CSS pop

Friday, July 17, 2020

why do we even claim to care about homelessness?

i think this is attributed to the one size fits all its capitalism if we say so and its only real if gov is eliminated and or forced to run like a biz. yes bit gov can become monster gov, but with out gov who ensures any basic 50 year or  more old protections for average joe/jill. its quite possible to have state or fed gov that does anything but at any size but thats biz in bed with gov, a gov against its people and or one drunk on power. point is in theory there is a reason to have a different sort of entity than just business. 

there is also risk from a small but relatively powerful (compared to even armed citizens) gov that is forced to run on absolute cost miniminization and then financial incentives crop up for violating citizens. 

regardless of corp or gov, the humans running it usually prefer their position to the bred line. when pop swells and funding remains flat line, there is an issue presented, things like courts cause unrest if wait is too long, how do you pay more court employees and officials and or more law enforcement officers? cant tax the biz, lax international laws mean even if other states dont bend (but they will) huge should be tax paying corp can pack up and skip town most places in the world that will offer them tax breaks and take out the burden they put on infrastructure on the citizens. ie in the scenario where most of the nations and worlds wealth is tied up in very few mega corps and with in a nation or between them theres now a race to keep the corps that control the resources and hord the money... 

well maybe the corps help produce a little bit of tax money but pop isnt directly in their control so scenarios exist where city is strapped and those employees face, either we take pay cut or they fire us all and replace with people at what ever fraction for position.. so same or close budget meets demand. only these people are often the elected officials that make the laws for us (we dont direct vote most things) aka they have the power to start bending rights almost universally as long as public will stomach it and incentive to do so. 

then enter federal funding through grants to either states or local pds often not explicitly for violating rights but with high incentive to do so and little in fear of consiquences.

so you get things like ignoring federal and state criminal laws but enforcing a civil order. lets throw in the image of battered women...its in court right? trials, police investigation...standards of evidence? not civil court. 

as far as i can see there are likely grants for men arrested on dv or dv restraining order charges. 

mn claims ofp dv restraining orders are gender neutral but even a pdf from 2018 has language like 

"can he still keep his guns?" 

issue is these things dont consider any police records or criminal records, having 0 history of violence for how many years doesnt do anything for you. the standard of evidence is the accuser "feels threatened" and the burden of proof is on the accused.  

i was given 4 days notice. ie summoned Friday the 13th for a court an hr and a half away the next Tuesday. 

the accusers knew i had a broken down car. police selectively non enforcing criminal law over and over allowed  0 notice lockout on what my mom claimed was a lease 8 mo after i moved back in with my parents. i had 2 live pet rabbits, also locked away, one died in their care one right after coming to empty apt they forced lease on under threat to give away and while destroying all my property police were helping them keep and damage. 

when you think about it ..its even darker, the accuser has all the time in the world because nothing happens until they decide to take the court action. 

all the sudden, hey dont worry weekends are not a good time to find a lawyer or claims date back to 2018 jan and you are being served march 2020. or fact that they have repeatedly been able to take things to endanger your life or lock you away from records that might give you a chance. why dont u get them online? systems i might not have accessed before and might require a call to a support department on a weekend? aka again might be closed? while not having a working car or photo id when one they knew and 2 they took it. i realized in the time line just now ..this happened right before they filed. kinda hard to keep things straight when all you have is 3 folding tables, no pots or pans in kitchen, nothing you own for organization earning tools sanity/coping ... while people claim to own you and cops dismiss even reports of attempted murder. then tell you "its not illegal to say you own someone" 

silly me i should have learned k-12 all those times a civil court judge with a badge and a holster came to the class room to create awareness that civil courts are who you call when your life is endangered...where did i get this idea the police do that? 

better yet where did my women group feminist mom get the idea she could...oh... yeah...

but outside my world the more i read about this.. say a guy owns a home and he has a female roommate. in theory she can run to civil court , claim she felt threatened and this roommate or renter now has him banned from his own home. 

mn has expanded it to be anyone who has been in a romantic relationship with out even having to have lived together. wheres the database that shows that? or is it "i feel we dated at one point?" 

it carries a pretty nasty implication on back ground checks probably harming employability and ability to rent. passes if you cant make it. and unlike most criminal law, this civil action pretty much explicitly states if an officer belives you violated it, they can/must arrest you and can do so sans warent. you can also be ordered to therapy. but heres the thing, with no normal standard of evidence auto pass and flipped burden of proof, and esp with the anyone whose been in relationship expansion... 

