 years cultivating to make sure those big donations keep coming. The more afraid you are of our government and your neighbor, the more money for the NRA. The worse your life is, the better the NRA’s bank books.
I’m sure the answer to people behaving badly is to make all bad behavior illegal.
Sooo….it sounds like what you’re saying is that if we can’t curb any bad behavior with a 100% success rate we should just probably not do anything at all about it.
“it sounds like what you’re saying”
Nope.
What are you saying then?
If people are making real, verifiable physical threats against someone you are OK with allowing them to keep their lethal weapons?
It is obvious from the support of Taylor Brown’s drivel about a week ago and now this piece, that hysteria and emotion should be allowed to override due process of law whenever a woman “says” she is in fear. In earlier versions (and likely the present one) of the CDV bill introduced by Larry Martin and another anti-gun legislator, a disgruntled spouse or former partner could have you disarmed and deprived of your property just by going to a judge and saying they are in fear of you or what you might do. Never mind that a lot of pissed off former partners will use this, as they have the “must arrest” CDV laws as tools to “get back” at estranged spouses or partners. A man intending to harm an armed ex gf or estranged wife could likewise use these laws to disarm her and make it easier to harm her.
Let’s put the shoe on the other foot. I would make a decent wager that a LOT of women who wind up murdered by abusive ex’s have called the police for help on multiple occasions, tied the cops up for many man-hours of report writing, evidence collection, and court appearances, only to back out at some point and refuse to show up for court, chage the story, or otherwise sabotage the case tbe cops had. They do this time and again because “I love him” or “I’m afraid”, or maybe “because he’s the money train in our house”.
Not only does this foolishness lead to more waste of first responder time, it frequentl leads to the woman being more severely beaten or even murdered. “If it would save just one life”, wouldn’t it be worth it to enact a law where cops could have a judge issue a confinement order for these confused women, allowing police to take them into protective custody and confine them until a court determines that these women are no longet in danger from these abusive spouses and partners?
Are some of you starting to see my point. I know, “WHOOSH” will be the sound of that one flying completely over your head.
Now your just blaming the victim, sarcasm alert. I was on a CDV call and the lady screamed for her husband to be arrested. Her face was bashed in beyond recognition and when the cuffs went on she freaked out and tried to plunge a kitchen butcher in my partner’s back. I stopped her and there I was, with her blood all over me and left wondering why the Hell she didn’t do that to her husband?
People who are constantly abused, physically, mentally, emotionally, psychologically, aren’t always in the best frame of mind when it comes to these things. Sounds like you found that out first hand.
Movies tell us to just cut the red wire, or is it blue? It is nice to think things are that simple even though often times they are not. This is one of those cases. Who knows why a woman defends an abuser? I have seen it first hand too and I still can’t make heads or tails of it. My opinion or suggestion does not hold one iota of difference though, the person I am talking about will still do what they do, they won’t listen to reason. I still feel bad for them, I mean, what could happen to someone to cause them to ignore the abuse, even right after it happened? That would take a lot of damage for me to be in that state. Or maybe it wouldn’t. Maybe we are more fragile than we would like to believe, who knows.
In that particular call, the victim felt financially trapped. He yelled good luck paying your rent you f-ing whore while he was being cuffed and you could almost see the realization come to her. Your know, we have drug courts that firmly guide minor offenders on a path to recovery with the threat of incarceration for not progressing. Maybe something like that could be the way to lift the fog out of the victim’s thought process and get them away from their abusers. As far as abuse shelters go, the Rep needs to go familiarize herself with them, i don’t mean walking through shaking hands and kissing babies, really educate herself. Many, many victims sneak out and meet their abusers. I personally know of instances where the abusers were spending the night in the victim’s vehicle and leaving every morning with the victim. They almost always carpool to the abusers court dates, even with restraining orders in place. Will getting rid of guns or making duplicate Laws fix that?
Again Taz, many thanks for shedding the light of truth and logic on this emotional issue, though sadly, it will fall on many blind eyes on this thread.
Taz and BWS: Your observations are much appreciated in gaining perspective on this issue. However, your comments. as noted, offer more about outcomes of the problem versus cause of the problem. BWS: on target with “maybe we are more fragile than we think”. Much of the challenge of understanding this is that many people try to apply a rational template to an emotional and irrational problem. Go to “the cause of the problem”, look to those factors we already know result in people being fragile, dependent, and/self defeating/destructive. A major component: the internalization of shame and blame. Some women internalize blame for their abuse, believing the abuser when he tells them in so many ways that they brought the abuse on themselves. Most women won’t buy into to this: they’re not so fragile. But, when victims communicate with words and actions that “I’ll do anything to make this work”, there is unfortunately no shortage of sharks in the world who will reply, “I’m so glad to hear that. You’re just what I’ve been looking for”.
Been there, seen that and have a drawer full of tee shirts, except not with that level of violence toward me or a partner.
Yeah, I was waiting for that “you can NEVER blame the victim” nonsense from some of the (severely) logic-impaired in this audience. Your Sarcasm Alert was duely noted and appreciated. :-)
I really believe some of these people who (seriously) spout that line may have grown up in homes with no cook stove in the kitchen because they couldn’t constrain themselves from touching those pretty orange burners and their parents couldn’t blame them because they were “victims”.
Simple question for my my gun loving neighbors that Im sure you will know the answer to…
How many people have been killed in SC the last 10 by knive attacks..??
How many CDV deadly assaults have been conducted using a knife…or a coconut…or a 2 x 4…or a Bible..??
How many been conducted using firearms….
Yea..I thought so
You miss the point. Guns are a convenience. If it wasn’t a gun, it’d be the next available item: bats, knives, cars, etc.
That’s the fallacy of your argument.
Right on Mia. I agree 100% with everything you wrote. Unfortunately this is SC and if there is one thing we’re good at, it’s being ignorant, racist assholes.
You’d have better luck ramming your head repeatedly into concrete than to try and talk sense here.
From the sound of her twaddle and yours, you’ve both been doing that already. The concrete must be badly damaged by now.
Like I said, we’d have better luck than trying to talk sense with you lot.
Take away their guns and they’ll just beat them to death with a bat or strangle them with a lamp cord.
Think how many lives could be saved if the country took former Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s advice and take away guns from minority males.
http://rt.com/usa/230707-guns-minority-bloomberg-newyork/
How many more murders are going to happen before we speak out against atheist and their backward veiws.
Three Muslim Americans killed by a religion hating atheist.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/02/12/us/muslim-student-shootings-north-carolina.html?referrer=
Here is his anti- religious Facebook page.
https://m.facebook.com/craig.hicks.967?_rdr
Guns should be legal,but only for medicinal purposes.
Don’t take my guns away Mia. That was the old me. I hardly ever hit Katrina!!!!
My husband knows I have a gun and that I’m a damn good shot. That’s my suggestion to prevent domestic violence against women.