E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe law, first passed in 1994, makes it easier to prosecute domestic violence crimes in federal court and now provides extended coverage to immigrants, gays and lesbians. NBC's Brian Williams reports.
Flanked by Vice President Joe Biden, the original author of the 1994 Violence Against Women Act, President Barack Obama signed a reauthorization of the legislation Thursday.
"All women deserve the right to live free from fear," the president said in his remarks before signing the bill. "That’s what today is about."
The reauthorization, which includes expansion of protections to gay couples and Native American women, passed the House last month after over a year of partisan disagreement over its renewal.
It was ultimately approved by the House by a vote of 286 to 138, with a minority of Republicans joining Democrats to support it.
The bill passed the Senate earlier in February by an overwhelming majority.
"This victory shows that when the American people make their voices heard, Washington listens," Obama said.
This story was originally published on Thu Mar 7, 2013 2:47 PM EST
Leave a Comment:
A minority of republicans joining in... such a common refrain.
What a sack of door-knobs.
And only a minority of Republicans voted for it. You wonder why they have an image problem with the citizens of this country!
Layton: You are spot-on! (I used to say "right," but now that poor little word can be used as an insult - LOL!)
It's good news for (1)Women/ victims of DV; It's a(nother) victory for Pres Obama; and it's a victory for Progressives because the ReThuglicans continue on with their War Against Women (remember when they accused us of just imagining their misogyny??)
Now, on towards increasing the min wage, and hopefully repealing the sequester, and somemore good stuff. We continue moving . . .
FORWARD! :-)
A greater percentage of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats. Al Gore's daddy voted against it.
If women have the right to live without fear, then why can't we defend ourselves against criminals with a gun, instead of a whistle or pepper spray like the liberal left has suggested.
Thanks Speaker Boehner for allowing this to come to a vote knowing it didn't have a majority of the Majority allowing the Chicken Hawks to take cover while still doing the correct thing with the much needed help of the Dems.
Industrial Strength . . .
The Republican party that voted for the Civil Rights Act then would have voted for the VAMA. The current Republican party has nothing in common with that of old.
I do give those republicans who helped get the VAWA passed credit; it was nice to see President Obama and VP Biden once again acknowledge the GOPers like Mike Crappo and Susan Collins who help get legislation passed. As for the rest of the GOP, what a bunch of wimps. Take heed GOP, women have long memories and they vote!
Industrial Strength, don't forget the rest of the facts. Most of the southern democrats--old bigot dixiecrats--became republicans. The parties essentially switched sides especially in the south.
isn't assault assault?
Why would there have to even be an act to make assault illegal ?
Enlighten me. It seems like a waste of time and money.
Assault is assault.....right ????? It's already a crime.....right ???
Won't that interfere with the Latin cultures that like to beat the crap out of their women?
Muy Macho!
Just another in a long line of obummer smoke and mirror distractions.
Dennis, good point about Speaker Boehner.
So, Rick, preventing and reducing violence against women (and children) is "smoke and mirror distractions"--tells me all I need to know about you.
bamer,
Among other things it provides funds to state and local police and communities to provide protection and “safe houses” for those that are abused and/or threatened.
And with this we continue to add more and more to the rolls of the protected, pro-government classes. Which means those that are not in a protected class are now a minority fighting against the oppression of the government. Well that only took what 40 years? To go from we want to be equal, to please protect me because we tried it the other way and it's scary.
I wonder if that brave young lady fighting a real war on women against the Taliban in Afghanastan gets upset at the opportunities presented to everyone in this country, only to have those same people need assistance from those they originally fought against.
Bamer- exactly what i thought
Washington seems to retread old bills, slap a new name on it, and people think they are doing something.... This law has already existed for ALL PEOPLE not just women.
How much will this cost to implement????
And you wonder why Washington is getting the nation bankrupt???
Just so groups of people can say- hey this did this for us...............
wow.
Idiot. What kind of political BS is this. Does the administration have the nuts to go after the Islamic view of women? No what does this legislation mean? It means vote for me cause you're stupidly thinking I can do something for you that you don't already have, Unless you are a muslim.
jamer, educate yourself; trying learning something about the topic before tossing out one-line pieces of uninformed bull puckey.
Until the VAWA was passed in 1994, domestic violence was treated by law enforcement as a "private" matter and no one's business--women were treated by doctors and at hospitals, and then sent home for more abuse. The law isn't just about filing "assault" charges.
Charlie Nies, the idiot is looking at you in the mirror judging by that idiotic comment. In the United States ALL women, regardless of religion, are protected by this law. The United States and President Obama are not in charge of how Islamic countries treat their women--all we can do is urge better treatment and use foreign monetary aid as a bribe.
Ok, so what did this act do that was not already addressed with existing laws?
Was EVERONE included or is violence against those left out ok?
Anyone?
It is not a new bill or law
It is a reauthorization of the 1994 law
Dennis, Did the 1994 law expire???
@ Layton...
Big thanks... for speaking with some common sense and logic to that juvenile-minded jack-wagon named... Industrial Strength.
I'm glad that the idiot didn't compare gun deaths to car ceaths, like "his kind" habitually does...!
Agreed, NC. To answer the snarky lib-dumbass questions here about why so few Republicans voted for this bill: they are smart enough to not waste time on redundancy.....there are already tons of laws on the books against assault & battery, murder, etc.
Q. Then why pass more laws?
A. It makes the Dems look good to their low information voter base.
I live in fear every day do to the incompetency of our government.
"Until the VAWA was passed in 1994, domestic violence was treated by law enforcement as a "private" matter and no one's business--women were treated by doctors and at hospitals, and then sent home for more abuse."
Sorry, Jody, that is absurdly flat out false. Law enforcement is mostly local police or state police...and domestic violence was and is a crime. Police take this crime seriously.
This Act will pay for more federal bureaucracy and more power to the almighty Federal Government. Whether it actually has an impact on the horrible crime of "Violence Against Woman"?
Doubtful, given the atrocious track record of the federal government in such matters.
"Head Start" -doesnt give a head start
"Affordable Care Act" -breaks the bank
"Department of Education"-- ruins education reform
Why did they go back home if they knew they were facing more abuse? Are you really saying that the government needs to pass a law to protect you form your own choices?
"All women deserve the right to live free from fear,"
EVERYONE deserves a right to live free from fear, including ALL minorities.
Yeah bamer, domestic violence against women used to be considered "none of our business" by the police and local communities. The fight for equal laws for women has been a very long one and isn't done yet.
Jody, for some people it is hard to get educated. Be easy on Jamer, he maybe one of these unfortunate people.
Rick, do you know that more children are killed by by the hand of a parent or a caregiver in the first three years of there life than all the children lost of mass Murder? Well it is true and more women and children suffer from physical abuse as well. Please look up statistice before you make such. I am willing to help you
http://www.nationalchildrensalliance.org/NCANationalStatistics
http://www.rainn.org/statistics
Sure hope you take the time to read and understand them.
another trick for the democrats to raise more money for nothing but waste,have another golf tounament obaaama and don't let the kids walk thru the white house,you worthless piece of human waste.
"This victory shows that when the American people make their voices heard, Washington listens," Obama said.
oh really? is that why we keep having to tell you to get rid of the illegal immigrants and get some security on our border? is that why we keep having to tell you no to amnesty for illegals? nice brainwashing PR quote
The comments here from the right wing misogynists are sure to secure women voters supporting your 1950's attitude in coming elections! LOL!
