Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame antifeminism men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA reddit

Men’s Rightsers discover the true villain behind the police killing of Walter Scott: His ex-wife

A makeshift memorial at the spot where Walter Scott was killed
A makeshift memorial at the spot where Walter Scott was killed

Over on men’s rights hate site A Voice for Men, Attila Vinczer has found the true villain in the case of Walter Scott, the black man shot in the back after he ran from a white cop: Don’t blame the cop for shooting and killing a man who was no danger to him whatsoever; blame the ex-wife who simply wanted Scott to pay the child support he owed:

Attila_L_Vinczer Mod • 10 hours ago This is another chilling example of the systemic severe abuse of fathers, by mothers. I say mothers, because the system only engages in the otherwise illegal act of debtor's prison, against fathers, result from the mother seeking it to do so.  I wondered why this man ran from the police. He did not appear to be a criminal. His crime, was of being a poor father, who was murdered in cold blood in fear of being sent back to debtor's prison, again. That is why he ended up shot, in the back, after the mother of his child(ren) stabbed him in the back.  Another father dead. Now, there is zero chance of collecting child support. I hold the mother responsible for robbing her child(ren) of their father and causing this father's death.

Another AVFM commenter seconded Vinczer’s, er, interpretation of events.

Jeff • 21 minutes ago The woman who set the child support order on him is just as responsible for his death as the police officer is. She sent out agents of the state to threaten him with violence, to kidnap him multiple times, and he ended up getting murdered as a result. His blood is on her hands just as much as it's on the cop's hands.

As did someone called TLC:

TLC • 8 hours ago Child support criminalizes fathers.  Walter Scott owed child support, therefore he was a criminal.  If he had been a mother, the government would have helped him support his children.  But because he was a father, he was a criminal.  And criminals deserve to die.  The cop who shot Walter Scott may have been a racist.  But Scott didn't die just because he was black.  He died because he was a father.

Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, the regulars, to their credit, were a bit more reluctant to see this as a Men’s Rights issue rather than a “white cop shooting black man despite being in no danger at all” issue. Well, some of them were, in any case. The others posted comments like this:

Ransom_Stoddard 2 points 23 hours ago*  This is a men's rights issue, because men should have 50% equal access and physical and legal custody of their children without child support wealth redistribution that is rationalized by unequal custody orders - by default of law unless one parent is proven to be a clear and present danger to their children- without needing to pay tens-to-hundreds of thousands of dollars just for the privilege of seeing their children that men must pay if the mother refuses to let their Fathers see their children. If there was actual equality, this man would not have ran, because there would have been no existing warrant for failure to appear in Court nor failure to pay child support. This man was murdered because of a lack of reproductive and parental equality.

Dungone decided to spread the blame to evil feminists eager to cash in on sweet, sweet child support payments.

dungone 1 point 6 hours ago*  Feminists: "We didn't make that cop shoot him, we just want our baby momma mana."

InBaggingArea offered the most succinct explanation:

InBaggingArea 9 points 1 day ago  Violence against men because of matriarchy.

It’s true that Scott owed child support. He had four children with two ex-wives and apparently owed thousands of dollars in child support for his two younger children; his family says this is the likely reason he ran, though we can’t be sure. Despite being behind on his payments, he was reportedly on good terms with his children, and saw them regularly.

Scott’s funeral was held today.

H/T — r/againstmensrights

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

195 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
vanir85
5 years ago

one man murders another man. of course it’s women’s fault.

men are not responsible for their own actions if they, in any way ever, have interacted with one of these wretched female creatures.

holding men accountible for their actions, like expecting them to pay for the children they helped bring into the world, is just as bad as killing them in cold blood.

MRAs, always twisting the truth to suit their hate.

anarchodin
anarchodin
5 years ago

If only something was surprising about this, other than how long it took them.

sff9
sff9
5 years ago

I’ve read a lot of ludicrous things on this blog, but wow, this is so ridiculous I don’t even

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

Leave it to MRAs to take a complex situation and boil it down to “it’s a woman’s fault.”

