I wish the number 4109 was right, but it is unbelievably low. So, why chose a random number like 4109? Becuase 4,109 is the number of people on average who will find themselves victims of domestic abuse.
http://www.ncadv.org/...
But never the less, despite the love of "pro-life" causes, that apparently only implies to birth, because if you are a man, woman or child facing domestic abuse you may be forced to decide whether or not being homeless is a fair tradeoff for being alive.
In a stunning article at Slate yesterday, Dahlian Lithwick published the unbelievable story of forced eviction because a neighbor decided to alert the police of domestic violence.
Lakisha Briggs was a 34-year-old single mom living in the suburbs of Philadelphia in subsidized rental housing. Her boyfriend had attacked her repeatedly in her home, and the police had been called on several occasions to intervene—10 times in the first five months of 2012 alone, according to her legal filings. But because an ordinance in Norristown, Pa., says that a tenant who makes three 911 calls within four months can be evicted and that tenant’s landlord could have his or her rental license suspended, Briggs did not call the police on the night of June 23, 2012, when the same boyfriend hit her in the head with a glass ashtray then stabbed her in the neck with a piece of broken glass. The police had already warned her that she was on her third strike after their last visit. So she didn’t make the call and—just before she passed out—Briggs begged a neighbor not to do so on her behalf.
The neighbor did call the cops, and Briggs was airlifted to a nearby trauma center. The boyfriend went to prison for the assault. Then police served Briggs’ landlord with a notice that said if she and her 3-year-old weren’t evicted within 10 days, he’d lose his rental license. Meet the new face of disorderly conduct.
Briggs knew the consequences, alert the police that she was being violently abused and she would find herself homeless. In this case, the police of Norristown, PA decided that these calls constituted a "nuisance" (despite her needing extended hospital care after being airlifted to a trauma center) and as such, the only place for this kind of problem: throw them in the streets.
This isn't a new approach, but it lacks any real reasoning. The argument goes something like that: If you don't rent to "THOSE PEOPLE" then they won't be in our neighborhood. The problem is, domestic violence occurs everywhere in many different socioeconomic classes and in all races, creeds and colors. More importantly: driving people out into the streets solves almost no problems and creates numerous longterm problems. Homeless children are at a significant disadvantage, and wishing sickness and illness on those less fortunate seems to run counter to our stated social goals.
That said, it isn't as though other states do anything like this, it has to be a one-off, right?
I mean, it's been two years since the State of Kansas stopped dishing out money for the capital city to prosecute these crimes:
http://www.nbcnews.com/...
TOPEKA, Kan. — Suspects in Topeka domestic violence cases are leaving jail without being charged, and advocates for abuse survivors say victims are growing more scared amid a public squabble over who should pay to prosecute the crimes.
The mayor and council of Kansas' capital city made a dramatic move Tuesday night in their ongoing clash with county officials by voting to repeal the city's ordinance against domestic violence.
The intent is to force the county's district attorney to back away from a budget-driven decision to stop prosecuting misdemeanors committed inside the city limits — including domestic assault and battery not involving a weapon.
After all, it's "just a misdemeanor"
So, maybe it's just Kansas and Pennsylvania, and just some cities in those. But no matter where it is, we continue to move on a path that makes us as a society more callous and less caring for those in need. We justify bad things happening to them because of their status, who they are or their sex and gender and we say "it's not us", as though driving people from their homes for being the victims of violence is a solution.
The ACLU is going to try and step in and make a case of this.
http://norristown.patch.com/...
The ACLU charges that the ordinance is unconstitutional and "punishes innocent tenants and their landlords for requesting police assistance."
The case was filed on behalf of a Norristown resident, Lakisha Briggs, a victim of domestic violence who the ACLU says faced eviction for calling police when she was being attacked by her abusive ex-boyfriend.
"I was shocked to find out that reaching out to the police for protection could instead lead to eviction for me and my family," Briggs said, according to a press release issued by the ACLU. "Nobody should have to fear losing their home when they call for help."
It boggles me that somewhere, in someone's mind, that last sentence does not make sense.
We decide we can't prosecute because it's a nuisance to do so and in some ways we reason that these horrible acts can be in some way justified.
Left homeless, poor, and undefended. It's a great way to encourage future generations to think about the great country they live in.
I wonder how long before we just give up and start seeing this in the streets and stare away to look at our ipads.