How is that "re-branding" effort working out for you these days? ;o)
Is there anyone the party of pale - male & stale doesn't hate?
GOP DOA 2014, being hateful about Children and sick people, battered women and educating people so they can support themselves. This supremeisist rhetoric handed you defeat in 2012 and unless you find your humanity and maybe a little humility, it will defeat you again and again and again.
truth,
The President and most in Congress do listen as 60% of Americans say that we need immigration reform that includes a pathway to citizenship.
You are out numbered !!
So it's still OK to attack men?
Why is everything and I mean everything taegeted for the the minorities and such show me one thing that's for the white middle class working male just one there isn't and by god our children are really going to pay this is just wrong all of it you can hVE A HISPANIC CHAMBER OF COMMERECE AND CHURCHES YOU HAVE LOANS SETR ASIDE FOR HISPANIC FEMALES TO START THEYRE OWN BUISNESSES YOU CAN HAVE A MISS BLACK USA ALL THATS FINE WONDER WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF YOU HAD A JUST CAUCASION ANYTHING FOOD FOR THOUGHT
I agree Red - just like that state rep who said that women did not know they were about to be raped........Oh wait! That was a democrat state rep from Colorado.
Right away there's all kinds of republican bashing and people are fixating on the "Minority of Republicans" statement. People should understand the reasoning before commenting. Yes, 199 democrats voted Yea to 0 voting Nay and 87 republicans voting Yea to 138 voting Nay. The reason I believe the votes fell this way is because the law is being modified to only include women abused by other women in same sex marriages. The modification the republicans were looking for eliminated all references to "Gender identity" and "Sexual orientation" meaning men would then be protected under the same law. Shouldn't anyone being abused be protected by the law? Why only women? If there's something I'm misunderstaning please fill me in.
Bully, bully, oh we didn't pass that put of the law. At least we can still have some fun ;-} Like we need a law that said we can beat women, my wife tells me that while shes beating me all the time. At Yahtzee!
Another reason not to be Republican. The demoncrats way of life is to give groups of people "Special Treatment"= Special rights= less rights for the rest of us.
So, what types of violence were allowed before 1994 to women?
This is for the "feisty redhead"... Hate is a 2 edged sword..have you ever heard of misandry ?? and there's just as much of it,and it has nothing to do with politics.
The democrats cannot have it both ways. One one hand, they sign this Violence Against Women act and think they are doing something wonderful for women. On the other hand, they want to take a woman's right to bear arms away, thus making her defenseless.
There are some real numb nuts on here today... One of the things this law does is give LGBT folks legitimacy in the eyes of the law when it comes to domestic violence as opposed to just a simple assault. Which by the way is an entirely different crime with different punishments and legal procedures. Another is that it gives power to tribal courts to go after Non-Native Americans that rape Native American women on native land. Which is something that before this bill made it impossible for natives to protect their women from the WHITE MEN!
Hey William Travis, although I do not deny that we Latino males do beat our women from time to time... White men are like the Michael Jordan of that $hit! So maybe you should read up on statistics before you spew your unnecessary racist dribble... I mean this article did not mention Latinos at all and you could not help yourself you ignorant F$%#!
See what you don't understand is that women are second on the ladder of hopeless peeps when it comes to white, christian, non homosexual men abuse. First on the rung are of course blacks. Funny how will these poor little girls be able to join the Army and become a combat trooper if they can fight off their boyfriends?
So the Sequester King took the day off from hiding behind children and chose women.....Dog and Pony Show as usual for the Great Divider Barry Soetoro.
LosMan - isn't that what the "hate crime" laws are supposed to fix?
Thank G-d for Obama!
Why, until now violence against women was perfectly fine! Sure! Women were chattel!!
.
And then, behold! Our Dear Leader has used his Mighty Pen!
From now on, there will be no more violence against women!!
Women can now be free from being the victims of violence!
/cue singing angels/
Hark!!
[APPLAUSE]
.
.
Psssssssttttt!!!!...................Now, show us the pork spending you've attached!!
.
The article skimmed lightly over the protections for Native American women, and did not mention at all the provision giving Tribal police the right to arrest and prosecute non Natives who commit crimes on Tribal lands.
Prior to this law being passed, any non Native who raped or assaulted any Native woman, child or man on Native land could walk away with being brought to trial. The feds claimed they didn't have the resources to prosecute, and the local white man's law said it wasn't their bag.
The criminals got away with it being pleaded down to a misdemeanor, if he was charged at all, and paying a measly fine. And you people wonder why there is so much alcohol and suicide on reservations? It's open season on the Rez for any rapist or pedophile as long as he isn't a Native American. White, Russian, Hispanic, Black, Somalian, you name it, go to the Rez, pick your fancy, rape, beat up, walk away. You can't be touched.
Was a problem getting it passed because some of the politicians didn't think it was "right" for Indians to be able to arrest and stand judgement on non Indians. Ain't that a trip?
Judging from the door-knob count here so far, we're gonna need a bigger bag!!!
Somebody kicked over the tool-box today.
.
I'd like to see Obama sign the "Violence Against Unborn Women Act"
.
Hope that helps!
.
CoRavensfan... I dont know much about how hate crime laws differ or if they have any wholes in them that made this law necessary... but i am not going to sit here and pretend i know either... But i can look it up... Only reason i posted was cuz of what's his face pissed me off..
your mom's like a door knob, everyone gets a turn...
This is one piece of legislation that I haven't been following aside from this article, which doesn't say very much. My honest question: what does this legislation outlaw that wasn't already illegal? Violence against women is already a crime.
CoRavensFan . . .
You do know that senseless paranoia is a sign of substsance abuse? Where on earth are you getting the right to bear arms taken away? Please ... cite a source! And get some help.
He said they "want to take a woman's right to bear arms away" which they do:
http://www.infowars.com/video-dianne-feinstein-says-prepare-to-turn-in-your-guns/
Thank you for your post Screminmini. Glad you are up on the subject.
Layton - denial is not just a river in Egypt! You haven't heard or read anything recently about how Americans' second amendment rights are in jeopardy??
You asked this question before a few days ago when this was being discussed on another thread and I answered it several times.
READ MY POST 1.46
Listen up, liberals! Assigning racial and gender bigotry to those who vote on a bill, one way or the other, is an old political ploy, and it's getting tiresome! Do you truly believe that voting no on this bill is an indicator that that person is biased, wants to see women abused, is anti-woman, or whatever the fk other accusation you can stir up in your severely damaged leftist brains...??? It's a good try, but the rhetoric is wearing thin andas a tool to demonize the GOP and Conservatives. Snarky insults from popcorn eating leftist jackasses have long ago ceased being effective political tools.
it was illegal to beat up women yesterday. wasn't it???
