4 ms·
> Yes. His house. She told the cops she felt in danger. Cops told him he had to stay somewhere else and go through the eviction process. Mad world. The pendulu
by WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
> Yes. His house. She told the cops she felt in danger. Cops told him he had to stay somewhere else and go through the eviction process. Mad world.
The pendulum needed to swing toward protecting women by default. As these things happen, it may have swung to a point where nuance needs to be applied.
Your example seems fairly complex. I couldn't opine on it w/o knowing the details of the complaint.
I can offer a different example. My ex's mental illness sometimes required me to take a stronger hand in her life, than would be benign otherwise. One time, she was in a delusional state. She stole my van and left the area. I wasn't able to report it stolen because she was my wife. The police were protecting her from the possibility that I was lying and using the police to harass her.
A stranger found her in the middle of the night, hundreds of miles away, in a remote area wrapped only in a towel - obviously not herself. I directed the guy to call the police because he could do that. Local cops delivered her to a facility where she was stabilized.
What I would change is that I would have had tightly limited status as her caregiver. I'd want my wife and I to be regularly evaluated by a female mental health professional, who had training to detect manipulative spouses. In cases where my wife might be in distress, police would defer to me. Meanwhile the details would be immediately forwarded to the MH pro overseeing my spouse, who'd have authority to intervene, if she saw an issue.
- fires10 5y agoI wish that was an option. I've been there with mine.
- corndoge 5y ago> The pendulum needed to swing toward protecting women by default He owned the house. If she felt in danger, the cops should come and escort her out of the house that doesn't belong to her. I don't see how your story is related to this.
- kennywinker 5y agoBut they lived together there? Even when it's under the status of a romantic relationship, that's still at least partially a tenant-landlord relationship and as such the tenant has rights. Setting aside all the gender politics - you don't get to evict a tenant at a moment's notice. And yeah, he got evicted sorta. But he still owns the house. I'm not saying it's an ideal situation... but given the tenant landlord power imbalance, I don't think it's actually obvious that he gets to keep living there and she doesn't just because they've separated.
- frosted-flakes 5y agoI'm trying to get this straight. If he owns the house and lives there, then why do his tenant's rights supersede his own? The tenant might live there and thus has certain rights, but so does he.
- atatatat 5y agoNot if he's determined to be an aggressor in the eyes of law enforcement in the (at least, US) jurisdiction.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jokethrowaway 5y agoIn this case noone is claiming abuse, there is no aggression. She merely stated she was feeling unsafe. We don't live in minority report, so he's not an aggressor.
- EliRivers 5y agoWe don't live in minority report, so he's not an aggressor. Surely what you've got here is evidence that we do live in minority report. (We don't, but I guess what I'm suggesting is that you're stating something in flat contradiction of the facts presented above; if this event happening means "we are living in minority report", well then, here we are living in minority report)
- morsch 5y agoI don't think it's absurd that the tenant gets extra protection to counterbalance the ownership issue that lets the owner-tenant have the last word in the long run. But I suspect the man would draw the short straw regardless of the ownership situation. Which I'm fine with, it still seems to be a reasonable heuristic given how imbalanced I believe domestic abuse is. But obviously it's unjust in some cases, and not useful for same sex relationships. Let's strive for a world where as many women as men own shared housing and act abusive towards their spouse.
- xnyan 5y agoIf you legally live in someone’s home, in most jurisdictions (in the US) then you have at least some rights even if you don’t pay rent. The alternative is that one partner can abuse the other, then throw them out on the street if they wish or if the victim complains. I think it would be better if there was a real third option, but I’m not aware of it.
- atatatat 5y agoReclaim any of the 51+% of our federal budget on weapons we either don't ever shoot or leave in the desert, use the reclaimed former tax revenue to maintain separate apartments longer, even if just a bedroom one rents.
- grapist420 5y agomilitary spending is 51% of discretionary spending. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ6wwEzN6y62UA9KIzATgXKFu5t7FraQlbH0A&s https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ6wwEz... Not 51% of government spending, which is much much larger
- atatatat 5y agoHow many trillions per decade is that?
- grapist420 5y agocool but it’s not the half of the federal budget you suggested
- jshmrsn 5y agoI’m not a lawyer, but in my state there is a legal concept of your place of residence which entitles you to certain eviction protections, regardless of ownership or lack thereof of that place.
- dTal 5y agoAnd yet, a resident was summarily evicted and forced to live in a tent.
- overgard 5y ago> The pendulum needed to swing There's no pendulum, there's just doing the right thing and the wrong thing. Doing something wrong in the other direction is just as bad.
- danielheath 5y agoThe world operates on heuristics, not perfect information, and we can’t make the right decision in every case. Something can be the best available policy and also cause to poor outcomes in some situations.