This would be a great opportunity to talk about how black men bear the brunt of state violence. That is a men’s rights issue, an important one. But let’s not have that conversation! That would be hard, and stuff, and involve talking about structural and institutional racism, and admitting that middle-class white men are actually not particularly disadvantaged.

How we deal with people who are behind on child support is also an important conversation to have, but let’s not do it in any kind of realistic way. Let’s instead make it into a discussion about how women rule the world.

By making these adjustments, we can keep the focus where it belongs: on the persecution complex that too many privileged cis het white men have a psychological need to maintain.

M.
M.
5 years ago

… Oh the bright side, at least none of them went on a horribly racist rant like they have in every other “Racist white cop murders unarmed black man/boy” case so far?

(Countdown until one of them does: 3… 2… 1…)

Hoosier X
5 years ago

I bet his ex-wife was the party who smashed the taillight that (allegedly) led to Scott being pulled over in the first place.

M.
M.
5 years ago

*On, even. Not oh.

Social Justice Shota
Social Justice Shota
5 years ago

Does anyone else see how the MRAs basically assume the cop was justified in shooting an unarmed fleeing man?

Spindrift
Spindrift
5 years ago

Just like male rape victims, Walter Scott is just a beatstick to hit women/feminists with as far as MRAs are concerned. Typical.

Anne Mette
Anne Mette
5 years ago

According to MRAs women have 3 flaws: Everything we say, everything we do and they fact that we even exist in the world. Basically I think just the same about MRAs…

brooked
5 years ago

@Social Jusicd Shota

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/08/police-group-walter-scott_n_7029748.html

Law Enforcement Defense Group President: ‘This Officer Is In Serious Trouble’

” ‘Why did you shoot what appears to be a non-violent subject who is really just trying to flee?’ Straight federal case law, Supreme Court case law in Tennessee v. Garner, within the bounds of the Constitution, you don’t get to shoot a non-violent offender in the back. It’s fundamental. And so, by a straightforward Garner analysis of it, I think that [South Carolina Law Enforcement Division] would have had some serious doubts, and that there would have been a great opportunity for him to have been indicted apart from the video. Of course, the video is going to, you know, be compelling. Here it is, in black and white. In fact, in living color.”

LG.
LG.
5 years ago

It is seriously fucked up that parents who can’t afford to suppprt their kids get jail instead of help, though.

Aunt Edna
Aunt Edna
5 years ago

Yep. Once you understand that all evils and misfortunes are women’s fault, everything becomes crystal clear.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

@brooked

I’m unsurprised but unhappy about the way the person being interviewed in that story clearly assumes that any time a police officer shoots someone, it’s justified unless proven otherwise. I mean, that makes sense, given that this is an organization that defends cops as its mandate, and the person being interviewed is a former LEO. But that’s exactly the problem. At a minimum, all shootings should be viewed through a neutral lens from the outset, but that’s not what actually happens.

There’s good evidence that when a citizen group is charged with reviewing all instances of taser use, police use their tasers less. The citizen groups almost always find that the taser use was justified, because the unjustifiable instances go almost entirely away when cops know that they’re going to have to answer for it to non-cops after the fact. I haven’t heard of a similar mechanism for (fatal or nonfatal) deadly weapon use but I certainly would like to.

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

Social Justice Shota | April 11, 2015 at 6:10 pm
Does anyone else see how the MRAs basically assume the cop was justified in shooting an unarmed fleeing man?

THIS.

It’s like they didn’t even condemn the cop for shooting him, it was just “Oh! His wives wanted child support! EVIL HARPY BITCHES KILLED HIM!”

No, they did not. The policeman was the one pulling the trigger on a lethal weapon when he had several non-lethal tactics he could have used. He had a tazer on him for fuck’s sake.

And since we’re on the topic of the child support system, yes it is unfairly biased against black males. It’s hard being behind on payments and it’s even harder to get back on track once you get too far behind. This should be reformed.

However, I would assume that the MRA fix for this issue would be “paper abortions” where the father just can abandon the children and never have to pay a dime. They don’t even give a shit about the racial issues behind it. They just want a convenient punching bag, rather than letting his children and ex-wives suffer in peace.

