Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's actually an interesting idea. Issue the parties a CCW along with their marriage license.
"Do you, Ashley and Todd, promise to love and honor one another so long as you both shall live and to keep your firearms fully loaded and at your side at all times in case one of you attacks the other?"
lol, valentines gift from one of my friends who has a CCW was a 45 caliber handgun to his GF (really nice weapon too!). She promised she would never shoot him with it. I remember thinking at the time "Of course not, it wouldn't look like a suicide then, use his!"
Please dont respond with a ignorant assumption. I made an observation. Im not advocating paying people to not commit crimes, however I am making the observation that a basic income that has a TON of other benefits also has this as a side effect.
Its paying people to not commit crimes no matter what you call it. Its equal to a child throwing a massive temper tantrum nd you giving them whatever they want. give me a bmw and I wont beat you up!!! see how idiotic that sounds? People will always want more they are people with drug alcohol rage self control issues. Like everything else we cant subsidize the world into fairness.
Well, our kids are grown so that isn't an issue, but I'd hate to have leave my home and my critters and move into a shelter. That's a pretty big deal to suddenly up and leave everything behind.
What if you're still on the rent or mortgage and utilities? What do you do with your vehicles, your computer and all your stuff? If you have tools, firearms, kitchen gear, etc., will they let you bring all that into a shelter?
Yes, it's leaving everything (one's entire life) and starting over. Scary stuff. For many people the devil you know is better than the one you don't know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tia 914
First, I don't think domestic violence can be significantly decreased unless cultural beliefs that consider it acceptable are confronted and done away with.
However, I also believe one related issue must be addressed: for it to be, without exception, legal for women to defend themselves, and for women to know this. There are too many women who feel they must tolerate violence because they risk getting arrested if they defend themselves or fight back- in any way, not just shooting the individual.
Both men and women need to be aware of the signs of abuse. There's verbal and emotional that wears on a person over time, and can easily lead to physical abuse if not addressed early on. It can cover a wide range of ages from kids to the elderly.
I am wondering how many people with an opinion have actually been in an abusive relationship. I was. Oh, yes, you can just leave and give up everything and go on welfare with the kids. I chose not to do that. We had no guns in our house but somebody was going to die unless I got a job and a place to live and got myself and my son out. Someone was going to die and we didn't need guns to make that happen.
And, by the way, the violence intensifies when you leave and even after I moved out and filed for divorce, the police department considered it domestic violence and not a big deal like when another person broke into your house and destroyed your things. I truly thought I would have more protection once I filed for the divorce. I was almost choked to death after leaving and I will always remember what it felt like to think I was going to die. I remember looking around the room for my 4 year old son (now a 38 year old) and not being able to breathe. So, don't shake your unknowing fingers in the face of the abused until you walk a mile in their shoes. Barriers to Leaving an Abusive Relationship « Center For Relationship Abuse Awareness
I support the right to bear arms as I had history when I went to school and I also realize, not being ignorant or swayed by those that want us to be sheepeople without recourse, that if you want to kill someone or a bunch of someones, there is more than one way to get that done.
I get so sick of all the lame reasons that are being used to try to take away yet another fundamental right.
How easily some give away freedom astonishes me sometimes.
Hardly, they don't lose their guns permanently and it forces people to deal with their issues in a civil manner rather than through a murder trial. But God forbid we do anything civil when it comes to precious guns.
Hardly, they don't lose their guns permanently and it forces people to deal with their issues in a civil manner rather than through a murder trial. But God forbid we do anything civil when it comes to precious guns.
It doesn't force them to be civil by removing the gun. Do you think that the only way to kill a spouse in a drunken rage is with a gun? Check out the FBI stats on murders with hands and feet.
Its paying people to not commit crimes no matter what you call it. Its equal to a child throwing a massive temper tantrum nd you giving them whatever they want. give me a bmw and I wont beat you up!!! see how idiotic that sounds? People will always want more they are people with drug alcohol rage self control issues. Like everything else we cant subsidize the world into fairness.
My god you're right! We should stop paying anybody ANYTHING because thats paying them not to commit crimes!
Please don't be obtuse. I'm suggesting nothing of the sort, its you that are. Please stop. I will probably post a thread in the next few days about this sort of topic, and you can go state your case there if you want. You can even try and explain what you meant by "People will always want more they are people with drug alcohol rage self control issues."
And we can in fact subsidize everything into fairness if we wanted too, but thats not the discussion either. Thats a nice way to make it a emotional argument instead of a factual one. I provided a fact here, why are you trying to turn it into a emotional argument?
So are you saying that if folks are the subject of domestic violence, one of them should just get out of the house?
I understand the logic, but where are they supposed to go? What if they can't afford a new place? If there are kids or pets, do you take them or leave them? What if there's rent or a mortgage to pay -- who gets stuck with that?
nice job responding to one section of my post and ignoring the rest. at the point where people are going to a shelter, it is time to break up the relationship anyway as it generally wont get any better.
Sure. There you go. Sorry I was incorrect though, the reduction was slightly higher. And I will admit that I make the assumption that domestic violence would specifically benefit more, but thats based upon a personal observation that most arguments revolve around a lack of money.
If that isnt sufficient for you, might I suggest that doing a larger scale research project in the US would be beneficial.
that shows some promise, but it is also in an area with extreme poverty as well. people there were stealing just to survive. i suspect it wont work as well here because you have rich peoples children that are just bored and decide to commit crimes because they can, and usually do get away with it.
one more thing to ponder, in namibia, a basic income would be fairly inexpensive to institute, not so in the US. there they can live on $100 per month, here, not so much. you are going to need more like $800 per month minimum, and that assumes that people here would be willing to live without things like cell phones, and other luxuries.
that shows some promise, but it is also in an area with extreme poverty as well. people there were stealing just to survive. i suspect it wont work as well here because you have rich peoples children that are just bored and decide to commit crimes because they can, and usually do get away with it.
one more thing to ponder, in namibia, a basic income would be fairly inexpensive to institute, not so in the US. there they can live on $100 per month, here, not so much. you are going to need more like $800 per month minimum, and that assumes that people here would be willing to live without things like cell phones, and other luxuries.
Agreed. I'm not sure what the crime reduction was in the Canadian experiment, or even if it was tracked. If you want to question how well it would work here thats a fair question that I would love to know the answer too. But theres a lot of other aspects to it that offset its cost. If I pay a homeless guy 12K/yr I will save the 30K/yr in expense that the average homeless person causes. Financially that makes sense. If I tax someone like me an additional 12K/yr, then give it back to him....its a wash. Im still pondering all of this, but at this point in time I am still thinking its not economically viable to do. Theres a ton of variables involved. I do think it is inevitable eventually. I just wonder when.
As for rich peoples children...theres two types of crime. The "whoops partied too hard was irresponsible", the "im rich I can get away with it", and the "Im angry". Those sorts of crimes won't change. So how much crime do rich people commit vs's poor people?
Where I live if convicted of a domestic violence crime, or found to have committed domestic violence in a civil domestic violence hearing you must surrender all guns and ammo to the sheriff. Due process seems fine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
