Ky. House passes temp concealed carry for victims
By BRUCE SCHREINER
Associated PressFebruary 28, 2014
Read more here: FRANKFORT, Ky.: Ky. House passes temp concealed carry for victims | State | Kentucky.com
FRANKFORT, Ky. — Domestic violence victims in Kentucky could gain quick access to temporary concealed weapons permits under a bill that passed the House after emotional debate Friday.Abuse victims receiving court-issued protective orders meant to keep their assailants away would be eligible for the 45-day concealed carry permits. Supporters said the short-term permits would provide a measure of self-protection at a time when victims can feel most vulnerable.
"This just levels the playing field for the potential victim," said Democratic Rep. Gerald Watkins of Paducah, the bill's lead sponsor.
Opponents said the concealed guns would further inflame domestic violence situations.
"What you're doing here is completely ignoring the fact that anyone who's in these troubled situations does not have good judgment," said Rep. Jim Wayne, D-Louisville. "And you're going to give the victim a handgun or a weapon to protect themselves? This is madness."
The bill [House Bill 351] cleared the House on a 79-13 vote. It goes to the Senate, which is considering similar legislation. Read more here: FRANKFORT, Ky.: Ky. House passes temp concealed carry for victims | State | Kentucky.com House Bill 351 is hardly a “gun-control” measure, far from it. Nor can it credibly be called a measure to “prevent violence.” Indeed, this may be the first case in US history where guns and domestic violence have been addressed together by a legislature in the sense of arming alleged victims rather than dis-arming alleged abusers. It strains credulity to see this as a means to less violence, or as a path to the safer presence of guns.
Updated 5 Days Ago at 03:19 AM by Rof L Mao Esq
antimisandry.com - Legal Research Facts: The Child Support Enforcement Treadmill. - Blogs
My first chance to add the up and coming legal proceeding:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF CLEVELAND COUNTY
STATE OF OKLAHOMA
DAVID COX, ) PLAINTIFF ) THIS IS THE NEXT )
STATE OF OKLAHOMA,
DEFENDANTS, 1 )2 )3 )5 ) 6 )
Updated 2 Weeks Ago at 09:42 AM by eagle2feather
Emotional abuse, feminism and personal truth Only in recent days have I been faced with a revelation that I have allowed myself to play the victim for many years in an emotionally abusive relationship. It began in the depths of my recent research on “violence against women” programs, when I found a quote from Erin Pizzey to the effect that people commit abusive conduct on their loved ones because they can. It didn’t hit home right at first, but I soon found that I was reading the materials I would find from that point on, through different eyes. I had expended a great deal of energy on the idea that false accusations and double standards against men were what I was trying to take down with my efforts, and there is still truth in this. But what began slowly happening after reading Erin Pizzey’s words, was that I would go through training materials and program descriptions for VAWA and other domestic violence programs, and repeatedly see the term “power and control” in describing the root motivations behind abusive behavior. What made me reject or at least ignore this as mere ideology was that these same materials always had either charts and graphs misleadingly backing up the throwaway “vast majority of victims are women” disclaimers, or quotes from various experts to that effect. And when I would read through materials from a more openly feminist source, I would find the same reasoning, backed up with the additional idea that “power and control” alone did not describe the motives for male abuses, but patriarchal power and control. That argument takes a valid line of reasoning, the same one Pizzey was asserting, that a desire to exercise power and control over another was made into reality by an opportunity to do so, but the difference in the feminist hijacking of this concept is to assume that every abusive man is a patriarchalist, that his abuses of women or children are motivated by his incorrect world view that male domination in
Updated 3 Weeks Ago at 09:38 PM by Rof L Mao Esq
Has anyone watched "The Mask You Live In" trailer by The Representation Project? As I watched the trailer I have to say that I was kinda moved, because they presented their message in such an "empowering" way. I wanted to know some of your opinions on the trailer, since The Representation Project had also been known for their 2011 documentary film, Miss Representation which had many Feminist leanings. I'll leave a link down below.
For over a year now I have been researching the US federal government’s programs under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). I have made a number of significant findings, which I introduce below, but the first thing I discovered going in was the sense of taboo and political terror guarding these programs from any critical examination. Anyone following the “debate” in the US Congress last winter will remember the steady din of “War on Women!” that arose, overwhelming any vocal critic and castigating any serious questioner of the performance, legality and effect of the actual programs. One might point out that this lack of reasoned dialogue, and a resorting to taunts and threats in its place, can be found surrounding any feminist initiative, such as calls for “gender quotas” in various (non-lethal) professions, or a traditional female monopoly on reproductive freedoms irrespective of everyday realities for both sexes. And, I would agree. In the case of VAWA and its passage through the 113th US Congress in 2013, to point out (just as one example) that the Act poses certain jurisdictional issues under the 10th Amendment, would be shouted down as no more than “mansplaining”, as if the concerns of a select group of people and their political objectives based on pandering to feminist dogma, somehow simply overrides the rule of law or the unforgiving logic of calm reasoning. Seeing on first glance this degree of prejudice, and the fear of backlash it produces, my immediate decision in doing research on VAWA was to have a hard look not at the law itself or its history as a federal statute, so much as at the programs authorized by the Act, with a view toward their (once again) performance, legality and effect. ============= - On the actual day-to-day performance of grantee functions, little evidence is available that might corroborate any claim that VAWA programs are smoothly functioning, professionally managed, financially accountable,
Updated 2nd-February-2014 at 10:00 PM by Rof L Mao Esq
I haven't seen discussions about what a post-Feminist World would look like, or how we would transition to it.
