It is currently 04/11/25 6:33 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




  Page 1 of 1   [ 12 posts ]
Author Message
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/26/12 9:35 am • # 1 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR ~ WTF is wrong with these people? ~ ImageImageImage ~ Sooz

New Hampshire Republicans Propose Bills That Prevent Police From Protecting Domestic Abuse Victims

Since the 1970s, New Hampshire police have operated under a progressive policy for handling domestic violence cases that has saved countless lives. Under current law the presumption is that an arrest will be made when police observe evidence of abuse. They have a large degree of discretion and don't need to witness the assault firsthand or obtain a legal warrant before they can separate the alleged attacker from his victim.

All that will change if Republicans get their way. The state's GOP legislators are pushing two bills that will reverse a half century of progress, the Concord Monitor reports:

Quote:

Domestic violence is no longer taken lightly legally or by society. That's the way it should be, but two bills under consideration by this most unusual of legislatures, would undo that progress and put lives in danger. Both deserve a speedy defeat.

House Bill 1581 would turn the clock back 40 years to an age when a police officer could not make an arrest in a domestic violence case without first getting a warrant unless he or she actually witnessed the crime. That's an exceedingly dangerous change. Consider the following scenario, one outlined for lawmakers by retired Henniker police chief Tim Russell:

An officer is called to a home where she sees clear evidence that an assault has occurred. The furniture is overturned, the children are sobbing, and the face of the woman of the house is bruised and bleeding. It's obvious who the assailant was, but the officer arrived after the assault occurred. It's a small department, and no one else on the force is available to keep the peace until the officer finds a judge or justice of the peace to issue a warrant. The officer leaves, and the abuser renews his attack with even more ferocity, punishing his victim for having called for help. [...]

It's impossible to say how many lives the policy, in place since the 1970s, has saved or how many injuries it's prevented. If they adopt House Bill 1581, lawmakers might find out, but the price paid could be extraordinarily high.

The other bill Republicans have proposed, HB 1608, limits judges' ability to order the arrest of someone who has violated a domestic violence restraining order by contacting or abusing the person named in the order. It would also prevent judges from ordering defendants to surrender their weapons or block them from buying guns.

Police say the bill stops them from intervening to protect victims. For instance, they would be stripped of their power to arrest someone who is threatening to use violence against a victim or child. It's unclear why New Hampshire Republicans have set their sights on repealing protections for abuse victims when promised to focus on economic priorities.

http://thinkprogress.org/...-domestic-abuse-victims/



Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/26/12 10:20 am • # 2 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
It's unclear why New Hampshire Republicans have set their sights on repealing protections for abuse victims when promised to focus on economic priorities.

Because they are abusers?


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/26/12 10:49 am • # 3 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/20/09
Posts: 8188
 WTF is wrong[/i] with these people?

Republican. 

(Only commie, socialist, "nanny state", liberal bleeding hearts would oppose such a sensible measure.)


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/26/12 11:24 am • # 4 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/04/09
Posts: 4072
In Wisconsin, we also have tough domestic abuse arrest laws. Hope is New Hampshire disease isn't catching,
http://www.doj.state.wi.us/cvs/DAR/Domestic_Abuse_Arrest_Law.asp


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/26/12 12:28 pm • # 5 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 07/03/10
Posts: 1851
Women (and children) are the biggest victims of domestic abuse.  Repuglicans hate women.  You do the math.


Top
  
PostPosted: 01/26/12 12:31 pm • # 6 
They're just putting out the signal that they don't want the female vote - so - don't give it to them.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/26/12 12:49 pm • # 7 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
Any well-educated, non-white-christian-millionaire-male-gun-owning-redneck is not wanted by the GOP.

Edit: And they want everybody's last nickel while they fob their debts off on those they don't want.


Top
  
PostPosted: 01/26/12 12:58 pm • # 8 
In other words - Uncle Sam Doesn't Want You - He wants your money.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/26/12 1:23 pm • # 9 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
Sidartha wrote:
In other words - Uncle Sam Doesn't Want You - He wants your money.
Dunno 'bout Uncle Sam but Pappy Repugnant sure as hell doesn't want you unless you're a wrinkly, wealthy, white, christian, male bankster and/or fraudster.

  


Top
  
PostPosted: 01/26/12 1:34 pm • # 10 
... or as I like to describe them: crusty old men in frumpy blue suits.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 01/26/12 2:26 pm • # 11 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/04/09
Posts: 4072
well, good. http://www.wmur.com/r/30295720/detail.html

CONCORD, N.H. --
Domestic violence advocates said they were relieved Wednesday when a House committee decided to kill a bill many said would weaken protections for victims.

Dozens of people showed up to testify against HB 1608, a bill they said would weaken the role of law enforcement in arresting and detaining violators of protective orders. But lawmakers apologized to those who planned to testify when the sponsor of the bill didn't show up for the hearing.

Bill sponsor Rep. Skip Reilly, R-Grafton, didn't show up last week when the bill came before the committee, telling the chairman that he would be out of town. The hearing was rescheduled to Wednesday, but Reilly again didn't appear. He told News 9 that he wasn't prepared to testify about the bill.

"To have people travel great distances on two separate occasions to come here to testify and then have the prime sponsor not show up or send a surrogate, I thought that was beyond the pale," said Rep. Steve Shurtleff, D-Merrimack.

Reilly said he sponsored the legislation at the request of Plymouth prosecutor Gabriel Nizetick, who said his original intent was completely lost in the wording of the bill.

"It was intended to protect victims of domestic violence," Nizetick said. "It was not intended to criminalize civil misconduct."

Nizetick said he was trying to bring regulations currently on the books in compliance with state law, saying recent amendments lumped civil disputes in with criminal infractions. He said that he in no way intended to strip away protections that restraining orders provided to victims of abuse.

But the proposed legislation as written alarmed many on the front lines of domestic abuse.

"The coalition has been very alarmed at the number of anti-domestic violence bills that have been filed in this past session," said Amanda Grady of the New Hampshire Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence.

John Cantin, whose daughter, Melissa Charbonneau, was shot and killed by her husband in 2009 in front of him, said he was gravely concerned about legislation that appeared to remove power from police officers to arrest violators of domestic violence protection orders.

"After my daughter passed away, that went like a tsunami through the entire family, so we're all victims to this," Cantin said. "That person needs to removed out of the situation as soon as possible."

The bill will not be considered any more this session. Nizetick said he hopes to rework the language to introduce what he called technical corrections to the legislation in the next session.

Read more: http://www.wmur.com/news/30295720/detail.html#ixzz1kcLp9gyG


Top
  
PostPosted: 01/27/12 10:16 am • # 12 
The bill will not be considered any more this session. Nizetick said he hopes to rework the language to introduce what he called technical corrections to the legislation in the next session.

Sadly, if people had not turned out enmasse to protest the bill (IOW, if they had not been informed about the bill) I have little doubt it would have passed...the repugs got caught and called out this time--"next session" I'm afraid they'll try to be more discreet...


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

  Page 1 of 1   [ 12 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 6 hours



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
© Voices or Choices.
All rights reserved.