Support NeoGAF

[cpp_is_king]

And the law should provide to the people that think beating their wives is acceptable because?

Just curious, do you think that murder should be punished differently than "simple" assault and battery?

Why shouldn't domestic abuse with grave bodily harm be punished differently than domestic abuse without grave bodily harm?

 

[Dai101]

People really gonna defend this? I mean come the fuck on, there's no defense for this.

Give it time, we're only in the first page.

 

[cpp_is_king]

Then why vouch for it?

I did no such thing. That's the problem with people, you only see what you want to see.

 

[- J - D -]

Putin covering his own ass, probably. Time to go to work, journos.

 

[victreeb3l]

How long until a similar bill passes in the US?

 

[Marvie_3]

So fucked up

 

[jellies_two]

The thread title says it encourages domestic abuse. That is textbook hyperbole. You can call a spade a spade without being a "Putin defense force"



Hard to do when I'm opposed to it.

Hyperbole - exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

Hmm, no, it is exaggeration at worst.
Because it does, it functionally does encourage.

In Romania they recently removed the penalties for bribery for amounts below 45k, leaving just stiff penalties for amounts ABOVE that figure. There is no question this will ENCOURAGE bribery.

I don't see the difference.
If it is just exaggeration, because it isn't creating wife beaters out of nothing, then this is Putin, he can handle a bit of somewhat aggressive press don't you think?

and let me ask you a different question.
Does Increasing the penalty DISCOURAGE domestic abuse?
if not, why would anyone bother to increase the penalty. For revenge? that doesn't make any sense.
Ipso facto, decreasing does the opposite.

 

[sazzy]

People really gonna defend this? I mean come the fuck on, there's no defense for this.

Nobody is defending this legislation (at least, I'm not).

The thread title is misleading and hyperbole, and like I said before, something you would see on Infowars or WND.

 

[notaskwid]

Just curious, do you think that murder should be punished differently than "simple" assault and battery?

Why shouldn't domestic abuse with grave bodily harm be punished differently than domestic abuse without grave bodily harm?

Murder should be punished as murder, assault and battery should be punished as assault and battery and domestic violence should be punished as domestic violence.
Passing such a bill decriminalizing domestic violence will only result in it's increase, when Russia is already one of the worst offenders worldwide.

 

[jellies_two]

Nobody is defending this legislation (at least, I'm not).

The thread title is misleading and hyperbole, and like I said before, something you would see on Infowars or WND.

Would you consider this thread title "infowars" "hyperbole" and "misleading"?

"Putin discourages domestic violence - signs bill into law raising penalties".

Seriously.

 

[cpp_is_king]

and let me ask you a different question.
Does Increasing the penalty DISCOURAGE domestic abuse?
if not, why would anyone bother to increase the penalty. For revenge? that doesn't make any sense.
Ipso facto, decreasing does the opposite.

Problem is, "encourage" has two different meanings. You can encourage a situation to develop, or you can encourage a person or group of people to do something. "Encourages domestic abuse" is almost certain to be interpreted as "encourages people to abuse their spouses" (ie eggs them on)

 

[jellies_two]

Problem is, "encourage" has two different meanings. You can encourage a situation to develop, or you can encourage a person or group of people to do something. "Encourages domestic abuse" is almost certain to be interpreted as "encourages people to abuse their spouses" (ie eggs them on)

It seems words have different meanings depending on your attitude to domestic violence, or Putin or both. Thats the message I am getting.
edit: and you are also avoiding the facts that for SOME husbands a lower penalty will ENCOURAGE them to lash out. Make no mistake.
Just like for SOME husbands a higher penalty will DISCOURAGE them to lash out.

 

[UberTag]

How long until a similar bill passes in the US?

As soon as someone pitches the idea to Donald with the qualifier that "Obama wouldn't have done this".

 

[Milksheikhs]

Just curious, do you think that murder should be punished differently than "simple" assault and battery?

Why shouldn't domestic abuse with grave bodily harm be punished differently than domestic abuse without grave bodily harm?