Discussions around a "Blue Skies & Green Fields" model might inform our eventual transition. Relationships
I have no authority over women. I never had it so I can't miss it. I don't seek it, and wouldn't accept it if it were offered. This is my start point for a post-Feminist relationships.
Men & women get to have sex with each other.
Men & women get to spend time in each others company.
Women get to accept men's resources?
Hmmmm. Something's not quite right there.
Women also benefit from sex and company. To make the interaction symmetrical, they need to develop some skills, show some enthusiasm, wash occasionally, and put their hand in their pocket.
The evolutionary pressure of competing with one another for Men's time and money evidently isn't enough to reach an equilibrium. We may need to open up the 'playing field' to allow professionals to compete for Men's time and money. 1. Prostitution: regulated, but legal. No pimps. Compulsory medical checks, trading standards, & zoning. There would probably also be a fixed price business for fulfilling prescriptions (stress relief, etc). Trad-con
Does anyone really want to go back to gender politics circa 1950? Most African-Americans I suspect would be reluctant to step back into racial politics circa 1950, much less 1850. I'm not sure it is either desirable or even possible to undo 60 years of feminism. Social Science
Better idea; how about turning Social Science into an Experimental Scientific discipline? In a "blue sky" environment is it doesn't matter what anybody else thinks. With enough land and people who want to participate, anyone can set up an experimental community. Public Policy
Am I Right?
I mean, how DARE the insurance industry tell me it's MY fault if someone steals my car just because I left the keys in the ignition with the driver's window half-way down and my wallet in plain sight on the dash board. It's disgusting that they tell me I have to take responsibility for my irresponsible behaviour.
Uploaded & shareable from: http://antimisandry.com/members/marx...thieves-1.html
If we need more women chief executives, do we also need more white sprinters in the Olympic 100m? The clamour is deafening and relentless for more women in everything, but in all the furore led by women's groups, does bigotry rear its ugly head? This film assesses the merit of quotas for women executives by looking at the prison population, black Olympic sprinters and the human brain. Features: Steve Moxon, author of 'The Woman Racket'. Mike Buchanan, author and UK party leader of 'Justice for men and boys (and the women who love them)' -- http://j4mb.org.uk Oliver Curry, Evolutionary psychologist, London School of Economics. Erin Pizzey, author and Domestic Violence expert. Photo credits: "Usain Bolt winning the 100m final 2008 Olympics" by PhotoBobil is licensed under CC BY 2.0 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...lt_winning.jpg "Start of men's 100m" By Darren Wilkinson from Chester-le-Street, England is licensed under CC BY 2.0 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...inal_start.jpg
The Supreme Court of Canada did the right thing. They struck down laws that endangered Canadian citizens.
The old laws made it illegal for sex-workers to communicate with clients in public, conduct business in private buildings, and for anyone to live off the avails of prostitution. Sex workers were therefore prohibited from paying for security, working indoors or negotiating and screening clients in a safe, open area. The law put these women in danger.
The case was brought to court by the very women whose lives were put at risk: female sex-workers. But feminists from the Women's Coalition, which includes the Elizabeth Fry Society, are not impressed with the ruling, and make the bizarre claim that "it is now ok to buy and sell women and girls in this country."
The Coalition is trying to stir-up moral panic because
they want legislation that "removes criminal sanctions for women involved in the sex trade but continues to target pimps and johns." In other words, freedom for women and jail for men.
This idea was pioneered in Sweden in 1999. After more than a decade it was declared a complete failure by both the Rights Work organization and the UN-backed study "Global Commission on HIV and the law," which further recommends that all countries "decriminalise private and consensual adult sexual behaviours" and concluded that the Swedish model "resulted in grave consequences for the sex workers even though reported as a success to the public." To be blunt, the mostly-feminist Swedish government is lying in order to justify continued criminalization of men.
German Prostitute "Annabell"
In contrast to Sweden, Germany legalized prostitution in 2002, and has since concluded that the law has had little effect on the lives of the
I was arguing with a feminist where I work. It is an unfortunate habit of mine. Anyway, I shot down her assertion that women have traditionally been oppressed throughout history by pointing out some basic historical fact. Unable to counter my argument she went into feminist default mode. She said that she found my analysis of her argument "offensive" and added that I had made her feel "uncomfortable." Feminists never fail to do this in my experience. You will see them use the same tactic all over the internet all the time.
The problem with feminism is that it is an ideology based on feelings and emotions rather than fact or logic. Most feminist theory can be quite easily dismantled by anyone with an IQ higher than 10. Feminists have long given up trying to debate like adults. They have for the most part accepted at some level that their theories are built on air and that they turn to dust very quickly whenever they encounter such patriarchal inconveniences as facts based on science or history.
Some feminists will instinctively resort to screaming insults when confronted with the truth. The more practiced ones however, will almost always retreat behind their ever present barricade of victimhood. It's a cleaver strategy and it is facilitated by the politically correct culture that has pervaded every aspect of our society, partly thanks to feminism. It's all about everybody having some kind of divine right to feel good about themselves all the time; everybody's opinions are equally valid it seems no matter how monumentally idiotic their pronouncements may be. It is a culture that has stifled debate of any real value all over the western world.
How many times do we see debates on important issues degenerating into childish competitions where both sides are trying to prove they are more "offended" than their opponents. In recent years in Ireland, debates on a whole range of issues from child-abuse to gay-marriage to immigration have
antimisandry.com is a voluntary-sector organisation supported mainly by member reader donations.
If you wish to reduce the advertisements, sign up and log on as a registered member.