Beating a spouse
is wrong. Fighting is wrong. Domestic Abuse is wrong. This is a very simple concept and lawmakers,
police officers, and citizens of our country for years have been in majority
agreeance with these concepts. One of
the punishments our government has come up with for convicted domestic abusers
is revoking the privilege to carry weapons in public. This prevents convicted abusive citizens from
having the ability to tote a potentially murderous weapon around, at any time
ready to be assistance to their destructive and unstable personalities'
wishes. Police amendended. Officers have
recently been added to the list of people who are not allowed to carry guns in
public if they have been convicted of Domestic Abuse. Some precincts are outraged, however this
seems to be the proper law and should stay as it is
Law officers are
human, and just like everyone else, they make mistakes. An up-and-coming officer could get in a
skirmish at the local bar and be charged with Domestic Abuse. This same officer could become one of the
most effective law enforcers in the country.
With this law, this officer would not be allowed to continue his
services for his county and his fellow police officers. Many people feel that this officer is being
done a great injustice and should be allowed to continue his otherwise flawless
career as an officer of the law.
Interesting.
One simple
conviction could ruin the lives of every cop in the country. Hard working, one-time offensive policemen
and women would be barred from police work forever. Many people think that this is entirely too
harsh for a poke in the chest or a slap to the face of a spouse. Many people think that the law was produced
in haste and that the solution is simple-make the judgement of each officer's
career jurisdictional and personalize each case. Interesting.
Finally, some
people believe that by swiping the badge of a convicted Domestic Abuser the
government is causing two totally new problems.
The first problem caused by the new law is the decline in officers on
the street and the resultant increase in criminal behavior. The second problem is the fact that the
policeman or woman that is dismissed is probably expecting that income to
support a family. Interesting.
Criminal behavior
is wrong. Proponents of reinstating the
convicted police officers and abolishing the amendment have not fully
considered the circumstances that provoke such measures. The law does not apply to those people whom
have been charged with Domestic violence.
The law applies to those officers (and citizens) that have been
convicted of the crime. This means that
the action had to be so serious that someone pursued a lawsuit against the
alleged criminal and a servant of the public's best interest had to see that
the action was worthy of punishment. A
"poke in the chest" at the local bar with very unlikely draw a
conviction of Domestic Abuse. If the
action was serious enough to be brought to court, someone was very effected by
the actions of the future protector of the peace. If a judge found the person guilty of a
crime, and the same mind that produced the rage to commit the crime still
exists, it's hard to put faith it the ability of that criminal to protect
citizens from bad guys.
Spouses who are
victims of Domestic Violence probably experience one of two different types of
abuse. The first, and extremely rare, is
the isolated incident where the abuse only occurs once. The second type is the repetitive and
continual occurrences. In the first
type, it is probably minor and certainly not worthy of someone potentially
losing their job years down the road. However,
there is extremely little likelihood that the spouse of the abuser will
prosecute the abuser and have them convicted.
With the more frequent type of abuse, the spouse is much more likely to
attempt to prosecute the offender and have them punished. So if the police officer was convicted of
spousal abuse in the past, the incident was probably not isolated no minor.
We should not be
so sympathetic toward criminals. A
convicted criminal has no right to be enraged because his job was taken
away. If these police officers are our
leaders in upholding justice and moral actions, they must certainly have the
demonstrative characteristics necessary to set examples. It is almost hypocrisy to have someone make
on-the-scene judgments as to whether or not a person will be spending the night
in jail for a domestic crime if the judge himself has done the same crime.
No comments:
Post a Comment