So, you make the distinction by decreasing the penalty on one instead of making the penalty for the former more strict? How does this make any sense to you?

 

[UpDownLeftRight]

Nobody is defending this legislation (at least, I'm not).

The thread title is misleading and hyperbole, and like I said before, something you would see on Infowars or WND.

I guess it really depends how you view the situation. By reducing the extent of punishment it emboldens those who would do this sort of thing. Obviously they haven't put out any PR saying "go slap your family about", but to remove punishments that were already in place is kind of indirectly spurring on those who may have already felt such urges but are afraid of the legal repercussions. It reinforces their ability to behave that way.

Though yes, the wording could have got it's message across perhaps a little more simply, without really deviating either.

Edit: FWIW I can see why others are also complaining about the title, it's probably a matter of how you read it but "into law" makes it sound as if it's the law to hit your family, whereas something like "with new legislation" reads closer to the actual situation. At first glance I thought it had been completely decriminalized tbh.

 

[jellies_two]

I guess it really depends how you view the situation. By reducing the extent of punishment it emboldens those who would do this sort of thing. Obviously they haven't put out any PR saying "go slap your family about", but to remove punishments that were already in place is kind of indirectly spurring on those who may have already felt such urges but are afraid of the legal repercussions. It reinforces their ability to behave that way.

^^ correct
which is why comparing this headline to InfoWars is some grade A crap.

 

[cpp_is_king]

It seems words have different meanings depending on your attitude to domestic violence, or Putin or both. Thats the message I am getting.

I do hope you're not suggesting I'm a Putinite or a wife beater simply because i can look at this objectively and see that the thread title is misleading/hyperbole designed to elicit an emotional response. :-/

Anyway this isn't a very productive line of discussion so I'll just leave it at this

 

[Earthbound64]

Vladimir Putin has signed into law a controversial new measure

"controversial"

Would hate to see who's on the "for" side of that "controversy."

 

[jellies_two]

I do hope you're not suggesting I'm a Putinite or a wife beater simply because i can look at this objectively and see that the thread title is misleading/hyperbole designed to elicit an emotional response. :-/

Anyway this isn't a very productive line of discussion so I'll just leave it at this

Of course not.
I just find it totally amazing that someone can nitpick a headline because it makes PUTIN of all people look only fractionally worse than he already is.

Especially when you know why he is doing it, and then someone can equate it to infowars is like basically saying the headline is a hallucination.

And flip the action to an increase in penalties, and nobody would say anything about the headline being biased because it "discourages" domestic abuse.

 

[Wag]

This will be a popular Russian Christmas gift...

 

[kaching]

Heaven forbid anyone try to elicit an "emotional response" when it comes to something like domestic abuse.

When the supporters of the bill claim its for the ability to better discipline their children, how can you not hear the dog whistle from a mile away?

 

[victreeb3l]

As soon as someone pitches the idea to Donald with the qualifier that "Obama wouldn't have done this".

Wasnt Bannon a wife beater too? Hmmm this might not even be a joke at this point

 

[Extra Sauce]

Time portals are a real thing that exists on this planet.

 

[CarpeDeezNutz]

Why even push for this?

Maybe it's just anecdotal but I was surprised to find out dudes who get thrown into county jail (USA) are hesitant to admit that they are there for spousal abuse, they make excuses for it.

 

[jellies_two]

Actually I changed my mind a bit

Putin signs bill into law. Will encourage domestic abuse

Is better because the current one just sounds like the title of the bill is "encouraging domestic abuse" lol

 

[kinoki]

You can really tell there are two worlds. One that is prosperous and one that leads to ruin. In one of these worlds you hate women. In this world you beat women, you harass women, you force women to wear demeaning garments, you decide over their reproductive rights, you imagine them serving men, you mutilate their genitalia, you kill them before they're even born, etc. On, that's the world that leads to financial and social ruin. Why can't people just respect and love women?

 

[Beartruck]

Voted 386-1. Methinks the guy who voted no is gonna get a little polonium in his breakfast.

 

[RinsFury]

Putin is pure evil, what the fuck.

