...on the restraining order.
I think that women would be better off treating restraining orders as "a permit to shoot the SOB when he comes calling" rather than "a magical paper protecting me from all harm."
You'd think that simple numbers would enter into such an equation, like odds at a casino (for purposes of this scenario we'll equate violation of the restraining order with murderous intent):
With restraining order: 50% chance of subject obeying order, 50% chance of subject violating order and killing victim.
With restraining order AND GUN: 50% chance of subject obeying order, 25% chance of subject violating order and killing victim, 25% chance of victim killing subject in self-defense.
So the woman who acquires a gun in addition to a restraining order reduces her chance of being killed from 50% to 25%.
The actual numbers will vary according to the level of training by the woman and how accessible her gun is, as well as the element of surprise which her murderous husband unfortunately enjoys.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Whatever the merits of your argument, Bob, your use of numbers is scandalous. You're proposing that when given two options, a given population will split evenly between both of them. If half the women who seek restraining orders are being murdered, why aren't we hearing about it? Is it only on Fox News?
@wally: you did read the part about "for purposes of this scenario," right?
@wally: And dragging in Fox News, when I've told you in the past that I don't watch TV or much visit the Fox News website, just makes you sound like an elitist prick.
An elitist prick! I love it! And "for purposes of this scenario" simply means "because I feel like distorting the true situation."
@wally: From the Colorado Bar Association:
A protective order is only one part of a safety plan. Having a protective order does not ensure safety. A protective order is only as good as the abuser’s willingness to obey it. A protective order should not be used to give a victim a false sense of safety; it is not a bullet-proof shield.
Unfortunately, protective orders can sometimes have the opposite effect for which they are intended. If an extremely violence abusive partner – an abusive partner who has no respect for the law – or an abusive partner with no concern about the consequences of his/her behavior is served with a protective order, he/she may seek revenge on his/her partner and place her/him, their children, co-workers, family, and friends in danger.
From Criminal Law Lawyer Source:
A restraining order is a helpful tool to reduce the risk of violence, harassment, and other harm. However, a restraining order cannot provide absolution protection so it is important for potential victims of violence to take every precaution possible. Statistics show that restraining orders are frequently violated. Nearly twenty percent of all domestic homicides occur during a time where the victim had a restraining order out against her killer. And this statistic reflects only the most extreme example of a restraining order violation.
So there's the number, Walt. 20%. Are you ok with telling a woman who has a restraining order against an abusive partner that hey! It's ok, there's only a 2 in ten chance that he'll come kill you?
Good grief, Bob! The statistic is that 20% of domestic homicides occur when the victim had a restraining order, NOT 20% of women with restraining orders get killed! Can't you see that?
Let me be clear: I think it's appalling that ANY women are victimized in this way, and there might even be merit in allowing them to defend themselves with firearms, but you do your argument no favors by mishandling statistics. The quotes you just provided speak for themselves. There's no need to exaggerate.
@wally: I stand corrected on the 20% number, although it's mentioned that restraining orders often provoke a violent response. And I have no idea whether the numbers reflect national statistics or just a single jurisdiction (or state). Probably in some locations violent violation of restraining orders is higher than mentioned here.
And I think my original point stands: it's better to view a restraining order as necessary documentation justifying a successful self-defense plea when you are forced to kill the abuser than it is any sort of protection in and of itself.
Agree!
Post a Comment