Layton, there isn't enough space here to tell you how the right to bear arms is being taken away. There were many laws on the Federal books regarding weapons, BUT THEY WERE NEVER IMPLEMENTED OR ENFORCED as they should have been. Check the law that was approved in NY State by Gov. Cuomo. The ONLY people paying the price for owning guns are people who are licensed, law abiding, non-combative, non-killers, etc. Anyone else, just like before, can get his weapons off the street. There is/was a law on the books where anyone who purchased/owned a weapon that COULD BE considered a military-style weapon had to turn in a used cartridge casing to the FBI or State Police for them to hold to compare against any potential weapon used to commit a crime. Over the years, do you know how many of these "casing-registered" weapons were used in a crime???? ZERO!!!! Any further legislation is ludicrous and a knee-jerk reaction to someone who was INSANE and murdered children. Do you honestly think a law-abiding, sane person would do such a thing? How do you legislate against insanity? What would the reaction be if, for instance, a whacko released a poison gas in a classroom or subway? What would you legislate against? NO ONE who values the right to bear arms would commit a crime and lose that right, but those are the people who are paying the price for insanity. Frankly, chipping away at those rights is exactly what happened in Germany when Hitler was taking power and it is frightening to think we are traveling that same path.
OK, so just so we are clear, a native can go off the res, commit a crime, go back to the res and is completely and 100% safe from prosecution as long as he stays on native soil. So now if a non-native goes on the res, commits a crime, and leaves, he is able to be prosecuted. But only if it is against women. And it is a man committing the crime. Or a gay woman.
Yeah, that is fair.
Sorry, I lost a bucketload of money when I was in college when some drunk natives pulled out in front of me and totalled my car, and got out of their totalled car and ran back to the reservation where I could not do anything, including get the remains of their car for scrap to recover a couple hundred of the thousands of dollars I was out (it was titled to the reservation). Unless I could catch them off the res and get them to a police station, there was nothing I could do. My understanding is that this has not changed, a native can come off the res, commit any crime and once back on the res he might as well be in Russia, he is untouchable.
Not saying that people who commit crimes shouldn't be punished for it, just that it should be equal, across the board, and not just for one race or gender. Every law in this country should apply to every citizen of this country, no more and no less. I wouldn't have voted for a bill that specified that lesbian domestic violence was covered but not gay men domestic violence, or violence against men of any sexual orientation. Violence is violence, and assault is assault, and spending time and money to make it more illegal to do something because of a body part while at the same time making it illegal to charge more for insuring someone based on the same things is hypocritical and a waste. But toot your own horns all you want on the left. At least there isn't a new tax associated with this, yet anyway.
@ William Travis , How about a Bill that prevents "your culture" from Shooting up movie theaters (Aurora Co) or Elementary Schools (Sandy Hook Elementary)
How did I know this Act was a lawyers dream come true? This will create a whole new government agency in the midst of the so called sequester.
Found this on Wikipedia, looks to me like more spending and more big government; even with WH tours being cancelled! Smoke and mirrors!
More from the same site,
So, based upon case law this was an exercise in futility because the first case brought before the court will have this to contend with. Much like gun control laws this will do nothing to protect women from violence and it tramples upon the Constitution (10th Amendment). Actually, a woman with a gun would have a much better chance of permanently solving her violence concerns.
where is the equal protection with this law? sorry, you cannot make laws specific to someones gender, race or anything else if it does not protect ALL CITIZENS EQUALLY. this law is unconstitutional and as a citizen i do not need to acknowledge its existence, abide by it nor be subjected to it. is there no violence against men?
must be so hard to read the US constitution or understand any of it
you are flat out lying or just plan ignorant as that is not the case. american indians live on sovereign land and if you commit a crime on their land you face their justice, not american justice. if you leave sovereign indian land while still a wanted criminal, you can still be arrested by american police and extradited back to sovereign indian land. the federal government has no constitutional powers to create criminal laws as that has nothing to do with the function of a federal government, states create those laws.
so how would creating this law help the government carry out its constitutional functions? prosecuting citizens for criminal matters does not fall under any constitutional power, maybe if it was treason or something but states have the power of creating these criminal laws.
native americans living on their sovereign land do not get the protections of the US constitution as they are not under the jurisdiction of either our government or the courts, thats why it called sovereign.
Caesar - You used to be just an irritating, silly little man . You have evolved into an angry, foul-mouthed, hateful little man. What has you sooooooo pissed off? Just an observation from one of those left-leaning, progressive Communists you want to shoot with one of your automatic weapons.....
DaveK-1110204, you are equating your vehicle destruction with the rape of women and children? Okay.
Swagganaut : No I am not lying and for you to call me one shows you have absolutely NO IDEA of what you are talking about. You should go to the site Indian Country Today and take a look at some back articles, or oh, hell, dude, take a look at some of today's articles.
Here's an idea, Google "Rape of Native American Women and Children" or "Prosecution of Rape of Native Americans" before you run off at the mouth about something you don't have the faintest idea of what you're talking about.
The rapist and abusers of Native Americans DO NOT GET PROSECUTED! They can get caught in the act of rape and the Tribal police have to turn them over the the local white law, who call the feds, who plead it down to a misdemeanor and a fine and they never even see the inside of a court room.
Tribal police ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ARREST OR PROSECUTE A WHITE MAN, you twit! Not until this law was passed and I'm not even sure that provision was kept in it.... it wasn't mentioned in the article and I'm waiting for the Indian Tribes to either applaud or condemn the bill based on what was kept in or taken out.
Because some of the politicians actually SAID it was not right for an Indian to pass judgement on a WHITE MAN even if he had committed a crime on sovereign land; i.e., Tribal land; i.e., the Rez, even if that crime was the rape of that Indian's wife, sister, mother or CHILD!
Stupid Kim, i've never threatened or alluded to that ever...its asshats like you that spout misinformation in an attempt to direct the narrative. I am an irritating silly man because i make sense and to a troglodyte like you, its hard to understand without monosyllabic interpretation. Im not pissed at all...Life be Irie. You want to see pissed, go see your inebriated redheaded rottencrotch friend..
Have a GREAT DAY
P.S. you like my new Avatar? I think its lovely and fitting for our current political Environment
I'm glad there were enough politicians that voted for the VAWA to pass it despite the 138 idiots that voted against it. And to those of you posting asinine comments that VAWA shouldn't have been renewed...you're either guilty of domestic violence/rape, think domestic violence/rape is acceptable, are uniformed, and/or just plain ignorant. Yes domestic violence was illegal before 1994, but not much was done about it. When domestic violence occurred, usually the most that was done (if anything) to the abuser was that he spent a night in jail. When the abuser was released from jail, he would go back and beat the person(s) he had abused again as punishment for him getting arrested. The abuser was very rarely actually punished for his actions. I use the words he, him, and his, because statistically it has been a male that was the abuser more than a female. Before any of you try to tell me that what I've indicated is not true, I can tell you that I have personally witnessed this happen several times. There are also other reasons for renewing the VAWA. For more info:
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/vawa_factsheet.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act
Basically the VAWA is necessary, because it provides important resources for victims of domestic violence/rape.
Industrial strength: I would recommend a course at your local community college, Political Science 101. There you can learn that the Dems/Reps switched their political "pole" (conservative vs. liberal) in the 1960s, amongst other things. Never stop learning, education is always a good thing. No one ever died from knowing too much.
To add to my comment #1.68...I'm aware that domestic violence/rape are not the only types of violence that occur. I used those types of violence as an example to express my opinion regarding the VAWA. My main point is that I believe that the VAWA is NECESSARY, and I can't understand any politician voting against it.
CoRavensFan and Tess . . .
Uh. No. I don't subscribe to all of the hate-filled fear mongering posts that you do nor do I watch Fox News. Again, as I stated above please feel free to cite a credible source and enlighten us all rather than your bunker white supremacy nonsense.
