<rant> Re: Another wife beater sentenced to AA

[Guest guest]

I saw an episode of COPS or some similar show about two years ago, where

in Los Angeles a woman police sergeant responded to a domestic disturbance

call. The husband and wife were both there, agreeing that there had been

some violence, each claiming that the other person was the one who committed

assault, while claiming their own actions were restricted to self defense.

The husband had a large multi-fingernail sized scratchmark running

vertically on his face, while the wife had little, if any marks on her

person.

The lady police sergeant told the camera that it was her responsibility to

arrest one of the two, depending upon her assessment of which party was

guilty. That was basically what she told the camera. She then proceeded to

listen to both complainants conflicting stories, and placed the husband

under arrest and removed him off to the police station.

I remember getting the distinct impression that this was unfair arbitrary

action, and that I felt that the sergeant was totally biased against the

husband, which I attributed in my mind that she had some kind of prejudice

against husbands, or men in general. I guess that's what you get for calling

the police to handle your own personal problems. Mike.

<rant> Re: Another wife beater sentenced to AA

> Here the question is taken very seriously. Men whose wives accuse

> them of just pushing them are not going to be arrested and charged.

> They may be advised to spend a night elsewhere so everyone can cool

> off. If a wife makes more serious claims, she is expected to have

> some bruises or other physical effects. Police responding to every

> domestic violence call will question and investigate both parties,

> because they realize here that it's not the person who makes the phone

> call who is necessarily the abuser. Some domestic situations that

> result in physical fights simply cannot be resolved -- no one can say

> that one spouse or the other was the abuser. While I know that not

> all our cops are angels, they do seem to take a very reasoned approach

> to domestic violence (when it is not their own. But even there, I

> have seen an improvement, based simply on reading newspaper articles).

>

>

> >

> > Yes, this phenomenon is common in many states that have adopted such

> > legislation, only to find themselves losing cops as a result. My

> own view is

> > that some " domestic abuse " cases are over-stated and unfair. A man

> who

> > shoves or even hits his wife in the heat of a fierce argument is not

> the same

> > as the cretin who routinely terrorizes her. Many, many decent men

> are

> > finding themselves convicted of " domestic abuse " due to the foibles

> of human

> > nature, rather than because they are the sorts of monsters Farrah

> Fawcett set

> > on fire in The Burning Bed.

> >

> > --Mona--

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I saw an episode of COPS or some similar show about two years ago, where

in Los Angeles a woman police sergeant responded to a domestic disturbance

call. The husband and wife were both there, agreeing that there had been

some violence, each claiming that the other person was the one who committed

assault, while claiming their own actions were restricted to self defense.

The husband had a large multi-fingernail sized scratchmark running

vertically on his face, while the wife had little, if any marks on her

person.

The lady police sergeant told the camera that it was her responsibility to

arrest one of the two, depending upon her assessment of which party was

guilty. That was basically what she told the camera. She then proceeded to

listen to both complainants conflicting stories, and placed the husband

under arrest and removed him off to the police station.

I remember getting the distinct impression that this was unfair arbitrary

action, and that I felt that the sergeant was totally biased against the

husband, which I attributed in my mind that she had some kind of prejudice

against husbands, or men in general. I guess that's what you get for calling

the police to handle your own personal problems. Mike.

<rant> Re: Another wife beater sentenced to AA

> Here the question is taken very seriously. Men whose wives accuse

> them of just pushing them are not going to be arrested and charged.

> They may be advised to spend a night elsewhere so everyone can cool

> off. If a wife makes more serious claims, she is expected to have

> some bruises or other physical effects. Police responding to every

> domestic violence call will question and investigate both parties,

> because they realize here that it's not the person who makes the phone

> call who is necessarily the abuser. Some domestic situations that

> result in physical fights simply cannot be resolved -- no one can say

> that one spouse or the other was the abuser. While I know that not

> all our cops are angels, they do seem to take a very reasoned approach

> to domestic violence (when it is not their own. But even there, I

> have seen an improvement, based simply on reading newspaper articles).