Walter Scott at least tried to get help making payments by going to an outside organization, because his children were more important to him than anything else. He knew that his children depended on him.

Which is more than any MRA could understand, considering they’d rather harm their children than help their mother.

wordsp1nner
5 years ago

So he got sent to jail because of what he claimed was a DHS clerical error–right payment, wrong Mother–and so lost the best job he ever had (that paid only $35,000), couldn’t find another, the child support kept piling up even when he was in jail for not paying it… the way the courts treat poor and black people (and especially poor black people) is amazingly fucked up. That has nothing to do with child support. He could have ended up in the same cycle for traffic tickets (watch John Oliver’s Last Week Tonight).

It sounds like he really, really wanted to help his children, but the criminalization of being a poor black man stopped him. (Causing a father to lose his job because he has become slightly behind on child support? Where the fuck is the logic there?

brooked
5 years ago

@Policy of Madness

I was pleasantly surprised that the president of The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, an ex-FBI officer, felt that Slager very likely would be indicted even without the video. Of course in a better world anyone, including LEOs, should always be indicted for shooting someone fleeing in the back. It’s a shitty world though, which is why I’m pleasantly surprised.

I cut off the opening of my quote where he questions Slager’s tazer cover story, pointing out there’s no reason for him to tazer Scott either and even if the made up tazer story were true, it wouldn’t in no way make the shooting justified.

If, in fact, the guy did have the Taser, it makes for a slightly different question, but I think there would still be serious questions to answer, like, ‘Why were you tasing?’ And certainly, ‘Why did you shoot what appears to be a non-violent subject who is really just trying to flee?’ Straight federal case law, Supreme Court case law in Tennessee v. Garner, within the bounds of the Constitution, you don’t get to shoot a non-violent offender in the back. It’s fundamental. And so, by a straightforward Garner analysis of it, I think that [South Carolina Law Enforcement Division] would have had some serious doubts, and that there would have been a great opportunity for him to have been indicted apart from the video. Of course, the video is going to, you know, be compelling. Here it is, in black and white. In fact, in living color.”

I think this interview offes a nice quote to shut down all the craven attempt to defend this shooting. The question remains if there was even a remote chance that the SC authorities would responsibly investigate this shooting. Contrary to Fox News’s protestations, the Ferguson protest was the only reason the Mike Brown shooting was investigated.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

I was pleasantly surprised that the president of The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, an ex-FBI officer, felt that Slager very likely would be indicted even without the video.

Yeah, but. Firstly, I don’t think that’s true. I don’t think he would have been indicted without the video. I don’t even think Hosko thinks that’s true, which is why he says he would hope that the investigation would ask pertinent questions like, why did you discharge your weapon from 30 feet away into the suspect’s back? He hopes that would be asked and taken seriously, but I think it would have been swept under the rug and I bet Hosko does, too.

Secondly, the remainder of his remarks just carry this tone that I can only describe as “agency point of view.” Also, note the lead-in at the top:

The organization recently invited several journalists, including this reporter, to experience a simulator that police academies use to train cadets in order to give the media a better sense of split-second decisions officers must make.

I think everyone knows that cops sometimes have to make split-second decisions, and there is increased room for error when that is required. Those instances do not occur on a day-to-day basis and did not occur in the situation at hand. Showing journalists a cadet-training simulator that implies that cops have to deal with this every day, day in and day out, not long after Ferguson and when police brutality is all over the news, is a transparent ploy to increase sympathy for the mostly-white cops who shoot young black men in the back.

It leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and that bad taste stays there for the entire article because of statements like this:

I do not know, and I guess it will ultimately come out, what the officer had in mind, what he knew about this person who he shot.

Hosko returns to that at another point, that we just don’t know what happened prior to the beginning of the video. I don’t think he consciously is attempting to imply that there might be some kind of legitimate justification for this shooting, but that’s what he’s doing. I mean, we just don’t know … what Walter Scott might have done to deserve being gunned down like an animal. That’s what this kind of weaseling says. It doesn’t seem to be a deliberate, conscious thing, but it’s still there.

