NFL Toughens Domestic Violence Policy

[zekko]

As an update to the domestic violence discussion we had here a while back, the latest news is that the NFL has toughened their domestic violence policy. Basically you get a six game suspension for a first offense, and a lifetime ban for the second offense. Here's a key quote from the article:

To be counted as an "offense," a player would not necessarily have to be convicted in a court of law, but each incident will be judged on its own merits.

I take this to mean that if there is no conviction, then your fate will depend on the size of the media sh!t storm that is generated. Really, whether this policy is a good or bad thing will depend on how it is executed (since it's basically going to be a judgement call). My fear is that it will most likely be used simply as another tool against men.

http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-commentary/article/11425377/nfl-implements-domestic-violence-penalties

 

[Maximus Rex]

It's a F*cked Policy

The league shouldn't have bowed to pressure and has no place in trying to regulate people's personal lives. I've always said that Goodell information that we weren't privy to and that factored into his decision. Also, we does the league feel the need to single out domestic violence, what's the difference between hitting a man or a women, both are equally bad and should be treated as such.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Of course this is yet another example in the never ending campaign to further make males second class citizens to females. I think besides being sexist against males it's unconstitutional but yet it continues to go on.

 

[user43770]

Of course this is yet another example in the never ending campaign to further make males second class citizens to females. I think besides being sexist against males it's unconstitutional but yet it continues to go on.

Men are already second class citizens - especially white men. Just look at all of the men that have already lost their livelihood, for doing the unthinkable crime of stating their opinion publicly. It's ridiculous. Women seem to have the right to never be offended.

Just like most liberals, they're all for free speech until it hurts their feelings.

 

[backbreaker]

i don't have a problem with this really. I mean if you beat a woman twice you should not play in the NFL. I don't see what the big deal is.

 

[rascal99v]

:crackup:

The comments in this thread so far are laughable. It will be very interesting to see the rest of them pile up in here.

It seems to me that any law that is established you guys disagree with it calling it "liberal" or "against men", even when conservatives are implementing the laws. What a joke. :yes:

Sounds like you guys want a lawless society where people can beat people up, go pissing in public all over the place, or go streaking anywhere in public.

What the hell is wrong with you people? :crazy:

Liberal means plenty of, conservative means to restrict. So, if things are being restricted these are conservative laws being put in place to restrict people from doing things. Not Liberal. Get an education on what you are talking about first, before you make these ridiculous comments that you don't know anything about.

I'm glad the NFL is putting this policy into place to clean up the thug culture in the NFL. They should have done this a long time ago. Some thug gets to beat up his girlfriend or wife with no repercussions against him, while he makes bail, collects his pay check, and gets to play in the following game, as the media talks about his incident 24/7.

Meanwhile, the average citizen gets to sit his ass in jail, lose his job, and have a record with no income.

This is what you guys are supporting. :crazy:

Athletes are not above the law, and should be held to the same standards as the regular public. Domestic Violence laws are strict against average Joe, they should be strict against the NFL player as well.

The NFL is an Entertainment Business, they don't want a few thugs to reflect bad on the company giving them a bad image. Kids look up to these players, and when they see a player getting off the hook for a domestic violence charge, they assume they will too and won't take it seriously. When they get charged, booked, and jailed for it, not getting off the hook, they change their tune and hold resentment.

Men shouldn't be hitting women in the first place, that shouldn't be defended by anybody. Yes, of course false reports are filed and reported where men get charged for no reason. But if the average dude gets in trouble, so should the NFL player until the mess gets sorted out. People should be held to the same standards regardless of who they are or what title they hold.

The league shouldn't have bowed to pressure and has no place in trying to regulate people's personal lives. I've always said that Goodell information that we weren't privy to and that factored into his decision. Also, we does the league feel the need to single out domestic violence, what's the difference between hitting a man or a women, both are equally bad and should be treated as such.

Why the hell not? Even If you worked at a big corporation or a regular job and got charged with a domestic violence charge, they would look into the matter and try to regulate your life. You would even get fired for that.

The NFL is an Entertainment Business, they don't want a group of thugs reflecting bad on the business giving it a bad name.

If some dude came to work drunk or coked up everyday, you're damn right the boss or the chairman of the board would regulate your personal life telling you to clean up or outright firing you for using drugs or drinking on the job. Isn't that regulating your personal life of what you can do?

