WHETHER FITSNEWS’ “CONFLICTED” FOUNDING EDITOR THINKS SO OR NOT …
|| By TAYLOR BROWN | Today, Governor Nikki Haley signed into law Senate Bill No. 3 (the criminal domestic violence bill). I couldn’t be more proud of the General Assembly – especially lawmakers like Katrina Shealy who made domestic violence a priority.
I wrote, back when S. 3 was still in the Senate, that “This is a bill that transcends politics – a straight-forward, comprehensive measure that will save lives.” I still stand by this statement. If you follow me on Twitter or Facebook, you’ll have noticed I had a tendency to go on rants about the lack of action and the political posturing of our lawmakers on this issue. I wrote “stand with the women of South Carolina, or stand over their graves.”
This style of law has been extremely successful when implemented in other states. They’ve seen shooting deaths at the hands of an intimate partner drop considerably. This law will save women’s lives. It’s simple. It’s straightforward. It’s literally lifesaving.
This website’s founding editor Will Folks has a different opinion on this than me. He takes issue with the firearm aspect of this law …
Curiously, the most contentious issue attending the CDV debate this year was the right of convicted offenders to possess firearms – which is a totally superfluous issue seeing as federal law already bans firearm possession by any CDV offender (a ban we view as unconstitutional).
Folks received a flurry of enraged messages from me regarding this passage. How, in God’s name, can one possibly justify allowing wife-beaters and abusers to keep their weapons? When the risk of being killed by an intimate partner goes up five hundred percent when a gun is present, how can you claim that this measure is unconstitutional? In South Carolina, women are twice as likely to be shot and killed by their intimate partner than the average American woman, and somehow, Folks wants to give more rights to a violent offender than to the victim? Perhaps it is because Folks has been convicted of CDV that he sees this firearms ban as unconstitutional.
However, skin in the game or otherwise, this law is the right thing to do for our State – not to mention completely constitutional.
Folks has always been pro-life. He has written before that …
… we believe life begins at conception – and that taking life (at any state of development) is the most egregious, irreversible violation of the most sacred, fundamental liberty we have. This is why we’ve consistently opposed “abortion on demand.”
So when that baby girl grows up and is beaten then shot by her intimate partner, is it not as “egregious?” Shouldn’t we do everything in our power to stop her senseless murder? I say yes – and so do our lawmakers.
Why should we allow someone who is an abuser to keep their firearms? Why give them the means and ability to easily end the life of their intimate partner? Moreover, if we allow an abuser to keep their firearm, why don’t we allow other violent offenders to do the same? Why don’t we allow rapists and murders to keep their weapons? Is removing their right to bear arms unconstitutional? Or is it just when a wife-beater has his firearms removed that it’s unconstitutional?
In the end, our state government did a beautiful thing for the men and women of South Carolina – they’re putting lives above politics. Every single vote to pass this extremely important bill is a vote for life – Governor Haley signed into law fewer murders at the hands of an intimate partner. Our Government stands with their constituents’ right to life – whether Will Folks does or not.
Countdown to beating up on Taylor starts in 3…2…1
“Beating up on” LOL appropriate considering the subject matter
I doubt many want to beat up on Taylor. I don’t think bill has any teeth, because it didn’t change divorce laws, however, I appreciate Taylor’s passion about the topic and her ability to address it straight on.
What do ‘divorce laws’ have to do with CDV?
Expedited divorce for the case of physical cruelty was originally part of the Bill.
There’s been a 90-day divorce provision for physical abuse in SC family law for decades…
SC’s ridiculous requirement of a year of separation exacerbates many of these cases.
Right.YOU would sure hate giving a couple with children a time,cooling off period- to put their families back together.
That way the mom is automatically awarded the kids (except SYNTwist) and can put the family on welfare and the husband /father is gone from their lives.
Bet you would feel differently if the Family Court was tilted toward men/fathers.
“Why don’t we allow rapists and murders to keep their weapons? ”
Yet they don’t seem to care.
To quote Vince Vaughn the other day:
“Banning guns is like banning forks in an attempt to stop making people fat. Taking away guns, taking away drugs, the booze, it won’t rid the world of criminality.”
Don’t take their forks, take their belliwheels.
Meh, unnecessary law that does nothing but cover things already on the books. This is identical to hate crime laws. Accomplishing nothing but put a cute name on something for the sole purpose of making political hay.
The more laws, the less justice. – Marcus Tllius Cicero
Truer words were never spoken. Too bad a significant makeup of our population is too damn stupid to grasp this.