I don't get it. I thought assault was assault. This is like hate crimes. A crime has been committed what does the status of the victim have to do with it? It's the criminal that is the problem. If you commit a crime maybe you should be arrested and prosecuted for it. Why do we need all these extra laws? What good do they actually do except to create more red tape, more bureaucracy and ultimately more confusion? These laws certainly don't prevent crime.
Redhead Ranting
Red, this is the typical Liberal/Progressive idea of doing something. Symbolism over substance.
Of course this will be championed as the Lefts benevolence to you women. They are the arbiters of the "war on women" that Republicans are waging. Another "social war" to give the appearance of being compassionate. Of course we all know more laws, that are rarely enforced let alone significantly punished, will fix everything in the Liberal's mind.
This is the classic "Bread and Circuses" that many collapsing empires promote when they are incapable of understanding what is really causing the societies problems. Distract the unwashed masses from the realities and sprinkle them with "feel good" rewards of laws, programs or goodies.
We already have "wars" on crime, drugs, poverty and illiteracy. Now the Liberals are trying to add the wars on guns and the war on women. As much as the initial wars have been abject failures, so will these. But it makes them feel better.
Our biggest systemic defect is our criminal public school education system. All studies show if education is improved all the other social deficiencies follow. Unfortunately government's prefer an illiterate society, the masses are easier to control.
Until we get a government that is serious about reforming our education system all these insignificant attempts at control will just be more of the same.
Drew Peterson should have no freedom to kill off wife after wife.
VAWA? More like the Guilty until proven innocent act...
Thought you females wanted to be treated as equals... why the special treatment?
1.76
Did your Dad beat your Mother...do you beat your wife ? Because our comment is so disturbing that I wonder why you would be so dismissive of abused women.
Maybe you stupid libs should see what's actually in the bill, like Senate Amendment 21 that Leahy added in.
But I guess you really don't care about human trafficking or teenage prostitution. After all, that's progressive and people should be able to do what they want. Guess we can tack this one up with obama wanting babies that live through an abortion killed.
You libs are the most heartless @!$%#s I've ever seen.
@ R I Mom
My dad in drunken states, beat my mom and us kids all the time. He was turned in (I can't even count), nothing done but a protection order. How efective were the judges in making sure she and we were protected? hahahaha good one. Another law to add to the laws that prosecutors and judges have F&$%ed so many people on then and now.
Just add another groundbreaking media circus law that makes everybody feel warm & fuzzy
Dennis, you are somewhat of an embarrassment to Buckeyes everywhere. When you speak of immigration reform, do you mean that somehow we should legalize all the illegals presently in the country? Do you mean that we should lax the standards for immigration so that immigrants will not feel the need to be ambitious and not feel the need to assimilate into society? In my mind, immigration reform would entail enforcing current immigration laws. People are coming into the country and jumping right onto the entitlement train. They are not being denied legal immigration due to the likelihood of being dependent on social programs. Those that are here illegally and were being detained for a multitude of infractions are just being let loose here and not deported as they should be. Our current immigration laws already include a pathway to citizenship. My business partner did it, he got his work visa, applied and got sponsored, took the appropriate tests and oaths, and became a US citizen, all very legal and within the framework of current laws. Bottom line is, we have immigration laws that include a pathway to citizenship. The only real reform needed is to enforce the current laws.
Just reading this comment thread is giving me misRepublicanthropy. Oh, you'll grouse all day about the law and what you THINK it does or doesn't do, but I doubt most of you have the cojones to even TRY reading it (copy/paste - sorry no link):
thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s47:
Fair warning, it requires actual reading comprehension, of which most of you seem to have only an average functional grasp, at best, so good luck. The rest of you can bounce your lazy butts over to Wikipedia and infer the rest or tune into your media outlet of choice and have the gist of it sifted and fed to you (since that seems to be your typical modus operandi). Whatever you decide, do the rest of us a favor and stop talking out of your backsides.
Personally, what I find most amazing is how many of you ignorant gits are complaining that the law is "sexist" toward men without realizing its statutes apply EQUALLY to men, it just so happens that (surprise!) women comitting violence against men isn't nearly as commonplace as the reverse.
Oh, and since you're at the figurative end of the thread as I'm reading this, AlexM-2364525, I'll call you out singly as a representative of the other knuckle-dragging misogynists here. What's your beef with Leahy's amendment? It funds the part of the legislation to combat human trafficking. The amendment was co-sponsored by Republicans Rob Portman and Marco Rubio, too. You gonna ask them about their stance on abortion babies, too, or just blindly vote (R) and keep on spouting uninformed inanities? Sadly, I think I already know the answer. God bless you in your ignorance, kid. I'd say you need all the help you can get.
You have to look into the bill to figure out why people would vote against it. Dont just read the title and think that everything inside the bill is all peaches and butterflies. Does anyone notice that right now is so easy for a man to get in trouble. If a woman says that he beat her then he is automatically put in jail. All I am saying is please read the bill before you just start calling each other names because you read the title.
I bet most of you morons would vote to end womens sufferage.
We need to make sure our enemies know about this Violence Against Women Act or they will get into big trouble for try to assault our female combat troops.
The last time the VAWA was reauthorized, 4 Party of Noers dissented (mid-2000's).
This time over 150+ dissented?
Has the Reichwing truly gone off the deep end?
Seriously, who (or what) would vote against this?
NO ONE is taking away ANYONE's right to bear arms so stop the drama.
Also, YES, the 1994 law EXPIRED and needed to be reauthorized just like a number of other laws that contain government funding.
This law does not outlaw abuse (other laws do that). This law provides funding for services that abused women rely on. NO, THERE ARE NO OTHER LAWS THAT PROVIDE THAT SAME FUNDING.
My God, what a bunch of idiots you all are.
This is a "secret code" to all you Progressives......
"If I can't get my legislation through Congressional procedures, then I will go on the Road again, or I will use my Executive Orders or tell my Progressive Cabinet members just to rewrite regulations to support my agtenda."
GO IT !!! Throw the Consitution out the window (Obama's plan).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"SEQUESTER"....."What SEQUESTER ?" Asks Mr. Obama.
I find it ironic that so many on the right downplay comments like "War on Women, War on the Middle Class, War on Unions" in the face of hundreds of laws trying to get passed that do just those things...
but have no problem - with absolutely no factual support from this century (Feinstien in 1995 is a pretty lame source) - that there's a "War on Guns, Old White Men and Conservatives".
The "war" on the GOP was started , fueled and funded by...the GOP as demonstrated by the comments like those above (and soon the be below) and by a total lack of growth since 1950.
Let's see...Al Gore's daddy was a Dixiecrat from Tennessee right? As I remember the majority of Dixiecrats changed party to the Republican party soon after the Civil Rights Act was signed into law, right? Are you sure you want to brag about that? Clearly they've had quite an influence on the Republican Party over the years.
Rubio voted against it because it was going to cost too much. Bachmann voted against it because she is just an idiot. The GOP are building a great base with these kind of votes.
It doesn't surprise me that bat @!$%# crazy Bachmann voted against it. She wanted to(or maybe she actually did) take away the summer lunch program offered to kids, kids who sometimes only get one good meal a day and that's at the school. She's a pig.
Apparently Rubio places the lives of abused women and children at no value. If Rubio plans to run for president in 2016. he'll have a boat-load of negative baggage to explain.
