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.
Intimate partner violence, like most crime (except for murder in large cities, that's trending up since August 2014) is trending downward. Now, just one person being attacked, raped, sexually assaulted is a bad thing...but the overall trend is downward. So perhaps throwing things and other stuff is not quite needed, just yet.
And what about people who abuse animals? Surely there's some sort of public berating and gnashing of teeth we can do to them as well?
Abuse of public spaces could be a thing too, catch all those graffiti "artist" and spray pain their faces like Pac Man. Ever hear the one about the two bulls on the mountain?
You know how in the past they had those I think they are called stocks, the things a persons arms and head would be put into and locked and people could walk by throw things at them, ridicule them, hit them, etc? Well what if they came back but for abusive men? Say a man beats a woman, he is forced to wear a sign that says "I like to beat women" and people are allowed to do much the same, and say it became a common practice all over tomorrow hypothetically, do you think men would be less likely to abuse women if they knew they'd be looking at being publicly named and shamed and had to stay in the stocks for like a week?
It has always amazed me how little our poor excuse of a "justice" system actually ends up treating these men. They may just get a few days in jail but really in America there's really no truly bad punishment men that abuse women have to worry about.
No. A couple of things.
1) You have no substantial evidence that this would work. Now, ideally, that argument alone would shut this down, but this is America; evidence doesn't always cut it.
2) You make the false assumption that people who do abuse others are thinking about it. For example, there's a large portion of domestic abusers who also abuse alcohol or drugs. Does it make sense to claim that publicly shaming them would somehow solve their substance abuse? No. It doesn't. I'll answer it before someone tries to say it does.
3) I agree that our justice system is complete crap, but often, the resolution that many want is more severe punishments. This does not always do what we want. For example, states without the death penalty have lower rates of violent crime than states with the death penalty. We would assume that opposite is true if severity in punishment correlates to reduction of criminal behavior. I know many consider advocating for rehabilitation to be soft on crime (which is ridiculous, but whatever), so I'll say what's more important is consistency. Places that deal with crime effectively and universally tend to have lower crime rates than places that let a lot of things slide.
1) You have no substantial evidence that this would work. Now, ideally, that argument alone would shut this down, but this is America; evidence doesn't always cut it.
2) You make the false assumption that people who do abuse others are thinking about it. For example, there's a large portion of domestic abusers who also abuse alcohol or drugs. Does it make sense to claim that publicly shaming them would somehow solve their substance abuse? No. It doesn't. I'll answer it before someone tries to say it does.
3) I agree that our justice system is complete crap, but often, the resolution that many want is more severe punishments. This does not always do what we want. For example, states without the death penalty have lower rates of violent crime than states with the death penalty. We would assume that opposite is true if severity in punishment correlates to reduction of criminal behavior. I know many consider advocating for rehabilitation to be soft on crime (which is ridiculous, but whatever), so I'll say what's more important is consistency. Places that deal with crime effectively and universally tend to have lower crime rates than places that let a lot of things slide.
It's just ridiculous to me that we put white collar crimes WAYYYYYY ahead of any other. If someone is stealing from the government for example they'll send in choppers and swat teams to take him down and give a HEAVY sentence, but abusers, rapists and the like get slaps on the wrist. Why is just stealing money considered a far worse crime than others?
50 years ago i would say that shaming abusers in public would probably cut the incidence of such crimes, but today? no. why? because today the abuser would feel that its the fault of the person that complained about them, and they would seek revenge on said person.
and part of the problem is that as a society we have become far more permissive than in the past. we let things go until they get out of control, and then we clamp down on the offender, and by that time its too late to do much of anything. in addition we have become a "we want it now" society, as well as being one of suspect morality. 50 years ago we had a common morality, today however there is no commonality with peoples morals.
beyond that, do you really think that the liberals on the courts would allow punishment like what was suggested in the OP? 200 years ago it was a common punishment for small time offenders, today it would be considered cruel and unusual punishment.
It's just ridiculous to me that we put white collar crimes WAYYYYYY ahead of any other. If someone is stealing from the government for example they'll send in choppers and swat teams to take him down and give a HEAVY sentence, but abusers, rapists and the like get slaps on the wrist. Why is just stealing money considered a far worse crime than others?
What version of reality are you using?
We're using version 2.1 and I don't think we are having the same user experience as you.
You know how in the past they had those I think they are called stocks, the things a persons arms and head would be put into and locked and people could walk by throw things at them, ridicule them, hit them, etc? Well what if they came back but for abusive men? Say a man beats a woman, he is forced to wear a sign that says "I like to beat women" and people are allowed to do much the same, and say it became a common practice all over tomorrow hypothetically, do you think men would be less likely to abuse women if they knew they'd be looking at being publicly named and shamed and had to stay in the stocks for like a week?
It has always amazed me how little our poor excuse of a "justice" system actually ends up treating these men. They may just get a few days in jail but really in America there's really no truly bad punishment men that abuse women have to worry about.
I wouldn't be against the idea. As has already been said repeatedly, you would have to do the same thing to abusive women in order for it meet "equal protection under law" muster.
I don't personally think it's "cruel and unusual" but I get the feeling that the SCOTUS would disagree.
What we really need is for our culture to shame the men and women who abuse their family. Presently, not much happens to them until the victim winds up dead -- largely because the victims routinely refuse to press charges. And the fatality rate is truly staggering, with many of the victims being killed after leaving their partner.
Femicide, the homicide of women, is the leading cause of death in the United States among young African American women aged 15 to 45 years and the seventh leading cause of premature death among women overall. American women are killed by intimate partners (husbands, lovers, ex-husbands, or ex-lovers) more often than by any other type of perpetrator. Intimate partner homicide accounts for approximately 40% to 50% of US femicides but a relatively small proportion of male homicides (5.9%). The percentage of intimate partner homicides involving male victims decreased between 1976 and 1996, whereas the percentage of female victims increased, from 54% to 72%.
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.