Give ’em hell, Taylor.
Get a gripe on reality ……. It’s just a “Feel Good Law.” No law ever stopped a woman from killing a man. Stupid young ignorant twits …… they come a dime a dozen.
“When the risk of being killed by an
intimate partner goes up five hundred percent when a gun is present, how
can you claim that this measure is unconstitutional?”
How can you claim that this sentence is logical? Whether the measure is constitutional has nothing to do with the percentage of women killed when a gun is present.
“3,700 illegal immigrant ‘Threat Level 1’ criminals released into U.S. by DHS.” Over 300 of them right in the SC area. These are the worst of the worst. They are the rapist and the murderers. RELEASED right back into the community by the Obama Administration. Where is your loud mouth worthless Lindsey Graham? Why didn’t he stop this? Why didn’t your Tim Scott stop this too? Yeah. Your new criminal domestic violence law is not even worth the paper it was printed on. What a joke!
Thanks for sharing…
The unaddressed and possibly unaddressable problem ?
The extreme difficulty in prosecuting these type cases when,more often than not,the alleged victim either refuses to cooperate or even denies the incident happened.
True, but most of that is out of fear. I can’t speak for anyone else, but when you have some wacko threatening to kill your entire family if you speak out, chances are you will just try to get away without drawing a lot of attention to it, for fear he may just carry that out.
I don’t disagree but the fact remains that this law will do NOTHING to change that.
I agree – it has no teeth.
That doesn’t stop certain courts from prosecuting you and draining you of you lively hood making you hire A lawyer. Laws in a state should be the same. I know a person in Lexington County,SC that was guilty and wanted to plea but was made to get a lawyer. Do not say he could have represented himself or that wasn’t possible. I have mixed feelings about the gun part simply because you deprive people of protecting them selves.
The US Constitution does not mandate a person have a lawyer. In fact, codified in the United States Code, a person has a legal right to represent themselves in any matter. A court and/or prosecutor would be foolish to tell any defendant that they must have a lawyer to represent them. The US Supreme Court has said that the right of self-representation has been protected by statute since the beginnings of our Nation.
“In the end, our state government did a beautiful thing for the men and women of South Carolina” <<<< ROFLMAO. Who the fuck wrote this laughable chicken shit? A man hater?
Some one in the legislature should have given this bill a big dose of RU-486 at the beginning of the session.
CDV was already illegal, as was shooting someone. And of course, someone who assaults their spouse is very concerned with following the law.
I guess its more illegal now.
It is Official…….it is now VERY, VERY illegal to shoot a woman whose ass you’ve kicked before. Now, Bubba is going to have to skip the fist-a-cuffs and go straight for the gun. If you wifebeaters don’t cut it out, the brilliant minds in Columbia will another VERY to the illegal-nous(?) of your acts. I think everyone but the Beatee is feeling good about this.
LIKE, and LIKE!!!!
Will Folks pleads guilty to criminal domestic violence
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on email
Will appears to be a decent husband and father…or at least an interested husband/father from his sharing on Fits..However i am confused about why Fits should have ANY opinion on this subject.
Should the Duggars have ANY say on child molestation laws?
Just plain ridiculous.Everybody deserves a second chance BUT…please….
(Columbia) September 28, 2005 – Former gubernatorial spokesman Will Folks has pleaded guilty to criminal domestic violence in a Columbia court.
Did you plead guilty to tax fraud? With 250 more laws on the books than we had 10 years ago, I am sure there is something we can find to prosecute you under.
No.Fuck you.Make my day.
Everyone already knows this. It has no bearing of the legislation at hand as we have these this little provision in the US and SC constitutions banning ex-post-facto laws.
My point has nothing to do with the Constitution.In my opinion Will has no credibility on this issue because of his conviction of CDV.aol.com
He certainly is free too express his opinion on the law.
In my opinion Will has no credibility on this issue because of his conviction ofCDV.aol.com
Seems to TBG that would give him more credibility to speak on CDV laws.
Because he has personal experience with them (CDV laws).
Oh Palease. Will Folks was drunk (perhaps the girlfriend was too). She wouldn’t let him into the home they shared as an unmarried couple. He kicked in the door. He never laid a hand on her.
I love the fact someone’s “Mom” thinks it is okay to beat a woman as long as everyone is drunk. Either you hate your daughter, aren’t really a mom, or are spending your Sundays at the pen visiting your son Bubba.
