So accurate, you are a very positive strong person. Most people are passive and act like cattle waiting for a someone to save them. Abusers should know that their abuse will be met with zero tolerance and a lot of backlash only then we will have justice. 8 years ago were i live sexual harassment was a big issue. My sister would need me to accompany her when she goes for a walk next to our house like even one minute away walking destination. Last year stronger sexual harassment laws were enforced. Now she could walk wherever she wants without worrying and without needing me to walk with her
All that white knighting and you still can't get any...
What you're talking about is abuse occurring in the workplace toward other employees! Then it's appropriate. Asker is not talking about this. Asker is saying if someone is a convicted DOMESTIC abuser should they be fired. If it doesn't concern the workplace and they are getting treatment and some sort of punishment and they aren't in some high falutin' position that embarrasses the company, I'd think, "No." Harvey Weinstein is a case in point.
@msc545 say that again if your gf/wife/sister/ mum get assaulted
@kim45456 I got assaulted. THere is no point to fire someone over something not involving their work. The workplace is not a court of law. Leave such decisions for the legal profession. He had court ordered therapy and kept his distance. As long as I was not harassed or assaulted, I was fine. As long as he didn't act out in front of my son, I was fine.
Innocent until proven guilty. Just because someone is suspected of something doesn't mean they're guilty. In addition, there is court intervention so the person will stop the abuse. So their family doesn't become destitute if they lose their job. Remember punish the SIN not the sinner?
@Screenwriter thats not true. Unless you have been through it, you have no idea. Just because a court gets involved doesn't mean anything. They can issue a restraining order, but in most cases that escalates the violence up to murder. Lets assume for the sake of the argument the abuser is actually guilty. If someone is being abused, their family is already destitute. Your idea of punishing only the action not the person is archaic. Are you saying the person is possessed by the action and if you took it out of the person, they are a good person? You can't separate them. People have free will to make choices. You can't put actions on trial, only people
I have been through it. If an abuser stops being abusive, that is a giant step toward being a better person. Doesn't mean they become a good person. But they can stop ACTING OUT in abusive ways.
A mother hitting a child is also considered domestic violence.
@SuccessfulHornDog A few swats for being disobedient or lying or such is not domestic violence. If you spank a child for putting a hand in the fire when they're too young to stop at "No," sometimes you have to resort to a swat or two. Once they're older, that usually isn't the case.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
How about a criminal record?
Should not matter in my opinion.Its the duty of the government to punish you for your crimes, not your employer.If the government thinks, you have served your sentence and can be part of society again, why should an employer think otherwise?
AMEN!!! I hope she ends up in prison where she's abused, raped and murdered.
@DiscomfortZone That's straight up cruel, man.
@DiscomfortZone She didn't murder Johnny Depp, did she? Nor rape him. She abused him. Physically assaulted him. She's a messed up person. You should wish that she gets justice and treatment. Just like you'd wish that for anyone with criminal/psychological problems. Even Depp said he still loves her, though they're divorced because those issues couldn't be resolved within their marriage.
@Boppy no, that's straight up fair and by saying it's cruel you're contributing to society's forgiving and enabling treatment of domestic abusers. How does that feel?
@Screenwriter I would wish such a punishment on anyone who abused others while presenting themselves as a victim. You go ahead and fantasize about rehabilitation of monsters, I'd rather see them really pay for their crimes. Then maybe we'd have less of them.
I think there's a lot of options besides "forgive and enable" and "abuse, rape, and murder."For example, ideally, I'd like the damage done to be healed and rehabilitation and therapy to prevent future abuse. My ideals may seem far off, but they're my hope.
I won't begrudge you for being an idealistic dreamer, nor your fantasy world where monsters get better. Please understand I live in the real world where you either slay the monster or it slays you.
@DiscomfortZone It is neither idealistic nor dreaming to rehabilitate men or women who have abused in the past. These are not monsters, but people who might've been abused themselves or who aren't psychologically right. Drug abuse and alcoholism also play parts. I'm not saying someone needs to stay married to such a person, nor raise their children with them. I'm saying such people can do much better if they get ongoing, longterm counseling and, in most cases, medication. If jail release and parole require such monitoring, that is a better and less expensive practice than tossing away the key.
Cheapest solution would be to execute them. I won't argue semantics with you.