Yes, and add that to the sequester + even more cuts proposed by the Lyin' Ryan 3.0 budget . . . .
it's really almost beyond belief that these ReThuglicans can look themselves in the mirror & go to church on Sunday, etc., pretending to be good Christians, when they take BAY FORMULA out of the mouths of poor children in the WIC program, cancel Meals on Wheels . . . to make sure the .01% can still get their tax deductions on yachts & private jets!!!
Can't wait to start working on getting as many of them voted out in 2014!
.
FORWARD! :-)
Abused women and children at no value? Assault was already a crime. We don't need another law making assault against women a crime. Assault against anybody is already a crime. The gender of the victim or perpetrator is irrelevant. What a waste of time and public money.
Ok, so what did this act do that was not already addressed with existing laws?
Was EVERONE included or is violence against those left out ok?
Anyone?
Tabasco Ed. You are correct. Unfortunately you and I are going to be hung out to dry for daring to say this.
Assault is assault, whether it is perpetrated against a woman, a gay man, an Asian man or a black woman or a white man; assault is assault. Once you start giving special consideration to one group of people, where do you stop?
The answer to that question is simple enough. You eventually come full circle and have laws against assault. Period.
You liberal idiots, this was another waste of TAXpayers money. Our hard earned $$ can't solve all these problems. This is just another attempt of socialism in the US. Wake up liberals, we are already in so much debt, and you don't seem to care, the shows by you supporting of the unneeded bill.
NC..The VAW act is purely PC. There were and are laws on the books covering every crime in the VAW act. It's similar to hate crime bills. It's just more redundancy.
However, it is the PC thing to do and any politician stupid enough to not vote for it just doesn't "get it" and should probably never be re-elected. I mean, if you're that clueless about human nature.....
Of course, looking back, one could say the same thing about the Civil Rights Act, which many Democrats voted against.
To liberals, spending taxpayer money and growing the Nanny State is the feel-good solution for everything.
Actually asking whether the federal spending and federal programs have actually produced the results desired.....dont ask!
Zannie: Hate to break it to you but if Rubio runs, he'll win. He is business saavy, classy, sharp, moral, accomplished, sensible, pro-business, against socialist big government AND hispanic-kiss your free ride GOODBYE dems...no way ANY DEM will beat him..YES!
I guess some of you don't live in the real world. You call us stupid? I call you selectively blind.
if the mothers or dads would get their lazy ass off of drugs,they could afford to feed their kids with out my damn money.get a frickin job//////////////////hello that is job/////////job;;;;;; not drugs,i did not have your kids you did,now take care of them and quit doing like all the welfare people and get a job,job.
get off drugs and get the facts before you print someone as stupid as that,you must be on welfare.........
It is a good thing that baby seals and puppies can't vote or O'Blamo would force a vote on the "Violence
Against Baby Seals & Puppies Act" to make Republicans look bad. He sure is a uniter, just like he told
everyone. Remember
Mary you gave me a great laugh. People who vote for him are the same people that would vote for Bachmann; dumber than dirt. And I have a great job & 401K, you probably cannot get near me in salary & retirement savings, so you kiss off.
And no, this act helps pays for shelters and programs for abused women and families. Family assault before this bill was not assault, it was not touched by the police.
This is one progressive who is glad it was reauthorized, unfortunately it is needed.
There are already gun laws on the books to protect women and children from gun violence..but they don't work because of the "you'll pry my misused gun out of my dead cold hands" types. There are rules against assault on the books but since a sector of the population view women and children as personal property the existing laws don't go far enough. So until the good old boy network changes it's thinking ...or until those wrong thinking people stop reproducing more wrong thinking people. .we will have to continue to redesign and revamp laws until they actually work
predictable coming from the Femme Nazi and Misandrist none other than our bitter of rage male hating dyke Fisted Rottencrotch.
you like apples..how do you like dem apples
now its
$100 fine for beating your wife
$50 for gays
$25 for blacks unless you"re black then its $50
$100 credit for beating a Muslim male caught beating Muslim female
$10 for beating a norwiegen hermaphodite
ect ect ect................
Liberals just love meaningless symbolic jestures that don't actually do anything but make it appear they support every single subgroup that can be identified as "victims", a definition now expanded to include just about everybody except for white males with high incomes.
Obama was just protecting himself since he's gender challenged.
Tabasco Ed
CB750-6689139
sam-790083
hs321
GOP Comeback 2014
Reinf
papagigi
Caesar Augustus-
joe s-1610165
pgulrich
stopfreeloaders
NC-492358
Named you all individually since you are all so enamoured of yourselves in print to the point you couldn't be troubled to read any of the post preceding your names or you would have noticed the comments that pointed out that Native Americans were NOT protected prior to this legislation.
Non Natives could rape or assault any Native woman, child or man, for that matter and get away with it with nothing but a misdemeanor charge, if that, and a fine. Tribal police could not arrest or prosecute the person if he was not a Native, the feds claimed they didn't have the personnel or money or time to prosecute, the white man's law enforcement said it wasn't their jurisdiction it was the feds, so it was open season for anyone to go on the rez, pick out their meat and have at it.
Screw you, your "everybody was already protected" bull, and the donkey's rear you obviously have made of yourself by opening your mouth and proving yourself ignorant about something you know nothing about.
The "violence against women" act is a lot of nonsense to cover up the fact that Native American women have never been protected against violence, and that several of the white... and black... politicians were horrified at the idea that Indians, when this law passed this time, would be given the authority to arrest and prosecute anyone, of any color or nationality, who committed a crime on Tribal lands without having to turn them over to the feds and without having to allow them to appeal their case automatically to the US federal courts
LOL Screamin....do you know the Feds could have just said the laws that apply to assault, battery, etc. now apply to Indians in Tribal lands.
Nope, let's (politicians) pump ourselves up and create the VAWA.
Oooh! What a great comeback. -_- Half of those Republicans are six feet under. Sooooooo what are you trying to prove?!?!
Obama called all GAYS a bunch of women with this bill called the "Violence Against WOMEN Act."
You liberals whining about the Reps not voting for it because of all the back door dealings in it. Nothing but a political game by the Dems trying to make Reps look bad by naming it something that it is not.
It's funny how no one can be honest in Washington and these liberals suck it up.
Seems I remember TeaPublicans saying that about Mitt too...how did that work out for you? I also seem to remember him giving the TeaPublican counter to the State of the Union Address. The general consensus was that he went down in flames.
Cheers to the activists, democrats, those republicans who stood with democrats against abuse and violence, VP Biden and President Obama. It took far too long for this legislation to be improved and reauthorized because of filibustering republican senators and the foot-dragging House republicans but finally, it was signed today. Odd how foolish those republicans look (here's looking at you, IA Senator Chuck Grassley) who expressed more worry and concern for the rights of non-Native American abusers than they did about the Native American women brutally beaten and often killed.
WELL-SAID (as usual,) Iowa's Judy! :-)
The only thing I hate is that it has this "reauthorization" clause built into it - like there's any chance DV will end in 5 years (would be great, but unfortunately not likely)
.
FORWARD! :-)
Cheers for those who didn't want to waste time with this. Violence and assault were already crimes, for God's sake.
Ok, so what did this act do that was not already addressed with existing laws?
Was EVERONE included or is violence against those left out ok?
Anyone?
KC_NC, thanks. I'm not crazy about reauthorization every so many years either but in some cases such as VAWA, reauthorization allows for modernizing and inclusion; add rules seen unnecessary before, deleting and revising as needed. In 1994, Native American women, domestic workers, undocumented workers, and gays weren't protected by it. The changing of American views has helped the law become more inclusive.