Yep. Crimes of passion and heated arguments. Been witness to CDV. Former neighbor. A female. Always bitching and fussing at her husband. Always bitching and fussing at her son. In the darkness of the night, would hear her. Never much out of him. Eventually he would leave from the inside of the house in an attempt to just get away from her, hoping she would calm down. But nadda. She followed him. Under the low illumination of street lights, as peeked out the window to see what the hell was going on, I would she her striking him with the ball of her fist. Not once did he ever hit her back. He simply just tried to get away from her. This happened often, till finally one day EMS and the cops showed up. She had taken a box of something or another and wacked it across the side of his face. He required stitches. All 3 of their children were subjected to this crazy violent woman. To talk to her, you would think she was the most nicest sweetest woman you ever met. But behind that mask of deception, the front she projected, was a psychopath.
So it took my long lost neighbor from 20 years ago until now to come forward? Thanks, for nothing.
Thank you! Been there..done that and have the empty bank account to prove it. My life was turned upside down.
You can legislate relationships all you want, the fact of the matter is couples will always fight and argue through the course of the relationship. I will go out on a limb and say the Gov and Micheal have fought about the many extramarital affairs she has had during their marriage, and I will assure you that Katrina has gotten her redneck on during her marriage. The discouraging part about all of this is those slaps and hits that a woman does to a man during arguing and throwing objects at them is all considered battery but there isnt anything done about that. HERE IS THE TRUTH. LEGISLATORS SEE THIS AS A HOT TOPIC AND THEY JUMP ON IT TO ATTEMPT AND MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES.
Everyone knows CDV is illegal but this doesn’t make CDV go away. Government can’t regulate relationships nor control the outcome. People will argue and people will fight each other and it appears it is more now than in past. In past women stayed home and were more submissive to the husband and therefore the abuse occurred and no one knew about the abuse. Now though women are in the work force and have become more powerful in our communities than ever before. The data used is still painting a picture of how women were in the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s. That is not the case now.
The boat is being missed here, CDV law and training of CDV needs to be approached as it is illegal for a man or woman to hit or cause harm to one another. Even though the law reads this way, it is reported and trained with the focus of a man striking a woman and focused on the defenseless woman. This has caused law enforcement to stereotype all incidents. Pretextual stops (racial profiling) by law enforcement has been illegal and stated to be illegal by the Supreme Court. In other words you can’t go out and stop a vehicle driving by a black male for the possession of crack because he is a black and the statistics indicate that most of all crack cocaine is distributed by black males. Doesn’t make sense. Law enforcement has been trained throughout the last decade to recognize the male as the primary aggressor during CDV incidents. Even the matrix that is practiced is swayed against the man in the indication of size disparity. When looking at men and women the man will always lose by the man always being larger in size. This one point will always go against the man.
Every reader on this page knows that women will be the first to slap and hit a man because they know they can get away with it and the man will not strike them back. Are there exceptions to this, absolutely. There are some men who will strike a woman and abuse her in the relationship. The point I make is, QUIT TRYING TO BEAT EVERY SQUARE PEG INTO THE SAME ROUND CDV HOLE. I know this will come a shocker to all of you, but Women will lie.
Through the last decade there has been a lot of money poured into the victims fund and multi million dollar grants have been given out through the state and federal level. There are 1000’s of jobs attached to CDV and law enforcement agencies use these seed grants to hire new class 1 officers and then when the grant is over, they keep the personnel on and the tax payers absorb the cost.
Attorneys have their clients use the CDV law to off set the balance in a bad divorce case, what better way to discredit a man when custody battle has ensued. The hot buzz words are told to be used during arguments. The same buzz words that are told to police and they recognize them as fitting the mold of CDV.
The bottom line. Neither a man nor a woman should lay a hand on one another. The CDV law should never address one side in its training of the law because a death in an incident is never graceful be it a man or a woman, and to side with one side or make it out that a womans death is any more important that a mans death is wrong. Anyone harmed during a domestic dispute is wrong.
Super-duper, secret squirrel, double-secret probation illegal.
Maybe this is interesting only to me, but why is the photo about two lesbians slapping each other?
Maybe, but she has an Adam’s apple.
I think the one on the left is planning on filming the hand of the one on the right. Just getting some framing ideas.
Yeah … but make that big wheel pickups as well as guns. More children and more spouses are killed by big wheel pickups than by handguns.
…and more kids drown in pools in the US each year than are killed by accidental shootings. BAN ALL BACKYARD POOLS!*
*Except mine (I am very responsible, and all of my kids swim like fish)
I’m just going to leave this right here:
This is already covered under existing laws. CDVHAN, ABHAN, Point and Presenting a firearm are all crimes.