 

[psynergylover]

Do we have a "RussiaGAF"?

 

[Essay]

Voted 386-1. Methinks the guy who voted no is gonna get a little polonium in his breakfast.

The Kremlin keeps a few outsider "kooks" in Parliament so that the state-guided media can crack a few jokes. It's all meticulously designed by Bannon's equivalents over there.

 

[Marky Mark]

Russia's going to have a hard time beating America in the race to the bottom.

Even if they do it will only result in a civil charge unless significant injuries or repeat offenses occur.

 

[duckroll]

Sean Connery with some wise words for Russian men on how to avoid criminal charges: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo0d1zTAFKA

 

[GrizzleBoy]

So there are people being abused by their partners at this very moment, and it's legal, and the police will do nothing about it?

Is it really as messed up as that or are there some technicalities I'm missing somewhere?

I'm in denial. It can't be what it says it is......surely?

 

[StayDead]

Human Society is moving backwards and people have voted for it.

We're are literally heading towards another Dark Ages. What a shitty time to be alive for someone who has progressive views. How could ANYONE think that Domestic Violence was good? I don't understand.

 

[danthefan]

The mind boggles.

I had zero desire to ever go to Russia, certainly won't now if I can help it.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

So there are people being abused by their partners at this very moment, and it's legal, and the police will do nothing about it?

Is it really as messed up as that or are there some technicalities I'm missing somewhere?

I'm in denial. It can't be what it says it is......surely?

If someone punches their wife in the stomach several times and she hasn't called the cops on them before, he may get some community service or a small fine but nothing more than that.

 

[hateradio]

I had heard of this bill coming along, but damn. Didn't expect it to pass.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

If someone punches their wife in the stomach several times and she hasn't called the cops on them before, he may get some community service or a small fine but nothing more than that.

So someone is caught, prosecuted, punished with a fine and/or community service, and goes back home after the trial to abuse their partners for telling the police that they were abused.

*sigh*

 

[sazzy]

I guess it really depends how you view the situation. By reducing the extent of punishment it emboldens those who would do this sort of thing. Obviously they haven't put out any PR saying "go slap your family about", but to remove punishments that were already in place is kind of indirectly spurring on those who may have already felt such urges but are afraid of the legal repercussions. It reinforces their ability to behave that way.

Though yes, the wording could have got it's message across perhaps a little more simply, without really deviating either.

Edit: FWIW I can see why others are also complaining about the title, it's probably a matter of how you read it but "into law" makes it sound as if it's the law to hit your family, whereas something like "with new legislation" reads closer to the actual situation. At first glance I thought it had been completely decriminalized tbh.

A better non-hyperbole non-Infowars-esque title would be, 'Russia decriminalises some forms of domestic abuse, which may encourage abusers'.

 

[MWS Natural]

"It has been reported 65% of white women voted in favor of the law."

 

[BrassDragon]

I have difficulty figuring out what the Kremlin gains from this.

Is the criminal justice system backed up with domestic abuse cases, is this a religious/ideological thing or is this some weird campaign promise? The only thing I have to go on is that the bill was proposed by an ultra-conservative... is it a stance against perceived government meddling in family affairs? Can someone explain what they are thinking here?

 

[Aytumious]

"It has been reported 65% of white women voted in favor of the law."

This is some Breitbart level posting.

 

[Easy_D]

That's fucking horrible.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

This just seems cartoonishly evil.

I bet it won't do a thing to hurt Putin's popularity either.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I have difficulty figuring out what the Kremlin gains from this.

Is the criminal justice system backed up with domestic abuse cases, is this a religious/ideological thing or is this some weird campaign promise? The only thing I have to go on is that the bill was proposed by an ultra-conservative... is it a stance against perceived government meddling in family affairs? Can someone explain what they are thinking here?

The Christian Orthodox Church in Russia supports the idea of a man being able to hit his wife so this was likely to throw them a bone.

 

[Not]

Voted 386-1. Methinks the guy who voted no is gonna get a little polonium in his breakfast.

I shouldn't be laughing at this.

Goddammit.

We're next.