All in all … bleh. But unsurprising.

wordsp1nner
5 years ago

I’m currently listening to The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander, which is her arguing that the US criminal justice system has become, basically, a system mainly for controlling black people, particularly black men. I’m not that far into it, but it is really fascinating–and frightening.

I think her worldview is one that puts the murder of Walter Scott into context much better than the MRA’s “It has to be a woman’s fault, somehow.”

(Also, if you like audiobooks, the narrator does a great job.)

brooked
5 years ago

Here’s an excellent New Yorker article. It’s a shorter news piece rather than one of their full length Goliaths. It also fails to address The ex-wife’s culpability due to our culture’s oppressive gynocentrity.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/walter-scott-shooting-south-carolina

It’s crucial to point out that had the bystander not turned on his smartphone camera, that creaky counter-narrative—I thought he was reaching for my weapon—would almost certainly have given Slager a pass. And no doubt, the swiftness of the political and narrative unity in the shooting death of Scott owes much to the lessons of Ferguson. But South Carolina is not Missouri—its racial past, in fact, is more violent, but its attempts to move away from that history, while less known, have been more bold. The state’s history of violence against black men and women is excruciating to know, or to read.

M.
M.
5 years ago

Out of curiosity, when was the last time a white cop was convicted of murdering an unarmed black man/boy and served time for it? Google turns up naught.

brooked
5 years ago

And here’s an article for MRAs to mangle and misread, as they fail to see that race and class issues are central and how this is about the mass incarceration of poor minorities.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/10/walter-scott-child-support-_n_7036174.html

One-Eighth Of South Carolina Inmates Were Jailed Over Child Support Payments. Walter Scott Was One Of Them.

Patterson told The Huffington Post in an interview that most states are more forgiving than South Carolina when it comes to child support payments. In general, there is no set number of days after which the debtor automatically goes to a contempt hearing.

“There’s a more flexible process [in other states],” she said. “It’s less likely you’ll go the contempt route. You may enter a payment agreement, or may determine there’s no money. The person may pay up without going through the judicial process.”

The professor said she has found only one other jurisdiction in the country — the 9th Judicial District of New Mexico — whose rules are as stringent as South Carolina’s.

In a separate study in 2010, Patterson surveyed hundreds of cases across South Carolina and found that low-income, noncustodial parents like Scott often ended up in jail without being represented by an attorney in civil court. In fact, the study showed that over 98 percent of parents being held in contempt for non-payment of child support did not have legal counsel. Ninety-five percent of the parents held in contempt ended up being sentenced to jail, with an average sentence of three months.

Seventy-five percent of the parents Patterson examined in her 2010 paper were indigent, meaning they testified that they were presently or previously unemployed or that they were having difficulties finding work. And nearly 70 percent of the noncustodial parent-debtors were black, even though blacks made up less than 28 percent of South Carolina’s population that year.

brooked
5 years ago

@M

It was a long time ago, 1997, and didn’t involve a death but a several Brooklyn police officer who took part in the beating and sexual assault of Abner Louima, who was in custody at the time, were charged. Some officers were convicted for an assault that can be best described as torture with the harshest sentence being 30 years.

brooked
5 years ago

@M

In NYC, questionable fatal shooting usually end with the officer involved being suspended and the victim’s family receiving millions of dollars form a lawsuit settlement.

Here’s an article from 1997 about a police officers being sentenced to one and a half to four and a half years for shooting an unarmed man.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/22/nyregion/prison-term-for-officer-who-killed-unarmed-man.html

Yesterday’s sentencing was the first in two years for an officer convicted of committing homicide while on duty. In 1995, Jonas Bright, an 18-year veteran of the housing police, was sentenced to one to four years in prison for criminally negligent homicide in the fatal shooting of a man on the Lower East Side of Manhattan in 1992.

Apparently the only other time an officer was convicted and sentenced in such a crime was 1978, when Thomas Ryan of the 44th Precinct in the Bronx was sentenced to four years in prison, also for criminally negligent homicide, in the beating death of a suspect.