NFL players can't use drugs or steriods due to their drug policy, actions will be taken against them if they do. What if a player wants to snort some coke or get bigger? He can't because the NFL is regulating what he can do in his personal life. Same thing as the domestic violence as you claim is regulating a person's life.

When these guy's do the crime, they should be held accountable like anybody else without any special treatment or privileges. :yes:

Of course this is yet another example in the never ending campaign to further make males second class citizens to females. I think besides being sexist against males it's unconstitutional but yet it continues to go on.

Just like most liberals, they're all for free speech until it hurts their feelings.

:crackup:

More nonsense here that you have no fvcking clue what you're talking about.

If Joe the Garbage Man can lose his job with no pay, then NFL player can take the same punishment without being let off the hook.

Unconstitutional? How the hell is it Unconstitutional? You think it's ok for a football player to get off the hook for beating up a woman? Do you think it's Constitutional for men to beat women up with no actions taken against them?
You are a clown. :yes:

This ain't Liberal dude, Goodell has been known as a conservative enforcing conservative policies. Get an education first, before you start spouting off your own false biased opinions about political policies.

This isn't even political, it's about what is right. :yes:

i don't have a problem with this really. I mean if you beat a woman twice you should not play in the NFL. I don't see what the big deal is.

Neither do I, but there is always a few igornant people around who like spout off, complain, against women and liberals when that isn't even the case. This is a perfect example of the anger they hold. They do it with everything and that is a damn shame. :yes:

You're about 60 years behind the times.

No, you just don't know who is making the laws dude. Go do some research and find who is actually writing and implementing the laws. You will find an R after their name. I already did the research, you should do the same.

 

[( . )( . )]

Liberal means plenty of, conservative means to restrict. So, if things are being restricted these are conservative laws being put in place to restrict people from doing things. Not Liberal. Get an education on what you are talking about first, before you make these ridiculous comments that you don't know anything about.

You're about 60 years behind the times. Modern liberalism has become nothing more than the codification of the female mind upon society. That's why old timer liberals are now making the distinction that they are "classically liberal" . They like the rest of us basically cringe at modern liberalism. It has absolutely no semblance to true liberalism.

Btw you seem clueless as to what actually drives each ideology. Have a guess which camp yet more rules and restrictions to successful men actually sits. Think long and hard before you answer.

 

[Stagger Lee]

i don't have a problem with this really. I mean if you beat a woman twice you should not play in the NFL. I don't see what the big deal is.

See you think new domestic violence laws and enforcement are objectively about a man beating a woman. No, in practice there could be any kind of argument and altercation the women started and where the police were called out. And then the police and maybe even the courts later will usually side with the woman.

In other words, a man can commit "domestic violence" merely by actually being a victim of domestic violence or just defending himself.

It's always been illegal and looked down upon to beat up your wife, in the 1950's heck even the 1750's. It was called assault and battery. Some people just don't understand the anti-male intent and enforcement of all these newfangled laws and rules passed since about the 1960's and getting worse everyday.

How about just enforce old laws that worked well enough? How about if you commit assault against ANYONE then you're out of the NFL?

 

[backbreaker]

See you think new domestic violence laws and enforcement are objectively about a man beating a woman. No, in practice there could be any kind of argument and altercation the women started and where the police were called out. And then the police and maybe even the courts later will usually side with the woman.

In other words, a man can commit "domestic violence" merely by actually being a victim of domestic violence or just defending himself.

It's always been illegal and looked down upon to beat up your wife, in the 1950's heck even the 1750's. It was called assault and battery. Some people just don't understand the anti-male intent and enforcement of all these newfangled laws and rules passed since about the 1960's and getting worse everyday.

How about just enforce old laws that worked well enough? How about if you commit assault against ANYONE then you're out of the NFL?

i'm saying that i don't know one person that has a domestic battery charge on their record and i only know of a handful of athletes that do. and i know NONE with more than one. i'm saying that regardless of the circumstances, if you have 2 abuse issues on your plate,k you have bigger issues than professional sports.


i'm not arguing this **** with you lol. my view point is a sane, adult male's point of view. it's not like the nfl has the gustpo out just magically making **** up to get dudes lol, and you act like they want to suspend people.