no one is really safe. id bet if we could see those that pass vs those dismissed or dropped its highly skewed towards male claims dropped. thats my hunch it could be wrong but fixing by making it required to convict more females would be just as bad. 

this isnt justice its robbing people of any incentive to work, possibly the roof over their head because theres no safeguard against false claims and the ban on going near doesnt go both ways. ie accuser can call, go near commit state and federal criminal law violations that endanger life of accused but an officer hunch accused went near accuser... boom auto jail facing criminal charges. 

express pass to criminal by anyone anytime with hearsay. free to file, no length on statue of limits, can leave you homeless unable to get a job...whats the point? 

it puts the lotion on its skin or we make claims to civil court again. 

but back to the tile... 3/4 homeless are men. on top of that, when a social movement spawns nfp orgs.. well despite the not for profit, the controlling members/stake holders can earn what ever they want from the donations or services provided by not for profit corp. 

ie groups claiming to be about fighting homelessness or ending violence against women, the not for profits that become their official entities have no incentive to actually do what they claim they are about, that would put them out of business and a living. 

and unless funding increases to build more mixed gendered or men's only shelters, guess who ends up freezing on the steet for equality? pass the buck, hide the f*** as long as its behind a juste cause not just cause right?

again, issues arise. should we take criminally convicted hardened criminals and make them police? 

general population compared to police and military in the subject of dv... the later two have elevated levels. so what are we doing charging them with playing family cop in any sense and what are they doing ignoring non gendered threats to life and criminal law violation but then making sure this civil order is enforced?

to be clear.. i dont and i dont think anyone wants to see women get battered. heres the other issue though, relations with out men trend towards or match police and military dv levels. ie lesbian relations. just like any person... some people are more stable than others, im for gay marriage at the gov/state/legal level or even forced on states by fed. i think its wrong to force churches. mainly because its highly likely that one will crop up allowing an undergo marriage as long as state isnt banning the same gender license at legal level. sepeartion of powers is the concept. a gov that prides itself on land of the free and non discrimination shouldnt ban under law marriages of same sex couples but they also shouldn't force any flavor of god Allah or w/e your entity of choice and as a group to allow what you think as an individual to redefine what they have to allow. its actually not insanely hard to register as a religion and yeah...church has never been my thing for the record but ive had plenty of gay or lesbian friends that im happy can now get married regardless. (trying not to get pidgionholed while expressing my views on individual vs group and or gov cause im not about hate or needless regulation or forcing and i see the left and right both doing all the above but under diff stated causes)

but back on track... relations with out men end up above average pop dv rates and fed gov claims non discrimination race gender or (creed? and maybe sexuality) yet fed money and a violence against women bias protect one side/discriminate against another system exists for an issue that claims to be about men beating women

but as far as i can see thats pr for allowing gov to take rights and states to float coffers while making people homeless and or criminals off hearsay. 

even if you can prove there is no gender bias in conviction/these things passing, it still appears to be anti any citizen having stability. the quickest easiest route to being homeless and or in jail on criminal charges would appear to be a civil suite not even a criminal law violation. unless the state has a pretty accurate (incredibly creepy) database on who dated who... and esp with the rest of the standards or lax there of... doesnt matter if you even knew them. though its more likely to happen in a situation where say you rent from a homeowner and already know how this works. 

the last problem is the term "political prisoner" ...whens the last time it crossed your mind? if a corp or private or even gov entitity wants you locked away well compared to framing you for anything else this carries the image you beat women with it and flipped burden of proof. note i said the image. it associates itself with all the psas commercials and media reports of "the problem" when the problem is real but pretty likely both genders are good or bad people with most being mostly moral but not perfect and having traumas that might create reactions. as humans we once ran mamoths off cliffs. psychological kill. do you think the human was ever stronger than the abusive mamoth? 

if you look into it the fbi has stats and some lawyers websites even admit that reported to police and or civil court.. most of what gets noted as dv (like 99 percent) is a couple having an argument. 

i dont think this is truly about even protecting women. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

 It just dawned on me. If you want to see evidence that black people are no more inherently violent than white people Martin Luther King and...