So apparently as of 1997, a NYPD officer had been sentenced for an unjustified shooting three times in history. I’ll try to get more current info.

brooked
5 years ago

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30339943

The cases where US police have faced killing charges

Mr Stinson’s own research found 41 police officers were charged with murder or manslaughter between 2005 and 2011. In the same time period, the FBI recorded several thousand justifiable homicides.

proxieme
proxieme
5 years ago

Wasn’t a huge reason his being jailed for being in arrears that SC has child support paid directly to the state if the custodial parent is recieving aid?

I’m not saying that that’s right or justified (it isn’t), but it does place yet another layer between the EBIL WIMMEN and the case itself.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

Here’s an article from 1997 about a police officers being sentenced to one and a half to four and a half years for shooting an unarmed man.

A bit of googling tells me that the victim in that case was a Latino man.

I mean, Wikipedia has a list page of police officers convicted of murder. Browsing around it, we find mob-related killings, premediated killings (mainly of women), and at least one serial killer who was also a cop. But no victims who were unarmed black men or boys among the cases that resulted in conviction.

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

People don’t go to jail for failing to pay their child support, they go to jail for being in contempt of court. You can owe child support, and as long as in the eyes of the court you’re making a good faith effort towards doing your part, then you’re golden.

In other words, judges are usually pretty hesitant to throw men in jail, because they know that men can’t pay from jail. For a judge to find a man in contempt of court he most likely either completely dropped the ball in failing to file a motion to modify when hiz financial circumstances changed, or he’s one of those assholes who “needs” a new car and phone and is all shocked when he doesn’t have enough money left over to pay support. Although I’m not too surprised that most men in jail are black. Because as we all know; black men are deadbeats who want to spend their money on jewelry instead of their kids, right, right?/s 9_9

Child support collection is becoming the industry, though. Those private collection agencies scare the shit out of me. I’m sure there’s no room for abuse there, right right? /s

mrex
mrex
5 years ago

@proxieme “Wasn’t a huge reason his being jailed for being in arrears that SC has child support paid directly to the state if the custodial parent is recieving aid?”

AFAIK usually Social services, (or whatever it’s called in whatever state), takes on any case for which it’s help is requested, regardless of the mother’s income. Supposedly, by law, whether the mother is on welfare/aid or not can not come into play at all .

Suzy Q
Suzy Q
5 years ago

Return of kings posted an a piece blaming the germanwimgs crash on the pilots girlfriend who was pregnant and recently broke up with him. Apparently (and I’m not making this up) he was distraught about the invetible separation from his not yet born child because you know all women eventually take their kids away from their father out of spite. They actually said this made his action justifiable because he suffered from … get this… “Beta male rage.”

I would post the link but I don’t know your policy about links.

friday jones
friday jones
5 years ago

Hey MRA assholes: I know that most of you are libertarians or free staters or Republicans or Tea Party members, so chew on this a bit: In a real welfare state, there would be no child support payments because children would get their stipends from the state. You’d be 100% equal to the women in the parental sense and in every other way. Only in a true socialist welfare state can men truly cast off their shackles. So you must evolve your political/economic views to get what you truly want, True Equality of the Sexes. You know, the goal of all MRA’s everywhere?

lkeke35
5 years ago

Wow! You guys are as on point here as the MRA’s are off point there.

Keep it up!

Bina
Bina
5 years ago

Meanwhile, the officer who shot Scott has a prior record of police brutality towards black men.

But no, let’s blame the ex-wives, and not the entrenched (and bloody fucking OBVIOUS) racist biases of the law enforcers.

suffrajitsu
suffrajitsu
5 years ago

It’s not that there can’t ever be a discussion about child support laws, but this is a ridiculous time to have one. Walter Scott’s child support record is completely besides the point here (especially since the shooting was at a traffic stop, and the cop presumably had no knowledge of the situation with his ex-wife–you might as well blame laws making it illegal to drive with a broken taillight and that would actually be less absurd).The point he was unarmed and running away when a cop shot him, and that he’s not an isolated incident but part of a trend.

M.
M.
5 years ago

Walter Scott’s child support record is completely besides the point here (especially since the shooting was at a traffic stop, and the cop presumably had no knowledge of the situation with his ex-wife–you might as well blame laws making it illegal to drive with a broken taillight and that would actually be less absurd).