 

[Stagger Lee]

i'm saying that i don't know one person that has a domestic battery charge on their record and i only know of a handful of athletes that do. and i know NONE with more than one. i'm saying that regardless of the circumstances, if you have 2 abuse issues on your plate,k you have bigger issues than professional sports.


i'm not arguing this **** with you lol. my view point is a sane, adult male's point of view. it's not like the nfl has the gustpo out just magically making **** up to get dudes lol, and you act like they want to suspend people.

I don't know how many people you know, but how the fVck do you know what someone has or doesn't have on their record? It's not like they are going to go around telling everyone.

And you are not acknowledging how these newfangled laws like domestic violence work. The male is always considered guilty, so really to get 2 domestic violence could just mean you stuck around with the same troublemaking woman and were victimized by her twice.

But it's much worse than that. The OP said there doesn't even have to be a conviction. So the ban could be applied just by an allegation from the wife.

You are missing the point. The point is a professional athlete should be kicked out for assaulting anyone not just their spouse, not because of some murky, gray area of domestic dispute just because women should be considered a special higher class of citizen.

It's the difference between actual assault and the murky, gray feminist definition of "violence" where the male is always in the wrong.

 

[( . )( . )]

It's always been illegal and looked down upon to beat up your wife, in the 1950's heck even the 1750's. It was called assault and battery. Some people just don't understand the anti-male intent and enforcement of all these newfangled laws and rules passed since about the 1960's and getting worse everyday.

He understands. In case you've missed the backbreaker formula for the last 5 or so years I'll point it out.

Sacktakers winning formula for AW'ing success

* Find topic that leaves 99.9% of men agreeing something is off.
* Deny it's validity, claim it's bogus or just disagree as a rule.
* Sit back as thread explodes to 9 pages
* Prop up ego as needed along way

It's his modus operandi so to speak. Incidentally Naughty Ninja tried adopting this bullsh!t feminine formula before he was banned but couldn't quite pull it off as well as this phoney ****head.

 

[Ronaldo7]

So it is basically a free pass to spiteful women to provoke men on this. They can spit at you, scratch you, punch you and do anything else while you have to sit there as an athlete and contemplate that you either look like a complete b1tch being disrespected or apply the "equal rights, equal treatment" and be damned for standing up for yourself. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. And the woman is the poor victim and the athlete becomes a "criminal" for it. At least Ray Rice can still hold his honor and know that he stood up for himself and didn't let some broad have her way.

 

[Stagger Lee]

I think you're right he does do that. But I'm not really arguing against him or anyone's counterargument for their sake but in case anyone else buys into their arguments not realizing their trolling or why their counterargument is wrong.

I don't know, with the way a lot of guys think especially the younger ones, who needs feminist?

 

[Bible_Belt]

Yelling is domestic violence in California. So yell at your wife twice, get banned for life from the NFL.

Ray Lewis had a long playing career and is now works in broadcasts, despite being indicted on a murder charge as a player. The wiki article mentions that the white suit he was wearing on the night of the murders was never found.

 

[user43770]

Holy sh1t, rascal, what is it with you and these long-winded posts. Geez, man. And you never fail to claim that someone is less intelligent than you. Your gimmick is getting old.

You know what I mean when I say liberal - I mean "progressive." I'm referring to those that are currently shaping society: Marxists and feminists. If you don't see this then you're oblivious. Do you watch the news? Do you see that the only philosophy that's "right" is one that promotes women, gays and illegal immigrants? Have you not noticed all of the men that have been royally screwed for going against the acceptable narrative?

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/mozilla-ceo-resigns-calif-gay-marriage-ban-campaign/story?id=23181711

This is just one example. I can find more.

What is your motive here? What point are you struggling to prove? You're outnumbered here for a reason.

 

[user43770]

Rascal haha, your name suits you. Prove me wrong, bud. And try to do it in less words, you long-winded creaton.

 

[backbreaker]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/31/report-ray-mcdonald-arrested-for-domestic-violence/

 

[zekko]

49ers DE Ray McDonald has been arrested on domestic violence charges, so it looks like he may be the first recipient of the new policy. I haven't heard any details on what he did or what the situation was.