TabascoEd and NC#'s, then there are numnuts like you who never bother with the facts and the truth because that would interfere with the alternate universe in which you live.
Jody...did I miss something? (It's entirely possible because I've been very busy lately.)
Did some Republican actually try to filibuster the passing VAWA?
No need for a gun or to defend yourself for that matter when our senator is making sure that there are plenty of rape kits on hand as part of this law:
That from the same place where a state senator said women didn't know they were about to be raped and another said that women were unable to protect themselves.
Jody but I thought you girls were getting ready to jump right into the combat role in the Army. How can you be afraid of your un armed boyfriend? Do you think the tallywackers will not have AK-47 because barry and noboby messes with joe passed a law.
State representative actually.
Must be the altitude but every Colorado legislator named Salazar has turned out to be an idiot.
Won't see it on this web site but if you google samira you will get a short bio of the Jew hating American hating Egyption that Kerry & Michele were ready to heap acolades upon.
Another indication of eroding support for the GOP by women. And they wring their hands and wonder why.
That's some funny sh!t ARMY1971. Do you know how many rapes were reported in the US Military in 2011? According to Leon Panetta only 240 cases of sexual assault in the military were prosecuted in 2011, out of more than 3,000 reported cases. The Department of Defense estimates that the number of actual sexual assaults in the military each year is closer to 19,000, although many service members never come forward out of fear of retaliation.
Yep ARMY1971, that's some pretty funny stuff. Especially if one of those female soldiers is a daughter continually raped and sodomized by the other soldiers who are suppose to be watching her back. I suppose you are one of those guys that will be saying "I told you so, they were probably asking for it" if female soldiers are raped in frontline units, right?
layers of citizenship??? the death of the republican party!
138 Republicans voted No to the re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act. And we expect the House to compromise on spending cuts/tax loopholes? Even if there were some tiny point they disagreed with in this Act, wouldn't the overwhelming benefit of it cause them to cross the aisle and vote "aye?" Even Maine's Tea Party governor speaks out against domestic violence, it's his signature issue.
No, only Democrats are supposed to compromise for the greater good.
And 22 Senate Republicans voted NO as well as the 138 in the House. May their photos be plastered everywhere as reminders.
Witnessed by Chris Brown....LOL
I'm sure there is some wording in this bill that is suspect to have 138 people give it a thumbs down. It doesn't come down to a simple thought of "i don't want women to be protected against violence". There must have been some big money wasting attachment that had nothing to do with violence against women added to the bill.
no, it's not a $$ thing . . . the main objection the nay-sayers had was because of the jurisdictional issue re: Native American women . . .
the rate of domestic violence among Native American women is sky-high, and most of the perp's are non-Native men. Those who voted against it said they didn't think "white" men should come under the jurisdiction of courts on Native American reservations. But since their is irrefutable evidence that most of the rapes of Native women are done by White men, before this new language was added, men could rape these women and get away without any consequences/"scott-free . . .
these cases need to be tried where the crime was committed, and without added language about reservation courts being able to get personal jurisdiction over the perp's, they couldn't try the cases.
KC_NC - are you nuts? Get away with rape against Indian women without any consequences? Rape has always been a crime. This law was not needed to make rape illegal. It was only needed to make liberals feel good about themselves, as though they were doing something about a problem. This law was totally unnecessary. Existing anti-rape laws were sufficient. The problem has always been convincing victims and witnesses to testify. That won't change.
Tabasco Ed-
Until the latest iteration of the law, tribal courts had no jurisdiction over non-Native Americans who were abusers on tribal lands. There were two other principal groups also without protection -- LGBT and undocumented aliens. Removing what has amounted to licensed predation against these groups is vital new protection. And before you get too upset, the protection extends -- in addition to the act's name -- to men.
I am a liberal, and I do feel good that this expanded version was passed, even if numerous posters choose not to.
I think Tabasco Ed
is a troll or for some reason wants to lie to people.. I suppose some abusers of women could be spreading propaganda here.. wouldn't be in an abuser's best interest to pass a law like this.. Tabasco Ed has made too many comments pushing Anti VAWA Nobody should be getting info from that user .. Some people are well.. you know
Some of those Republicans who voted for it mistakenly thought it was "The right to commit violence against Women act." I guess they didn't bother reading it.
Just like Obamacare Tom hows that working out for ya? along with the NDAA NDRP and a host of other unconstitutional horse pucky Obama put into law, both sides are the same haven't you figured it out yet, instead of getting something done its easier to blame bush and the newcons and take no responsibility on himself, and no iam not a repuglican so don't call them my party, and don't argue by ridicule it just makes you look uninformed and stupid, and how about the drones killing us here in the good ol usa iam sure you support that to, wake up.
Won't call you a republican, as you say, but I will call you an ignorant fool.
AmericanVeteran, think about how silly your comment sounds. You wrote your comment here so you know what you said, right? Democratic legislators WROTE ObamaCare, they knew what was in it. BTW, it's neocons not newcons plus if Bush weren't to blame, why is it the GOP didn't let him anywhere near their presidential convention and do their best to pretend the 8 disastrous years of Bush never really happened--kind of like what you're doing in your comment. President Obama didn't collapse the economy, nor did he start two UNFUNDED wars, or pass an UNFUNDED Rx Medicare plan, or pass trillions in UNFUNDED legislation as Bush and the GOP did. Ignoring the truth won't make Bush 43 go away.
Come on Jody man up remember you and your sisters want to be combat troops, no crying in the foxhole.
Is violence against women more serious than violence against men? I thought we are all equal now.
Good luck finding a job. LOL
Job: Not in the mind of a liberal. Certain groups are more equal and deserving of protection than others, and certain groups deserve no protection in their minds. They, of course, feel that they are the arbiters of who does and doesn't deserve protection.
If you are a union member, liberal, woman, black, Muslim, or illegal alien, you deserve protection.
If you are an American Christian, you don't deserve protection. If you don't believe that American Government policy can change the climate of the entire planet, you are looked upon with disdain. If you are a white male, you can forget about it, because you are the scourge of the planet. And if you are all of the above, you are written off from the start.
Yes, in the liberal mind, only certain groups are worthy of protection, but only if you fall into one of the politically correct groups that they deem worthy of being protected.
Linda......Stay on topic. Do you think another law making women look like weak little things help the women's movement? I seriously doubt my female army colonel next door agrees with such a stupid law.
Job Seeker: Even though it's called the Violence Against Women Act, it DOES cover men as well . . . it covers ALL victims of domestic violence . . . they have called it that for 20 years, partially I think because 20 years ago, most men who were victims of DV didn't ever talk about it, so people didn't realize it.
95% of victims of DV are women; 5% are men . . . as far as we know. ANY VICTIM OF DV, regardless of gender, can get help via this act - shelter, and a court-appointed attorney for those who can't afford one, DV Protection Orders, etc.
The TITLE may be gender-biased, but the ACT itself is not (I am a former attorney who did some defense work in this area).
.
FORWARD! :-)
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" - George Orwell, Animal Farm
Th point is SOME of us are trying to rise above being mindless animals. Others are trying to go back there.
Here's to small steps of progress!
Yes violence against women is more badder than against a man. Especially job seeker if you are white, christian, and hetrosexual. Also if you commit a "hate" crime this is also more badder than a crime done with love.