>

>

> >

> > Yes, this phenomenon is common in many states that have adopted such

> > legislation, only to find themselves losing cops as a result. My

> own view is

> > that some " domestic abuse " cases are over-stated and unfair. A man

> who

> > shoves or even hits his wife in the heat of a fierce argument is not

> the same

> > as the cretin who routinely terrorizes her. Many, many decent men

> are

> > finding themselves convicted of " domestic abuse " due to the foibles

> of human

> > nature, rather than because they are the sorts of monsters Farrah

> Fawcett set

> > on fire in The Burning Bed.

> >

> > --Mona--

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I understand the point but, as a man, there are some assumptions that a

person can safely jump to. In a fight in which the police need to be called,

the man is probably the abuser. Call me sexist, but a man is usually the one

CAPABLE of beating the significant other. Unless the size of the

participants is not typical, as in average size man and average size woman,

it's unlikely the woman is beating up the man.

I saw an episode of COPS or some similar show about two years ago, where

in Los Angeles a woman police sergeant responded to a domestic disturbance

call. The husband and wife were both there, agreeing that there had been

some violence, each claiming that the other person was the one who committed

assault, while claiming their own actions were restricted to self defense.

The husband had a large multi-fingernail sized scratchmark running

vertically on his face, while the wife had little, if any marks on her

person.

The lady police sergeant told the camera that it was her responsibility to

arrest one of the two, depending upon her assessment of which party was

guilty. That was basically what she told the camera. She then proceeded to

listen to both complainants conflicting stories, and placed the husband

under arrest and removed him off to the police station. I remember getting

the distinct impression that this was unfair arbitrary action, and that I

felt that the sergeant was totally biased against the husband, which I

attributed in my mind that she had some kind of prejudice against husbands,

or men in general. I guess that's what you get for calling the police to

handle your own personal problems. Mike.

[Guest guest]

I understand the point but, as a man, there are some assumptions that a

person can safely jump to. In a fight in which the police need to be called,

the man is probably the abuser. Call me sexist, but a man is usually the one

CAPABLE of beating the significant other. Unless the size of the

participants is not typical, as in average size man and average size woman,

it's unlikely the woman is beating up the man.

I saw an episode of COPS or some similar show about two years ago, where

in Los Angeles a woman police sergeant responded to a domestic disturbance

call. The husband and wife were both there, agreeing that there had been

some violence, each claiming that the other person was the one who committed

assault, while claiming their own actions were restricted to self defense.

The husband had a large multi-fingernail sized scratchmark running

vertically on his face, while the wife had little, if any marks on her

person.

The lady police sergeant told the camera that it was her responsibility to

arrest one of the two, depending upon her assessment of which party was

guilty. That was basically what she told the camera. She then proceeded to

listen to both complainants conflicting stories, and placed the husband

under arrest and removed him off to the police station. I remember getting

the distinct impression that this was unfair arbitrary action, and that I

felt that the sergeant was totally biased against the husband, which I

attributed in my mind that she had some kind of prejudice against husbands,

or men in general. I guess that's what you get for calling the police to

handle your own personal problems. Mike.

[Guest guest]

Just because the man is more capable of inflicting harm on a spouse than a

woman in no way proves he is the aggressor, and it alone is not

justification in my opinion of holding him responsible for the altercation.

I have known women who, when angry, would simply throw a punch at their

larger spouse's face, perhaps counting on the fact that he is bigger, and

maybe that he is more peaceful, to get away with it. Mike.

Re: <rant> Re: Another wife beater sentenced to AA

> I understand the point but, as a man, there are some assumptions that a

> person can safely jump to. In a fight in which the police need to be

called,

> the man is probably the abuser. Call me sexist, but a man is usually the

one

> CAPABLE of beating the significant other. Unless the size of the

> participants is not typical, as in average size man and average size

woman,

> it's unlikely the woman is beating up the man.

>

>

>

> I saw an episode of COPS or some similar show about two years ago, where

> in Los Angeles a woman police sergeant responded to a domestic disturbance

> call. The husband and wife were both there, agreeing that there had been

> some violence, each claiming that the other person was the one who

committed

> assault, while claiming their own actions were restricted to self

defense.

> The husband had a large multi-fingernail sized scratchmark running

> vertically on his face, while the wife had little, if any marks on her

> person.