Judging from this quote about the 49ers coach Jim Harbaugh, it's a possibility SF may not want him back even after a six game suspension:

"He said that we can do anything in the world and we can come and talk to him and he'll forgive us except put our hands on women," Whitner told the Bee. "If you put your hand on a woman, then you're done in his book."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11443518/ray-mcdonald-san-francisco-49ers-arrested-domestic-violence-charges

It's funny to see how differnet the attitudes here are toward domestic violence compared to the mainstream. I bet this is one of the few forums where the majority of its members would have been cheering Ray Rice on. What would Michelle Beadle have to say about that?

 

[zekko]

Fixed that for you.

Well, the Ray Rice situation was one of retaliation. She attacked him first, if I'm not mistaken. So yeah, my impression is that most guys here would cheer Ray Rice on for hitting her back. Personally, I don't think that a huge, powerful male athlete hitting a 110 lb. woman is the equivalent of the reverse. I've said that multiple times before, I don't really care to repeat it all.

But when it comes to the legal system, I'm not a big fan of having to respond with reasonable force. Like if someone breaks into your house, and you shoot them, there's a question of did you respond with reasonable force (depending on where you live). Or if a cop shoots someone, did he use more than reasonable force? I think it's a lot to demand of someone who feels threatened in the heat of the moment to stop and make sure they make exactly the right response. Make the right decision in a high pressure situation, or else you will lose your job, or get arrested, or whatever.

Michelle Beadle sarcastically said, in response to Stephen A. Smith's remarks, "I'm now aware that I can provoke my own beating". So is she saying that Ray's girlfriend should have been able to hit, bite, and spit on him, and there's nothing wrong with that?

 

[rascal99v]

You sound like you've been "educated" far beyond your intelligence. The first sentence in this quote could have been written by an 8 year old.

I can't win can I? When I elaborate, Tight Eyes call it "long winded". When I simplify, you say it's like an "8 year old". LOL

Well Sammy, it appears you know nothing about the political parties in general. I suggest that you do some research, so you can learn the facts to get an education. Keep reading below Sammy, to see what you don't seem to understand.

But it's much worse than that. The OP said there doesn't even have to be a conviction. So the ban could be applied just by an allegation from the wife.

To be counted as an "offense," a player would not necessarily have to be convicted in a court of law, but each incident will be judged on its own merits.

So, all you guys get in an uproar over a technicality to the policy? :crackup:

There is always technicalities to the law or work policies. Your work place has all these technicalities as well, so why shouldn't the NFL?

If your wife or girlfriend accuses you of domestic violence and you get arrested for it, your employers can fire you even if you don't get convicted. So, why shouldn't the NFL players be held to the same standards?

Again, these Domestic Violence Laws are already on the books, they have been law for a while now, this is nothing new, but you guys are acting like it is. When Bob at the corporation has to be under the scrutiny of these laws, the NFL player should have to be as well. Why do you want them to have more privileges over you? That doesn't make any sense to me.

Do you honestly think that Roger Goodell is going to be banning players left and right when they are innocent so his business will lose money when his star players are being banned for life? :crackup:

This is a PR move to clean up the NFL thug culture for players who are actually breaking the law. He is protecting his business, that's all that it is.

If a player is accused, he will investigate the matter, just like your employer would as well. There is nothing to this, but you guys automatically jump to conclusions ranting about liberals and women when these laws are already there.

the media sh!t storm that is generated.

What media sh1t storm? Ray Lewis was praised as a wonderful Godly Religious man, and look at what he was involved with. Anybody else in his shoes would be serving hard time for life.

Michael Vick killed some dogs, he served his time then returned to the NFL to make millions while playing like sh1t and getting injured for the Philadelphia Eagles. If you did that, after you got out, you wouldn't even get a job as a dog catcher. No pun intended.

Why should these guys get special treatment, more privileges, and be above the law when you can't?

So it is basically a free pass to spiteful women to provoke men on this. They can spit at you, scratch you, punch you and do anything else while you have to sit there as an athlete and contemplate that you either look like a complete b1tch.

Has nothing to do with "spiteful women" dude, it's about cleaning up the thug culture in the NFL. Do you think NFL Players give a sh1t about the spiteful women that can accuse you of doing things? Well, then why do you care about them? Those players don't even know you exist. And here you have Ronaldo as your screen name. Is he on a message board worrying about you being disrespected? :crackup:

Yelling is domestic violence in California. So yell at your wife twice, get banned for life from the NFL.

