Sounds great on the surface, and has some great changes…but, as in all politics, real shitty stuff slipped in.
The newly passed legislation creates and expands federal programs to assist local communities with law enforcement and aiding victims of domestic and sexual abuse. Most notably, the bill goes further by offering protections for gay, bisexual or transgender victims of domestic abuse, as well as allowing American Indian women who are assaulted on reservations by non-Indians to take their case to tribal courts, which otherwise would not have jurisdiction over assailants who do not live on tribal land. (The failed House bill offered the same provision, but also offered non-Indian defendants the possibility to take their case to a federal court).
“The newest version of the VAWA, S.47, contains very vague and broad definitions of domestic violence". “A man that raises his voice at his partner, calls her an offensive name, stalks her, causes her any emotional distress, or simply just annoys her can potentially be prosecuted under the VAWA". Calling your spouse a mean name is not advised or polite, but it isn’t the same thing as violence towards her.
Point 1: If an Indian accuses a US citizen of Abuse, they have to answer and comply with the findings of the tribal court. Not the federal court. Woah
Point 2: Domestic Violence is watered down to the causing of Emotional Distress. Woah…why is this a woah? See point 3:
Point 3, Once convicted of domestic violence (now even EMOTIONAL DISTRESS) the defendant loses right to own weapons, such as ANY gun.
Cause stress, lose gun
Just gotta make sure even more so now your keeping your pimp hand strong… :rofl
I think its total bullshit though that emotional distress is grounds enough for them to take your rights away. I understand the concern of domestic violence especially with someone who has guns in the home, but thats a little extreme.
So what about men. I get swore at and caused distress from people other men and women all the time mainly customers who are bat shit crazy. Can I have them thrown in jail now?
dude, ive been stalked for daayyyssss, phone ringing off the motherfucking hook, tried to be ran over by a car, extorted, black mailed, heavy things thrown at my face hitting and damaging my personal belongings, my property vandalized ext by woman and nothing EVER came of it… now, if i raise my voice at a woman i can be arrested? lmaoo, im getting the fuck out of here…legit.
nope, yours just a pussy and have no legal repercussions. sorry. :rofl jk.
One more pussification (pun intended) movement for America. I am sorry but if ANYONE gets clocked in the kisser, the person swinging probably had a damn good reason, or was nuts. Either way, there are already laws for that in existence that are used every damn day. I don’t know about you, but I would never lay a hand on my wife, mother, sister or any other woman, unless they were trying to take my life, so I have nothing to worry about. UNTIL this shit. Now if I tell my wife to do the laundry her own damn self, or I accidently forget to put the seat down a few hundred times and she has enough and goes to the police I am a fucking criminal? FUCK RIGHT OFF. Lastly, I 100% guarrentee every highschool or college full of women of legal age can have everyone arrested under this bullshit for normal every day events they never even were offended by in the first place, but this now ALLOWS them to be offended and act on it.
i wonder if you see how the cops and law passers effect use now.
most used to think ooo its positive, they protect us. now look at all these laws. who is the govt trying to protect? why do we need all this paper telling us what to do? or what we cant do.
i wish all cops were against the unlawfull unconstitutional laws. but most are not. the only law i have every seen that the cops disliked was the safe act with the guns. and i bet people will still get arrested that you know.
“The newest version of the VAWA, S.47, contains very vague and broad definitions of domestic violence". “A man that raises his voice at his partner, calls her an offensive name, stalks her, causes her any emotional distress, or simply just annoys her can potentially be prosecuted under the VAWA". Calling your spouse a mean name is not advised or polite, but it isn’t the same thing as violence towards her.
Source?
How is this different from the original act in 1994?
Edit: here is the act
Skimmed through didn’t see such definitions. Anybody have specific pages to look at?