> The lady police sergeant told the camera that it was her responsibility

to

> arrest one of the two, depending upon her assessment of which party was

> guilty. That was basically what she told the camera. She then proceeded

to

> listen to both complainants conflicting stories, and placed the husband

> under arrest and removed him off to the police station. I remember

getting

> the distinct impression that this was unfair arbitrary action, and that I

> felt that the sergeant was totally biased against the husband, which I

> attributed in my mind that she had some kind of prejudice against

husbands,

> or men in general. I guess that's what you get for calling the police to

> handle your own personal problems. Mike.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Just because the man is more capable of inflicting harm on a spouse than a

woman in no way proves he is the aggressor, and it alone is not

justification in my opinion of holding him responsible for the altercation.

I have known women who, when angry, would simply throw a punch at their

larger spouse's face, perhaps counting on the fact that he is bigger, and

maybe that he is more peaceful, to get away with it. Mike.

Re: <rant> Re: Another wife beater sentenced to AA

> I understand the point but, as a man, there are some assumptions that a

> person can safely jump to. In a fight in which the police need to be

called,

> the man is probably the abuser. Call me sexist, but a man is usually the

one

> CAPABLE of beating the significant other. Unless the size of the

> participants is not typical, as in average size man and average size

woman,

> it's unlikely the woman is beating up the man.

>

>

>

> I saw an episode of COPS or some similar show about two years ago, where

> in Los Angeles a woman police sergeant responded to a domestic disturbance

> call. The husband and wife were both there, agreeing that there had been

> some violence, each claiming that the other person was the one who

committed

> assault, while claiming their own actions were restricted to self

defense.

> The husband had a large multi-fingernail sized scratchmark running

> vertically on his face, while the wife had little, if any marks on her

> person.

> The lady police sergeant told the camera that it was her responsibility

to

> arrest one of the two, depending upon her assessment of which party was

> guilty. That was basically what she told the camera. She then proceeded

to

> listen to both complainants conflicting stories, and placed the husband

> under arrest and removed him off to the police station. I remember

getting

> the distinct impression that this was unfair arbitrary action, and that I

> felt that the sergeant was totally biased against the husband, which I

> attributed in my mind that she had some kind of prejudice against

husbands,

> or men in general. I guess that's what you get for calling the police to

> handle your own personal problems. Mike.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

At 09:46 PM 5/13/01 -0500, you wrote:

>I saw an episode of COPS or some similar show about two years ago, where

>in Los Angeles a woman police sergeant responded to a domestic disturbance

>call.

[snip]

> The lady police sergeant told the camera that it was her responsibility to

>arrest one of the two, depending upon her assessment of which party was

>guilty. That was basically what she told the camera. She then proceeded to

>listen to both complainants conflicting stories, and placed the husband

>under arrest and removed him off to the police station. I remember getting

>the distinct impression that this was unfair arbitrary action,

This is the problem with mandatory arrest laws. The cop was

probably telling the truth -- she was legally required to arrest one

or the other, so she just had to choose. Even when guilt isn't

clear-cut, mandatory arrest laws require the cop to lock up one

party or the other. What ya gonna do? She just had to take her

best guess at which party bore 51% of the blame.

It's almost as nutty as locking up harmless drug users.

Interestingly, the arrest of *women* for domestic violence has

been skyrocketing since the implementation of mandatory arrest

laws in many jurisdictions. Feminists don't like this much --

apparently, when pushing for these laws, they just assumed that

it would always be the man who was arrested.

[Guest guest]

If youre father had had a mind to, he would have hit you - unless that

you were female made a difference. I once asked my mother if hshe was

beaten as a child and she said no. It's possible she's forgotten

though - I dont think she remembers beating me. However, there is in

fact a big gender bias in which sex gets belted. I strongly suspect my

uncle came in for a lot of it, and that was where my mother got the

message that it was ok for boys to be beaten.

P.

> This isn't just a male-female thing; it's also a parent-child thing.

> It's considered OK for parents to hit children, but not the other

> way around. Even if you had been defending yourself from an

> immediate assault, most people would have blamed you and

> not her.

>

> Most offspring seem to buy into this. Parents hit teenagers with

> little fear of reprisal, although many teenagers are large and

> strong enough to defend themselves. I probably could have

> defended myself against my mother as a teenager, yet I never

> did.

>

> Might have been just as well, though, since my father also believed

> in one-way violence and probably would have beaten the tar

> out of me.

>

>