That is a wild statistic!
It’s a demonstrably inaccurate number. The study was vague enough that yelling at a partner was included, and much more damning they included the officer even if they were the victim in the situation. It literally paints the victims as domestic abusers!
“40% of law enforcement self identify as domestic abusers” is demonstrably false and is not something that should be repeated.
At no point didn’t anyone ever say that it was “criminally worse” it has the same sentence
The article very explicitly says exactly that. Murdering someone due to their sex is very explicitly treated differently now, depending on the sex of the victim.
If someone murdered a male due to their sex, would you treat that any differently than someone murdering a female due to their sex?
Then we wrap back around to the start.
Correct. Murdering a male should be just as illegal as murdering a female.
How is it sexist?
Murdering someone due to their sex is not illegal under this law, if the victim is a male. Murdering a male due to their sex should be no less illegal.
If someone murdered a male due to their sex, would you treat that any differently than someone murdering a female due to their sex?
If perpetrators happen to be of one sex more often, then it means the rates of being charged with the relevant crime will be higher for that sex.
A crime must be treated equally, regardless of sex. The law treating one differently based on their sex is itself sexist. As I stated before, this should have been something that applies to all: ‘murdering someone due to their sex is now a hate crime’.
Exactly. This should have been something that applies to all: ‘murdering someone due to their sex is now a hate crime’.
Having the law give more consideration to one sex over another, particularly with something like murder, is quite sexist.
I’m glad we are backing away from that retarded ‘peace plan’.
I’m not an expert on this, but I know it’s common to use things like tranquilizers intended for farm animals.
Is there a source on this?
China barely pays their workers. Hell, they don’t even let you use services in the city you live in unless you were born there. Lots of people travel to the cities seasonally since they are prevented from doing anything reasonable where they work.
It’s not surprising they don’t want to spend, China has engineered an economy where huge portions of the domestic population have no spending power or even a stable place to live.
And that comment is incorrect. Unless we are going with Comcast’s ‘up to 1000mbps’ numbers.
No, they don’t range to 40%, and I detailed why. Don’t repeat 40%, it’s demonstrably false.