Army: Thanks for the reminder, I left out being gay as one of the protected classes that liberals love to put on a pedestal.
Yeah, tell that to OJ Simpson's dead ex-wife. How many arrests for domestic abuse did he have? How much Jail time did he get when he beat his wife?
Looks like you forgot Hispanics and Asian Americans, so much for a "big tent". And you wonder why you are loosing elections. It's not the messenger...it's the message!
Waste of time. There are already laws on the books that cover this. This is more grandstanding by the Democrats and BHO.
Laws don't mean anything unless they are enforced.
BHO let 2000 illegal aliens out of jail because of "Sequestration" before it even took place. If anybody is killed by one of these thugs the BHO is DIRECTLY responsible.
In a lot of states, in a lot of cases, law enforcement is reluctant to get involved in domestic abuse cases. Sure, there are laws on the books, and they must be enforced one and for all. Just because I am married to someone, I am not his property and he has no right to beat me. That is the specific designation of this legislation. Perhaps you could put your hate-colored glasses away and see things clearly for a change.
San Antonio: the problem with this particular "law on the books" is that even though it was passed ~20 years ago (with almost unanimous bipartisan approval) it has a clause in it (stupid, IMHO) that requires it to be REAUTHORIZED every 5 years.
This law is pretty well-enforced, (at least in my state) and well-utilized - - - police officers LOVE it, because it gives them real practical things they can do to prevent DV victims from being (further) victimized . . . DV very frequently ends in the death of the victim; this gives the police authorization to get & enforce protective orders.
.
FORWARD! :-)
lawful; in some muslim country you ARE your husbands property and you CAN be beaten by your husband. Country's like those need laws like this. Here, it is NOT OK to beat a spouse--it is already against the law. I agree that it is sad there are men out there who feel the need to use their wife (or children) as punching bags to make up for their lack of self esteem. But punish them under the laws we have, or toughen up the sentences for people convicted of domestic assault. Don't let lawyers plea bargain away prison time.
san antonio - Boehner and gang had a chance to stop the sequester and chose not to, in fact bragged about it. If you want to blame someone about those convicts getting out of jail and ALL the other rotten things that come about because of it, you need to point the finger where it belongs.
You are a waste of time..
is a talking point used by radical hate groups..
The law has already been passed.. so what is this goober doing here saying it is a waste of time
because he is trolling
Hey san antonio kid
you don't know what you are talking about so shut up
There was not already laws on the books that cover this for Native American Women
BUT THERE IS NOW..
VAWA has been expanded to cover
Native American Women
With non-Indians constituting more than 76 percent of the overall population living on reservations and other Indian lands, interracial dating and marriage are common, and many of the abusers of Native American women are non-Indian men. Too often, non-Indian men who batter their Indian wives and girlfriends go unpunished because tribes cannot prosecute non-Indians, even if the offender lives on the reservation and is married to a tribal member, and because Federal lawâenforcement resources are hours away from reservations and stretched thin.
Congress can close this jurisdictional gap in the criminal justice system by supporting the Leahy-Crapo bill and providing tribes with the authority to hold offenders accountable for their crimes against Native American women, regardless of the perpetrator's race This bill builds on the Tribal Law and Order Act – which President Obama signed on July 29, 2010 – to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of tribal justice systems and will provide additional tools to tribal and Federal prosecutors to address domestic violence in Indian Country.
In case you forgot, being in this country without papers is a misdemeanor, not a felony. If we need to hold certain criminals, I would prefer it be the more serious crimes.
Glad this issue passed because women should never live in fear.
"This victory shows that when the American people make their voices heard, Washington listens," Obama said.
Wonder if he would have made this remark if the Republicans all voted for this and none of the Democrats.
People are speaking out on a lot of issues and is he listening - No he isn't because he doesn't want a lot of these issues resolved. Not his idea!
So women aren't going to fear now? Stupid. We can pass all the laws we want but that wont stop someone from doing any crime. If their mind is made up its made up. Law or no law.
So you are saying we should have a lawless society because consequences stop no one?
Andrew, your "stupid" comment should be aimed at yourself. All laws are intended to prevent as much harm as possible but no law, and no legislator or president, ever claims that a law will prevent all violence or crime or injury or ???. Seatbelts don't prevent all car-accident deaths but they have greatly reduced the numbers of deaths and serious injury. In your narrow-minded world, apparently the idea that unless ALL can be prevented, don't bother reducing the numbers and preventing as many as possible. Why bother with seatbelts since people still die is ignorance on steroids.
Violence against everyone is already against the law, this is just a "feel good" act to make people happy. It will not change anything.
Your name is very appropriate.
You are right, except it will change something. It will gain democratic votes next election. Thats what it was about to begin with, the Left just are not aware of the true benefit of the "law"
It appears that Linda-399775 has had a few glasses of kool-aid. I must ask you Linda, if not for this "act" is violence against woman within the law? I think not.
The fact that they are there, even if they aren't well enforced, give judges something to work with to remove potentially dangerous people from the general population.
9 thumbs up for this .. Clueless uneducated bogus patriot who knows nothing about the country they live in.. for this Really ??
BUT WE ALREADY HAVE A LAW FOR THAT .. Or it wont work
are just fake talking points for poorly educated right wing trolls like Cheese Head 413
you got a nerve calling yourselves Patriots.. hate- riots are what you are.
You fools are the biggest propagators of lies spread through sheer ignorance.
VAWA was expanded to include domestic violence who didn't have a law for that Cheese Head 413
This is just one group of Americans being preyed on by domestic violence abusers that had no law to prosecute their abusers Until VAWA gave them one.
please learn about the other ones
VAWA now includes
Native American Women
With non-Indians constituting more than 76 percent of the overall population living on reservations and other Indian lands, interracial dating and marriage are common, and many of the abusers of Native American women are non-Indian men. Too often, non-Indian men who batter their Indian wives and girlfriends go unpunished because tribes cannot prosecute non-Indians, even if the offender lives on the reservation and is married to a tribal member, and because Federal law ÂÂenforcement resources are hours away from reservations and stretched thin.
Congress can close this jurisdictional gap in the criminal justice system by supporting the Leahy-Crapo bill and providing tribes with the authority to hold offenders accountable for their crimes against Native American women, regardless of the perpetrator's race This bill builds on the Tribal Law and Order Act – which President Obama signed on July 29, 2010 – to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of tribal justice systems and will provide additional tools to tribal and Federal prosecutors to address domestic violence in Indian Country.
Cheese Head 413-
Is there an Oak Leaf Cluster on your Master Misogynist Medal? How many Combat Stars have you earned?
As a woman who was once in a physically abusive marriage, I send a resounding thank you to those responsible for the initial bill and its re-authorization. For those who didn't see fit to vote for it, shame on you.
Useless laws like this does only one thing. It makes women look weak and helpless little things which is not true. How can we be stupid enough to have laws like this when women are about to be required to sign up for selective service when they reach 18 with the new women in combat approval?
I guess physical abuse wasn't already a crime??? Sorry for your abuse, he shouldn't have hit you in the head as it causes brain damage...
Kent, you are an @!$%#.
I sincerely you hope you aren't married, Kent. You know so little about the actual facts of the domestic violence issue, but you made broad, sweeping remarks that have nothing of substance to offer, and even go so far as to belittle me.