So, is every husband in California sitting in jail for yelling at his wife? :crackup:

Pure ignorance. Yeah, Goodell is going to ban guys like Tom Brady, Sherman, Manning, Rogers for life over a petty argument with the girlfriend or wife. Give me a fvcking break. :crackup:

Ray Lewis had a long playing career and is now works in broadcasts, despite being indicted on a murder charge as a player. The wiki article mentions that the white suit he was wearing on the night of the murders was never found.

Right, and where you would be at if you were in his shoes? Sitting in a cell for life, that's where you would be at. And here you want to give special treatment to NFL Players. What the fvck dude.

Rascal haha, your name suits you.

And your name suits you just fine, because you read my post with tightly closed eyes, not comprehending what I was saying. You read this thread and my post with tightly closed eyes being blinded by your anger. That isn't good.

Prove me wrong, bud.

You proved that I was right about you, with your anger towards Liberals.

Holy sh1t, rascal, what is it with you and these long-winded posts.

Long Winded? A few short paragraphs plus a couple of responses is long winded? What do you usually read? The Cat In The Hat? :crackup:

You know what I mean when I say liberal - I mean "progressive." I'm referring to those that are currently shaping society: Marxists and feminists. If you don't see this then you're oblivious. Do you watch the news? Do you see that the only philosophy that's "right" is one that promotes women, gays and illegal immigrants?

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/mozil...ry?id=23181711

This is just one example. I can find more.

:crackup:

This has nothing to do with the Domestic Violence Policy in the NFL. You have an anger towards and Liberals and women so you blame them for anything you can when it isn't even the case. I already pointed that out to you above. You did it again with this post proving me right.

You proved me right with Liberalism and Conservatism.

Liberals are trying to give the gays plenty of "rights". Liberals want women to have abortions.

Conservatives are trying to restrict the bogus gay marriage laws and abortions.

How am I wrong? I am not. You, t1ts, and Sammy are. Get an education :yes:

You don't know a damn thing that you're talking about here. :yes:

What does immigration or gay marriage crap have to do with the NFL? Nothing. Why are you bringing it up?

Better yet, what have Liberals or Conservatives done about immigration? Not a damn thing. They sure love to talk about it, but in the end nothing gets done because they don't want anything done about it. They are beholden to their special interest buddies, the farmers, the corporations that use them for cheap labor. You think a Republican Congressman from the midwest is going to stop illegals when the farmers who donate big bucks to his campaign employs them?

What did Reagan, Bush Sr. and Jr. along with a Republican controlled congresses for 30+ years do to help curb illegal immigration? Not a damn thing. What Did Democrats do? Not a damn thing either, but they want to give them rights, which is a joke.

Have you not noticed all of the men that have been royally screwed for going against the acceptable narrative?

Then why are so worried about an NFL Player? Shouldn't he get royally screwed just like you? Why do you want to give him special treatment and privileges that you don't get? That's what I'm saying, in which you can't comprehend because of your tightly closed eyes.

Do you think NFL Players are typing on a message board worrying about your well being? They don't even know you exist and you're rooting for them to be above the law over you. How fvcking stupid is that?

If you get accused or arrested over domestic violence, do you think an NFL Player is going whine and cry on a message board against Liberals and women?

Fvck no, he is going to play in a game, go to a club later that night, bring a couple of hot chicks back to his place, and fvck the sh1t out of them in his hot tub, while you're sitting your ass in a jail cell with the other inmates.

Then after you have a criminal record for domestic violence against your name, you won't even get a decent job. But the NFL Player can resume his job, his incident is all forgotten after everybody says he paid his debt to society.

Well, what about the debt you paid? Why should the NFL Player have special privileges that you can't? You are going against your own interest here, trying to give other men more power than you have, just because you have anger against Liberals and women. That is fvcking stupid.

My point is this, every man should be held accountable to the law regardless of what job he has. But it seems that you guys don't see it that way.

You're outnumbered here for a reason.

So what? Being outnumbered doesn't mean a damn thing when everybody else is being ignorant on the matter. I'm still going to be right regardless. :yes: