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 just what you can't do. Primarily because it's not self-defense. Women who do that end up in prison for a long time.
Wrong, the preachers wife, Mary somebody, did just that and got away with it. She claimed he asked her to do nasty sexual things, so they gave her a pass.
Have you been following the Jody Arias case? She stabs him 20-30 times, slits his throat AND shoots him. Now she is claiming self defense and abuse.
Come one! This has gone way too far.
Mary somebody shoots her husband in the back, while he's sleeping, claims self-defense and abused housewife and they buy it.
bs
It's a type of self defense called the battered woman syndrome, where the normal rule of self defense only being applicable if you afraid for your life at the moment you kill the person is extended. The idea is that a person has been so beaten down mentally and emotionally and feels so trapped that the only recourse they have is to wait until the abuser is unsuspecting and then kill them.
I have real ambivalent feelings with the whole battered woman syndrome defense. I feel for the women but I just can't excuse murder. The woman is trapped, doesn't feel like the abuse will ever stop, sees no way out. I get that. But it is still letting someone get away with killing someone else. That just doesn't sit right with me.
"I know he was going to beat me tomorrow and the next day and the day after that and I couldn't think of anything else to do, so I shot him" just isn't a sufficient excuse to me. It is an excuse to be offered a lot of help but it isn't an excuse to be judge, jury, and executioner and sentence someone to death. It's not that I feel sorry for the guy who got shot. It's just a matter of living in a society where people are not allowed to take the law into their own hands, and if someone isn't committing a crime against you at this moment you don't get to decide they are going to commit one later and kill them for it.
If a guy hacked up his wife like that and tried to claim self defense he would be laughed out of the courtroom.
Yes, and women are getting much more physically aggressive with their men. You guys have to start standing up for yourselves. If she slugs you, slap her back. Physical violence isn't acceptable coming from her either, don't put up with it. If she scratches you, tell her if she does it again, you'll file charges and do it. That will put a stop to this. Too many female psycho's out there, and men that put up with their tantrums. You deserve respect too.
They wanted to be treated equally, no more cooking, no more laundry, no more housekeeping, they are empowered now. But when it's convenient, they play helpless victim. Don't let them play you for fools.
Every year around here they have the men walking around in high heels. The men get to show their support for women by looking like idiots, and the women get to make fun of them - all to raise money against domestic violence. I think it's ludicrous. If people want to donate they will, without having men make utter fools of themselves hobbling around in heels. I also take issue with men wearing pink, that's another sham just to separate you from your money and take a little bit more of your manhood and pride.
The message is that women are to be pampered, you are a tool, you support them or your a worthless SOB.
Wrong, the preachers wife, Mary somebody, did just that and got away with it. She claimed he asked her to do nasty sexual things, so they gave her a pass.
I think I know that case, and that too is a case of a bat-crazy jury, like the one for Casey Anthony. Sometimes I think it would be better if there was no jury system, and we just relied on the judgment of a panel of judges, although that would have its own set of problems.
It's a type of self defense called the battered woman syndrome, where the normal rule of self defense only being applicable if you afraid for your life at the moment you kill the person is extended. The idea is that a person has been so beaten down mentally and emotionally and feels so trapped that the only recourse they have is to wait until the abuser is unsuspecting and then kill them.
I have real ambivalent feelings with the whole battered woman syndrome defense. I feel for the women but I just can't excuse murder. The woman is trapped, doesn't feel like the abuse will ever stop, sees no way out. I get that. But it is still letting someone get away with killing someone else. That just doesn't sit right with me.
"I know he was going to beat me tomorrow and the next day and the day after that and I couldn't think of anything else to do, so I shot him" just isn't a sufficient excuse to me. It is an excuse to be offered a lot of help but it isn't an excuse to be judge, jury, and executioner and sentence someone to death. It's not that I feel sorry for the guy who got shot. It's just a matter of living in a society where people are not allowed to take the law into their own hands, and if someone isn't committing a crime against you at this moment you don't get to decide they are going to commit one later and kill them for it.
I hear you, but I think this scenario is not as common as they lead you to believe. More often than not, the police intervene and she refuses to press charges, so what can they do? Or she goes back to him after being rescued. Or she is lying. I want evidence. The burden of proof is on her.
And there are men that are abused, but ashamed to come forward. They need support too.
We have various levels for homocides including justified, involuntary, etc. Let the courts decide.
I think I know that case, and that too is a case of a bat-crazy jury, like the one for Casey Anthony. Sometimes I think it would be better if there was no jury system, and we just relied on the judgment of a panel of judges, although that would have its own set of problems.
Mary Winkler - that case drove me crazy. I couldn't believe the people sympathizing with her!!!
That's what the revised VAWA does. Since the majority of the violence perpetrated on Native American and Native Alaskan women is by non-Native Americans, (don't ask me why, that's just the way it is), this allows the tribal legal system to deal with non-Native American perpetrators when crimes occur on tribal land. Before this neither state nor tribal authorities had jurisdiction, so crimes often were not prosecuted.
That's excellent. Thanks for pointing it out.
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.