@DiscomfortZone To a hammer, everything's a nail. I 'm no hammer. There should be work training and psychological care for people in prison THAT CONTINUES AFTER THEY"RE RELEASED. This is far less expensive than revolving door situations and requires that we recreate a person and a taxpayer who BENEFIT their community in ways we never know. It works in foreign countries where recidivism is less than 10 percent. NOTHING is done here and recidivism is around 75-80%. I'm also unwilling to off people when at least 10 percent of the people killed are actually innocent and have been wrongly sent to prison.
Like I said, I think you're an idealist and a dreamer. But that's not the worst I could say about a person.
@DiscomfortZone Here's something that ain't dreamy. We, the taxpayers, save billions if we educate and train prisoners and keep them on needed medications (50 percent of PRISONERS have psychological issues they need medication for and that medication is cut off once they leave!!! HOWDY DOODY! So they filter back in after they reoffend... ) This is PRACTICAL shit. Not some kind of dream. The only people benefitting from prisoners reoffending are private prison corporations and their shareholders. They're there to make money, so OF COURSE they don't institute programs to educate and train prisoners... Or to keep them on medications.. Shit. This is no dream. It's common sense.
Oh, you're absolutely right. And in countries without such presence of privatized prisons - it's simply lack of interest in the prisoners' basic welfare that often causes recidivism. All that is very true. I say you're a dreamer because it appears you actually think this situation can be changed, whereas I believe mental patients who aren't prisoners are already treated like shit. So there's a long list of things that need to change before we even think about prisoners, and none of them will change anytime soon because nobody in a position of power actually gives a fuck. In certain years the US has spent more in prisons than on education, that should tell you the priorities... I'd love to see a world where politicians have a conscious and listen to people like you, but that's a dream and nothing more.
@DiscomfortZone I won't give up contacting my reps and sens etc till I'm senile or dead.
If the dream is held by a majority of people and they won't shut up about it, there's better odds than doing nothing.
@Screenwriter good luck with that.@Boppy the majority couldn't care less.
My issue with "the majority couldn't care less" is that once you include the rest of the population, they could care less.A lot of people are affected by the prison system, or have family members who are affected by it. "In 2016, 2.2 million Americans have been incarcerated, which means for every 100,000 there are 655 that are currently inmates."2.2 million people + their families and friends are still a minority, but I think it's a big enough group for their impact to be felt, if coordinated.
You know? At first I found all this dedication by you two to be ridiculous, even pathetic. Now? I honestly wish you luck.
@DiscomfortZone I'm a rational person. I only champion causes that are reasonable and will work and that I've seen work elsewhere. We are SO primitive about our prison systems. We used to have GED and college course/degree programs but THEY were cut out because people outside were angry that they were getting educations that maybe THOSE people didn't have. If ANYONE needs educations and training it's prisoners. Will save us billions of dollars, create taxpayers. Our puritanical society believes in punishment. PRISON alone is punishment. Anything more punishes society. Ignorance punishes us all. In the countries offering these programs recidivism is 10%, the ACTUAL number of incorrigible prisoners we should have statistically. Prisons are now holding MENTALLY ILL people whose major offense is they're not medicated and offend BECAUSE of that. This shit is just stupid.
But do these prisoners deserve to live?
@DiscomfortZone Who's to be the judge. I'm not a god. I can't do it. Keeping them away from people so they'll do no further harm is humane. It stops them and saves others. Ultimately, older prisoners pose no threat to anyone. But they've been in jail so long, they've been institutionalized and can't care for themselves. There might be alternatives int he future, like the ones for chronically mentally ill patients, that cost society far less than prison. And would be more humane, too.
No, you're not a "god", you're a human being. Think of child molesting rapist. What is better? Years of prison costing us millions or 30 minutes with the victim's father, then a cleanup crew? Why should I be humane to a monster?
@DiscomfortZone Executions can get pretty expensive too. www.criminaljusticedegreehub.com/.../
True that, they can, but they really, really don't have to. All we have to do is stop making such an effort to turn something simple into something complex. Allocate an execution room, slit monster's throat, put monster's body in furnace. When it comes to rapists and murdered - a punishment fitting the crime.
