Both rape, and domestic violence, are already illegal. What's this new bill supposed to achieve? Make them illegal again?

 

so if as you say ,the bill is meaningless, just a paper work exercise, why did they feel it necessary to vote against it ?

 

That is a loaded question based upon an intentionally false interpretation. He asked the intended purpose of the bill. He did not describe it as meaningless or as a policy carrying no weight.

 

I don't say it's meaningless, since I don't know what it contains. I'd like to know what the meaning actually is.


Why is it necessary to vote against a meaningless paperwork exercise? That's a question so dumb that it doesn't merit an answer, but it seriously calls into question your ability to understand anything remotely political.

 

There are plenty of instances of reported spousal abuse against males by their often smaller and weaker, female partners. Difficult to believe but even females no bigger than five foot have battered their over six foot partners. It is not just males who are predators, there's plenty of females too.

 

Two republicans said they were concerned about how federal funds would be spent. They said they did not think the funds would go to help the victims.

 

*not_secure_link*media.tumblr.com/3ccfb10042e634b6b2ce9c09ee65c7a0/tumblr_inline_mj4bxdPhFA1qbhye8.gif
​

 

disloyality

Vote Republican-Female Get Democrat !
hmm I knew it !

 

Indeed. Rule one as a cop is don't go into a domestic situation thinking the only bad guy is the male.

Rule two is, if you do arrest the male, watch out for the female. In one notable case the cop arresting the male was nearly killed by the wife, who was bleeding from the broken nose her husband had given her, and who tried to stab the cop for arresting "my love".

And the worst injury I got as a cop was inflicted by a 5'2" 85 Lb. female who kicked my ass from one end of a holding cell to the other. Took help from 4 other cops to subdue her.

But the point is, VAWA is not a positive step in controlling violence. It is a fluff piece of legislation that is political in nature.

And Grimreapers, among others, has fallen for the same old crap.

 

Humored

It's amusing how we exploit a group of people for the sake of political arguments. Have you ever talked to rape victims, domestic violence abuse vics, or of any other violent crimes? Many of them immediately become card-holding members of the NRA, regardless of their political views prior. Perhaps you were a vic yourself? These kinds of events tend to cause either extreme political views or a cold indifference, I've noticed.

 

This is the first I've heard about this so I'm not familiar with it. Maybe there's a good reason for this act and I'm all about trying to stop violence towards women. However, I have to question why it's really necessary. We already have these laws in place don't we? Why not just enforce the laws we already have?

I need to learn more before I know how to feel about this.

 

yes I have, probably a lot more than you..

No I don't know any that became card-carrying members of the NRA.

But to return to original question.

The only votes against it came from Republican men in congress, even the Republican women in congress voted for it,but not the men .

 

That isn't a question, it's a statement. But, in any event, I have a question for you:

Why can't you tell the difference between "opposes violences against women" and "supports this bill?" They are NOT the same thing.