Just like Wilson had no any knowledge of Brown “Stealing” (in quotes because I read somewhere that the store owner said he bought them legitimately, but I can’t find the article so correct me if I’m wrong) the cigars but it was still thrown about as if he did. (And even in some alternate universe where he did – stealing smokes is still not a death penalty offense.)

Yep. No trend at all. *rolls eyes*

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

The biggest problem I’m running into with this case, with respect to the people in my life who are not the most self-reflective and non-racist folks I know (spoiler alert: it’s my parents), is the same one I encountered after it came out that Trayvon Martin might have done some marijuana at some point. There’s this attitude that if black men (or black boys) are not the most perfectly angelic individuals who would put Jesus Christ to shame in their virtue, it’s perfectly okay to kill them.

We don’t actually, officially, put people to death in this county for smoking pot, and the notion that Trayvon Martin smoking pot at some point somehow justified a random vigilante killing him is so beyond absurd and racist that I honestly don’t know how to respond to it. But I ran into it so often. I can’t even describe to you how often this came up.

So now, we again have a black man who did something that is mildly illegal and he got gunned down, and now those kind of racist people in my life can’t shut the hell up about the child support thing. Getting behind on child support is not a capital offense but you’d never know it from listening to them.

You know, my dad admitted to me that he smoked marijuana when he was younger, but for some reason he doesn’t seem to think he forfeited his basic human rights when he did that. It’s only African Americans to whom this rule applies, apparently.

Bina
Bina
5 years ago

Getting behind on child support is not a capital offense but you’d never know it from listening to them.

It’s also not a black thing (Paul Fucking Elam being a big, white case in point), but you’d never know that to listen to them, either.

brooked
5 years ago

There are no national statistics on the rate of incarceration for failure to pay child support. But South Carolina is one of just five states, along with Florida, Maine, Ohio and Georgia, that do not guarantee the right to an attorney during child support contempt hearings, according to a survey conducted by the National Child Support Enforcement Association.

In a separate study in 2010, Patterson surveyed hundreds of cases across South Carolina and found that low-income, noncustodial parents like Scott often ended up in jail without being represented by an attorney in civil court. In fact, the study showed that over 98 percent of parents being held in contempt for non-payment of child support did not have legal counsel. Ninety-five percent of the parents held in contempt ended up being sentenced to jail, with an average sentence of three months.

Seventy-five percent of the parents Patterson examined in her 2010 paper were indigent, meaning they testified that they were presently or previously unemployed or that they were having difficulties finding work. And nearly 70 percent of the noncustodial parent-debtors were black, even though blacks made up less than 28 percent of South Carolina’s population that year.

The quotes are from the Huff Po article I linked to earlier.

I’m interested in discussing Scott’s child support issues because I view the system in South Carolina as horrifically broken to the point where it’s prime example of ongoing criminalization of the poor. In South Carolina contempt for non-payment a jailable offense but it’s one of the few states that don’t provide the poor with free legal representation to fight the charge. The only people (98%!) who end up in jail for contempt are the poor, the majority of whom are black, who couldn’t afford to pay for legal representation and therefore had none.

Since MRAs are adverse to research and uninterested in the problems of people not exactly like themselves they act as if the rise of new debtor prisons only involve men paying child support. In fact it’s the rise of government money making scheme involving ridiculous fines for misdemeanors and legal fees that the poor can’t afford to pay that have brought back debtor’s prisons.

Despite child support being one of AVfM’s pet topics, they’re completely incapable of saying anything useful, insightful or even factual about the subject. They’d rather blame the mother in all sorts of ridiculous ways and/or nonsensical demands that child support payments simply be eliminated.

Has there ever been a MRA who was well-versed in a topic and came up with a substantial public policy proposal that was not pulled from their ass? I’m guessing no. This is why their conferences are just a poorly attended fan get togethers.

This is a bit of an link vomit, sorry:

Here’s a devastating report on the criminalization of poverty.

http://www.ips-dc.org/the-poor-get-prison-the-alarming-spread-of-the-criminalization-of-poverty/
Here’s an article about the topic in relation to Ferguson.

https://news.vice.com/article/st-louis-suburbs-ferguson-and-jennings-sued-over-debtors-prisons-criminalizing-poverty
Here’s a report on how unfair bail amounts have lead to mass incarceration and is used force the poor into taking unfavorable plea deals.

