[identity profile] hendrikboom.livejournal.com 2006-10-17 12:27 pm (UTC)(link)
The real question here is why repeated assaults on other people should be treated any more lightly than assaults on one's spouse.

[identity profile] velvetpage.livejournal.com 2006-10-17 12:34 pm (UTC)(link)
The spousal abuse laws allow the police to press charges when the woman won't, which is not true of more generic assault cases. It's also much easier to get a restraining order in a domestic abuse case. And in many states, restraining orders carry restrictions on firearm ownership. But I see your point - why is assault on an acquaintance a misdemeanour, when assault on family is a felony?

[identity profile] neosis.livejournal.com 2006-10-17 05:25 pm (UTC)(link)
If I told you, you wouldn't like the answer.

[identity profile] velvetpage.livejournal.com 2006-10-17 05:27 pm (UTC)(link)
Please, explain it. I'm really confused, here.

(Anonymous) 2006-10-17 07:24 pm (UTC)(link)
The explanation that jumps to mind immediately is pretty simple:

In violent assault against "acquaintances" the victims are most likely (~ 80%, if I remember the statistic correctly) to be male. The domestic assault laws tend to be pushed by feminist lobbies. Those same lobbies have no vested interest in aiding or protecting men, thus only those laws which disporportionately benefit women get pushed by them.

[identity profile] velvetpage.livejournal.com 2006-10-17 07:29 pm (UTC)(link)
How very ironic.