SB3 is not necessary. It’s just like a so called “hate crime”. Murder is already illegal, if I “hate” someone that makes it more illegal? Assaulting a person is already illegal, murder is already illegal, just because you do it to a significant other or a family member doesn’t make it you more assaulted or more dead.
The more laws, the less justice. – Marcus Tllius Cicero
Good point. We have too many laws mirroring one another.
All of which was already 100%, super-duper illegal at the time of the offense.
“Super duper illegal” Taylor if you were counting 3rd grade superlatives.
Well, Will’s resident airhead has spoken…, again. Somehow, I have an idea that this will save no more lives than “blood flowed in the streets” or “it was the wild West” because we passed restaurant carry or even allowed regular people to obtain CWP’s.
Even if the number of women killed with guns goes down, will the total number of women killed or injured by any means shrink? Kind of like laws against switchblade knives years ago, while the number of people stabbed with switchblades may have dropped, I doubt the number of folks stabbed with edged weapons changed, overall This is feel-good fluff for those too stupid to see it.
…meanwhile, Hose Speaker Jay Lucas is wallowing in the broken promises he made to get Constitutional Carry on yhe floor before the House adjourned. I hope the voters in his district remember this.
Pouring over correctly and honestly documented police incident reports do show, in fact, that women turn equally as violent as men. Back in the day, police reports were left blank of women starting the trouble when they responded to a call for service. This writer above appears to be biased. But then, I guess she got all of her information (whether its absolutely correct or not – maybe even skewed in numbers) from woman advocacy groups or maybe from underreported government agencies). Whatever the case maybe, history tells us that woman can be just as violent as men (like the women who kill other women and cut their babies out of the womb. Or even the women who kill all of their children). Society has a whole has a problem; not just SC. Domestic violence, or what I call violence in general, it all starts in the very beginning when a child is born and raised. And its just not a single parent problem. We have violence being shoved in our faces everywhere. Not just in home, but in public place, in movies, on tv, in video games, in rap music, etc. Kids are being programed. In the end of it all, no law is going to prevent it. No law is really going to make a difference. Until you start removing all the other violence in our society, only then will you have a chance at stopping it; unless, of course, you think locking everyone up is the answer. Then you will have to keep building more prisons and jails, which is already needed anyway. In its totality, crime in South Carolina is out of control. And its not getting any better. What fine lawmakers we have, eh? They lie, cheat and steal. And that in itself is such a fine example of upright and just citizens. Good role models, wouldn’t you say?
I don’t see this legislation as that big of a deal either way. Not a bad idea, and may actually save a life or two in cases wherein the Bubba actually coughs up his guns and isn’t smart enough to go get another one with which to shoot Bubbette. These types of laws are much like hate crime legislation, or even certain other gun laws. To wit, with very few exceptions, every public school in America is a legally designated “gun-free zone.” There, the school shooter problem has been solved. Doh, wait a minute…
Constitutionality isn’t determined by statistics any more than it is by opinion polls. You should know better, Taylor.
I don’t think this law is going to have as big of an impact as you believe it will. South Carolina is one of the deadliest states for women because of a systematic response to CDV. That will have to change before there is any measurable impact on CDV statistics.
I also agree with the poster who said the constitutionality of a law has absolutely nothing to do with statistics. It lessens the credibility of your “argument” when you connect the two. And seeing as you position yourself as an “advocate,” you should be able to see both sides of an issue even if you do not agree with the other side. I don’t agree with Will’s position but I see his reasoning.
Pointing out Will’s CDV conviction as a potential weakness in his argument only makes you look immature.
Wait, Will writes all these pro-death penalty opinions but is against taking a life at any point? Fucking hypocrite.
As for his CDV, yes, there really is no basis in fact for saying it is a violation of his constitutional right. They aren’t absolute. Ask any felon. Ask anyone wanting to yell fire in a crowded theater. Ask Will the last time he was in favor of frisking people based on reasonable suspicion and ask him where that phrase appears in the Constitution instead of probable cause. Ask Will about the other 6 or 7 “exceptions” the probable cause requirement. The only thing Folks knows about the Constitution is what his Tea Party, double-digit IQ friends tell him about it, and that ain’t a GD thing.
Thank goodness we have more laws enhancing the special victim status of women. Now when they are done murdering your unborn child via Roe and seizing most of your assets and future earnings in divorce, they can revoke your right to bear arms essentially at will. Don’t forget they can put you in debtor’s prison if they choose not to murder the kid and you can’t pay child support. United States of Cuckoldry.