Bail Fail: Why the U.S. Should end the practice of using money for bail

http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/bailfail_executive_summary.pdf

The use of money bail is among the primary drivers of growth in our jail populations. Between June 2010 and June 2011, nearly 12 million people were processed through jails across the United States. U.S. jails have operated at an average of 91 percent capacity since the year 2000.1 On any given day, 60 percent of the U.S. jail population is composed of people who are not convicted but are being held in detention as they await the resolution of their charge. This time in detention hinders them from taking care of their families, jobs and communities while overcrowding jails and creating unsustainable budgets.

Shaenon
5 years ago

Hey MRA assholes: I know that most of you are libertarians or free staters or Republicans or Tea Party members, so chew on this a bit: In a real welfare state, there would be no child support payments because children would get their stipends from the state.

The Red Pill subreddits have some regulars in European countries where this is the case, and they STILL complain about it. They blame their taxes on women and rant about how feminists are stealing men’s hard-earned tax money. No, really.

Zolnier
Zolnier
5 years ago

A homicide could be committed in an isolated monastery, with both the victim and perpetrator being monks, and MRAs could still blame women somehow.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ zolnier

Monks are the ur example of ‘men going their own way’ so that’s obviously women’s fault. If they weren’t so damn alluring and distracting with their womanly wiles then men wouldn’t be distracted and could do all their (whatever it is monks do) without having to isolate themselves.

Zolnier
Zolnier
5 years ago

Plus the Incels would probably whine that the nearby convent should’ve sent nuns to service them.

freemage
5 years ago

The moment I heard that his family was saying he’d run because of issues with child support, I knew this was gonna happen. They’re not just horrible human beings, they’re DULL horrible human beings. It’s the old truth about the banality of evil.

freemage
5 years ago

Oh, and posting a bit of brainbleach, industrial strength,to deal with this shit:

http://i.imgur.com/mjQiNrm.jpg

Cyberwulf
Cyberwulf
5 years ago

How much do you bet that all the guys blaming Scott’s death on the evil matriarchy are white as snow?

Cyberwulf
Cyberwulf
5 years ago

Also, there is definitely a nuanced, grown-up conversation to be had surrounding the penalties for non-payment of child support and how they disproportionately punish poor black men. But mras don’t want to have that conversation. They want to fuck women bareback with no consequences because condoms are hard, and ignore their own children except to use them as props to show how great they are.

Flying Mouse
Flying Mouse
5 years ago

Someone upthread mentioned the Last Week Tonight where John Oliver covered municipal violations and the return of debtors’ prison. Just thought I’d drop the video here (Youtube link here in case it doesn’t embed).

opium4themasses
5 years ago

What always gets me about the criminalization of poverty, is that a lot of times it’s not even the law but the uneven enforcement of the law which is the problem. I know it seems odd, but poor people can’t really afford drugs. It’s middle class and higher kids/college students/families who aren’t searched but have the contraband.

Of course, there is also the whole “Everyone is equally banned from sleeping under bridges.” bullshit. Thanks a lot for the links here on some of that everyone. I think John Oliver is doing a great job making what are essentially lectures/primers to help unfamiliar people approach difficult topics. With the spread of those links on youtube, I feel almost like his show is a public service.

This whole topic makes me angry and I am probably bouncing around a bit here.

The situation and the responses remind me of the limitation Kansas put on spending of welfare money recently. This also ties in the drug tests prior to welfare/SNAP benefits. We, meaning American society, continue to act like poverty is a choice caused by moral failings. (I don’t want to pretend to have a huge insight into other societies on this.)

dhag85
5 years ago

May I suggest “monkey business” as an answer to whatever it is monks do?

Saturday
Saturday
5 years ago

I fail to see the controversy in any of this. The man was afraid of being thrown back in debtors prison, ran and was shot. If the sexes were reversed then it’d of been “the patriarchy” which killed her.

1 2 3 4