As a Conservative, I can't see anything wrong with that aspect of it other than how much it's funded. Yes there is already laws against assault and what not, but if something is really rampant like spousal abuse then stricter punishments SHOULD be enacted. But I stop there. Same sex couples and illegal immigrants should not get the same protections. *waits for the flames*
Kent there are concerns for women you could not begin to comprehend. Some women live in abuse to protect their children. If he is beating me, maybe he will leave them alone. Women in abusive situations often don't have the resources to get themselves out, let alone themselves and their children and how could you leave your children with someone that abuses you, its only a matter of time before he abuses them. BUt you are probably one of those men that don't see a bruised cheek and a bloody lip as abuse, but the rest of us do Kent. The rest of us do.
So when do I get special rights? Since the balkanization of civil rights and America isn't going away when do I get preferential treatment? Wont that make us all more equal than right now? Logically no but using liberal logic it will so I want my rights and I want them right now! It's insane.
Andrew you have more rights than the women do. If a woman shots her husband and kills him after years of beatings, she goes to jail for 20+ years or gets the death penalty. If a man kills his wife because he is an abuser, he gets 3-4yrs. I've worked with battered women and men for over 30yrs. and I've seen this over and over again. Also being noted in Mt. as being in the worst domestic violence situation where nobody was killed, my X got 2 days in jail and turned lose. Don't talk to me about your rights. I've been there, done the abuse and seen things I would never want to see again. They already have the laws set and Obumbum didn't do a thing by signing his piece of paper. The laws in each state are different and it all depends on the circumstances. I've seen women hauled off for beating the hell out of their husbands after they've had the hell beat out of them. It all depends on who calls the cops first.
When you stop supporting a party that considers the term "legitimate rape" as an acceptable phrase!
Sorry mtblond, but BS. If a woman accuses a man of any kind of "domestic abuse", he is automatically guilty. If a child accuses an adult of any kind of "domestic abuse", the adult is automatically guilty. That is the way the legal system works, and it needs to be fixed. There needs to be credible evidence, eyewitness testimony (not just her word against his), forensic evidence, etc. Too many people are in jail or on probation due to false allegations. This problem needs to be stopped.
Please minmn, it was not a party that considered "legitimate rape" but one stupid individual within that party. Should the whole Democrat party have been condemned when Ted Kennedy left Mary Jo Kopecnik to drown on Marths'a Vineyard?
There have been several Republicans who called it "legitimate rape" - another one just the other day.
And again, what about the Ted Kennedy comment? Ignoring it lets me know where you stand too.
Only Republicans do or say stupid things? Whatever a Democrat does is OK, because he meant well?
I think the statute of limitations has run on the Ted Kennedy thing. Kudos to you though, you really had to go back, back, back but you kept at it until you found something....good job CB. Ligitmate rape is from this century though..so it still carries more weight. sorry, no cookie.
Andrew, maybe the Pres. can sign a new Act, "More white guys in the NBA" Act.
The world just keeps getting funnier and funnier, Hell you're funny too..I know a few gals who can stomp me into the ground and I'm 6ft four at 300 pounds...
The differance CA is that you like it.
Eh, JobSeeker, don`t try to talk sense to the leftists. It only confuses them.
eugene is spot on job seeker.
Why do they have to make a law to obey common sense and decency? If someone has no common sense or decency they are not going to obey a law. This is a "feel good" law that should be taught by parents, not enforced by Washington. Same as hate crimes and bullying. Just make a single law that says it is illegal to be an A-hole and that will cover all of this behaviour.
Your definition of A-hole or mine??
A POS law!
Another Progressive Left Act to cry about a problem that doesn't exist. Women in this country are much safer than in most other countries, yet Women and some Minorities want to be portrayed as the endless victim. And isn't it Gender discrimination to exclude most Men, or is the purpose of this act to villainize all Men.
I'm not satisfied with being "safer", I want to be safe. "Safer" isn't good enough when we have the potential to do better. What's wrong with doing better?
You are safe papagigi, unless of course you want to be the victim.
again more smoke and f***ing mirrors this was always a law big f****in deal,
let's take every law we have on the books revote and call it a victory for Obama
What a buunch of bull **** and msnbc will have this up for days
This is not written to disrespect women we shouldn't even have to need a law for this.
Why don't we enforce the laws we have in place?
i find it just a tad bit off center that the left wants women to be protected, but thinks that women owning a hand gun to protect themselves is a bad idea. at the end of the day when she is at home by herself and that 200 lb plus rapist breaks in to her home to do whatever he wants is gonna stop what he is doing because , HEY they signed an anti violence act . you know all of the really stupid ass liberal laws they pass that do not do a damn thing to stop crime. its just more warm fuzzy makes you feel good politics . look WHAT WE DID ! now everything is better. horse @#$%
I can see an act of this kind being needed in India.
This is the USA. Assault is a crime. How silly is it to make
assault illegal when it is ALREADY A CRIME ??????
Sounds like a bunch of silly politics. Just prosecute the attackers
as the criminals they are.
Part of this bill is that Citizens of the USA who violate Indian(American) rights or violence against them can be tried in INDIAN Court!!! how can that be??? they agree not an independent country, they are under FEDERAL law and Government!!!! hell, you they cannot try an illegal, why, this is totally unconditional. By being illegal in this country you can kill people and all you get is deported!!! best of all worlds!
Try saying that again logically and in good English. Then maybe people will understand what you are trying to say.
too much tequila! but, I agree! sorry.
Guess there were no laws already on the books for abuse and violence... What a joke! Enforce what battery, abuse, rape, theft, and other laws already on the book!!!
Battery isn't battery when it is your wife. That is domestic assault and she has to press charges before it is prosecuted. AND what wife is going to prosecute when that only means another beating. Yes, modifications are needed.
papagigi, there are two sides to every story until a Women falsely accuses a Man of Assault or Rape, then they haul the Man in regardless of his innocence. Would you rather all Men be jailed for guilt by association of being Male?
I remember when I was a kid and my stepdad was beating the carp out of my mom and my brother and I did what we'd been told to do when we needed help...we ran, and I do mean RAN, all the way to the police station to report it. I will never forget the smirk and the eye roll the cops gave us.
Your stepdad beat the "carp" out of your mom? What was the carp doing in her? Does she not like fish? Maybe he relieved her of a nasty parasitic fish, like a candiru?
What?! The act didn't come in and shield your mother from getting the crap beat out of her? Republicans come in to say work with the old act to make it more effective. liberal left cries republicans want all women to get beat to death and watch the children cry.
NOT FUNNY. Child abuse and spousal abuse aren't joking matters people. That police officer should have been shot with his own gun. Small people needing him to do what he is paid to do , serve and protect and he makes them feel less than they are. ANd you people joke.....perfect example of why such a law is needed, jerks. I'm so sorry meh1956.
these idiots are here to troll.. and mock Obama they could give a crap what VAWA is about and that it helps women.. the only thing these hecklers ever help is themselves to is another 6 pack of beer all they care about is pissing all over something Obama signed whatever that was.
Screw them they are just a bunch of losers.. what matters is VAWA was reauthorize and women can get some help they desperately need. Things are getting better for minorities despite these ugly Americans they are ignorant about what really goes on all around them it's pathetic
PrimeNumber and papagigi-
Those who post to diminish abuse probably are the deliberately, even malignantly, ignorant. Laws are already in place, existing laws get disobeyed, existing laws don't get enforced -- it all seems so similar to the reactions about any attempts to do anything about gun violence.