Quote:
Originally Posted by kristeejo
yep - that's my point. it's not as easy as just "leaving" in a lot of cases. In many cases, there are children and daddy gets to visit with them and you are always afraid even with the restraining order to which daddy doesn't pay attention. : )
|
I don't know.
I can't imagine a court in America that wouldn't impose a restraining order against a guy from seeing his kids if he were abusive. Shoot, a woman doesn't even have to prove it any more. All she has to say is she "fears" for her safety or the safety of her children. Boom. Restraining order till the kids are 18. She can even admit that he never physically abused her, and she will still get a restraining order.
The guy ignores it? Call the cops. They'll mace him for fun, throw him in jail, and that's that.
Women have gotten restraining orders against men they never met or talked to. One woman got a restraining order against David Lettermen, claiming that he was sending coded messages over the airwaves that communicated his desire to marry her. She has also accused TV personalities Regis Philbin and Kelsey Grammer of communicating with her through televised code.
Each year in America, 500,000 domestic restraining orders are issued without even an allegation of violence. Just "fear". Men are served at work. Searched. Their guns confiscated, on the basis of what?
Yeah, actual domestic violence is evil and should be punished. But the keyword there is "actual".
Today a woman is a victim by virtue of being a woman. A man is guilty by virtue of being a man. That is a sickening reality in America today, fostered by women who are non-victims, and a few who are victims but would rather stay with their abuser because they don't want to get a job and earn their own living.
Did I overstate that? Just a tidbit.