@DiscomfortZone "The reason for this is that the inmates on death row are guaranteed a long and very thorough judicial process by the Constitution. This is done so that the chances of executing an innocent inmate are minimized."If we rush to kill without certainty of guilt, we may be a bit monstrous too.
Damn I did not think my opinion would turn into an argument
Oh hey, sorry for throwing a party in your reply section, haha.
@Boppy - I wouldn't mind. Some innocents would die, but we'd gain back our strength as a society to deter the true monsters. Today, you could rape three women and serve one year. That's why there are still rapists.@Anonymous chicken shit - this is a discussion, and a good one at that.
@Boppy it’s okay no drama
@DiscomfortZone Actually, DZ, there are so many rapists because few women want to report rape (36 percent) because of the stigma and trouble it is to get a conviction (12 percent conviction rate), and because there are often one-time rapists. Rape is a crime of opportunity. There are practically NO Ted Bundys. Serial rapists are rare. There are a minority of men who rape once, get away with it and never do it again. AND... Wonder of wonders, NONE of these men (studies show) consider themselves rapists. So none of them acknowledge they've committed a violent crime. "Rapists tend to be antisocial. Many have a mixed criminal history and a pattern of victimizing people. They're aggressive and have problems controlling their anger. They lack adequate communication skills which contributes to their feelings of rage and frustration. They're often sensitive to rejection and insecure about their own masculinity. They also have distorted views about women and sex. Most have been sexually deviant since adolescence."
I firmly hold all these people would find themselves considering their options (wait for consent or don't) quite heavily if they knew the crime of rape leads to death. I think we'd see a serious improvement.
@DiscomfortZone The death penalty has NEVER, EVER deterred people from committing ANY crimes. That is a fact. People who ARE committing crime, I mean career criminals, don't have a sense they are doing wrong. They are surviving, getting revenge, doing what they have to. In their minds, they are not criminals. They think everyone else is wrong. As long as they get away with it, they keep on going. I'll relate a little tale I just heard. A couple with two lovely little boys were both drug addicts. The man abused the wife and also the children. In some fit of rage he beat his wife to death and is now in prison. Some cousins of mine are fostering the children and want to adopt them: they're about 5 and 6. They are having TROUBLE TERMINATING HIS PARENTAL RIGHTS... He clearly doesn't think he's wrong to prevent his children from being adopted by people who will love and care for them in spite of the fact he BEAT THEIR MOTHER TO DEATH because he was a meth addict. Somewhere in his mind, he's an appropriate parent. And he's taking care of his children from jail. (of course he isn't) And though he abused them, that wasn't so bad either... He'll probably be out in 25 years. But he's trying to deny these sweet boys the opportunity to have a normal life without him. Criminals aren't right in the head. Drug addicts aren't either. And who knows what other problems this guy has. Maybe he was abusive BEFORE the addiction. Addictions just drop the curtains on self control. They don't create anger and abuse.
Companies are responsible for employees safety
Are they attacking that person on company property? Then they can fire. They can’t meddle with the lives of others unless if it affects the company and the well being of the other coworkers.It’s nonsensical what you’re proposing since it is a domestic issue happening at home.
Exactly... the cowardly piece of crap relies on having some advantage on the victim so that it's required for her to risk a roof over her and possibly her child's head to escape the abuser
The question isn't will they, it's should they be able to.
Employers are not legal systems. They are businesses. Unless their being a cashier or dentist is directly affected by this issue, it is not a matter for a business to handle. People who are screwed up one way or another still need to survive to take care of their families and get themselves help.
And an employer is no judge. Still it is the CEO's decision.
Still the cancellation must be lawful. Otherwise the employee can file a lawsuit against his employer, sure with less hope to stay there. Next thing he should do, quit the job himself.
Oh yeah, America, the land of lawsuits.I think an employer should have just as much freedom as an employee. If an employee can leave a job at their total discretion, then employers should be allowed their own discretion.
Lol, I guess it's not dangerous at all if a women stabs you with a knife.
@Chase7777 most women need a weapon to hurt a man. Most men, can easily hurt a woman with strength alone.
Yes, taking a knife ain't that hard though.
I had a girlfriend hit me on two different occasions, so in addition to being arrested, she would also lose her job and become homeless? How does that help?
They can, but the question was should they.
@honestGUY45 of course.
@honestGUY45 if they think they should. Its their call.