[Diogenes]

this is only a part of the strategy employed <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duress<br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duress_(contract_law)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> when one is cognisant of which aspects of law can be put to use.... It is so much simpler.

[Dr Caleb]

Law? Who was talking about law?<br /> <br /> Brent was talking 'Justice'.

[Diogenes]

"I<br /> have no proplem with vigilante justice in cases of this nature perhaps not to the extreme but certainly to the point where the message is understood."<br /> <br /> <br /> from page two<br /> <br /> and due to the expense of jailing... first response Vigilantism is effective

[ouhite]

[QUOTE BY= Brent Swain] Wife beaters and child abusers both rely heavily on secrecy, and are empowered by the assumption that what they do will not be disclosed . Denying that secrecy is the only real deterrent to their abuse. Protecting that secrecy is to be an accomplis.<br /> Wife and child abuse is everyone's reponsibility. Using any and all means of deterence is the only alternative to being an accomplis.<br /> Only those who are themselves wife or child abusers would advocate protecting such secrecy, and thus becoming accomplises .<br /> Getting rid of the belief that wife and child abuse are private matters is the first step.<br /> Brent[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> are you accusing me of being an accomplice? <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/neutral.gif' alt='Neutral'>

[Diogenes]

<br /> With whatever respect due your question, ouhite<br /> That would depend entirely on the motivation you may or may not have for remaining silent.<br /> One of the problems with ,perhaps passionate blanket statements id they tend to cover their topic to the exclusion of reason .<br /> Perhaps you would be so kind as to give the readers your justification for your question.<br /> Silence on acts of violence can be seen as giving permission to just as the manner in which you have framed your question may be seen as “So, ya wanna make somthin outta it, Pally?”<br /> May I inquire as to your motive for your question?<br /> is the neutral icon for real or merely incongruent to the words you have chosen?<br /> <br /> <br />

[Brent Swain]

The purpose is to warn others in the area as to where he is comming from and enable friends, relatives workmates , etc to voice their opposition to his attitude problems. Otherwise he may be free to delude himself that he is morally right. It also supports a cultural change from the notion that family abuse is a private matter.<br /> Brent

[ouhite]

Brent, I did not pose a question, so I do not know what you're talking about when you asked me my motive for the question.<br /> <br /> also what do you mean by remaining silent? by not denouncing what he did as being wrong? I think that should be obvious. I dont know why would suspect me of anything, or assume I'm in his (the wifebeater) camp, some people (such as me) are just naturally cautious, which is why I suggested that one does this privately or make sure he/she doesn't have any info online (normally in political forums you dont, but in community forums - facebooks, myspace etc. or maybe some community forum on cooking hobbies etc. where interactions are often friendly and communities tighter knit, you might)<br /> <br /> "Silence on acts of violence".... so it means that whenever someone posts a piece of news about something bad, one must first denounce it and THEN join the forum? So every time I comment on a topic on Bush I have to say he's a fuckwit, or else fear people think I support him? Certain things should be pretty obvious. <br /> <br /> I'm not sure if its news to you, but the way that forums operate is that people comment on specific sections of things they want to talk about. Maybe I should have introduced myself a little bit before coming in to this discussion, since i'm coming in at the last bit, commenting on the sensitive issue of personal information, so perhaps you were alarmed.... but I dont think you needed to react that way.<br /> <br /> I am actually quite insulted and surprised by what you wrote.

[Brent Swain]

You seem to have advocated that this matter be delt with in a private manner . I think it is clear that keepng things private is in the best interest of the abuser.<br /> Advocating that we protect the interests of the abuser and thus his ability to avoid the social consequences of his actions warrants my response.<br /> We need to send a clear message to all abusers that that an abuser cannot rely on us to keep his deeds anonymous.<br /> Brent

[ouhite]

As you probably know by now, I was only concerned with *your* safety. And yes, I agree that putting pressure on it will be effective and add another dimension to it rather than just acting on it and dealing with him. I hope you can see that these two are not exclusive of one another (your safety vs action/pressure).

[Brent Swain]

I have no fears for my safety , only that of abuse victims. I can take care of myself.<br /> Its time someone with greater computer skills and access than myself set up a website listing all those convicted of spousal assault, to enable those in the dating game to check out who they are getting involved with, to enable them to greatly enhace their own safety. Forwarned is forarmed. Fear of getting on that list and having it cramp ones style may act as a further deterrent to abusive behavior.<br /> It won't work in all cases, but will work often enough to justify the effort.<br /> Brent

[ouhite]

sounds like a good idea. I searched and it really doesn't look like Canada has anything like that thats open to the public...