why is nothing being done to stop mandatory arrest laws?

Question

In most states, an ALLEGATION of "violence" (which has a very broad definition now) is enough to require the police to make an arrest. Evidence or not. If I move in with a woman, I am empowering her to have me sent to jail at the drop of a hat, based on hearsay. Isn't there something in the constitution about due process? Mutual arrest is also frowned upon by feminists, who have enacted policies for police to arrest only the primary aggressor, defined emphatically NOT as the instigator, or the less injured, but as the more "physically threatening" (read-male).

Okay, okay, enough of my rant. My actual question is (for all you law people out there): has this been challanged on constitutional grounds (due process clause of the 5th and 14th amendments) and if not, why not? What do you think the result would be?

Answer 1

No this has not been challenged to a federal level that I am aware of. You have a valid argument about due process. Often these arrests are made without a complaining witness and not in the presence of an officer. I would have to believe that void of these two conditions of the 4th admendment that these types of arrest are unconstitutional.

Answer 2

I think the law would be that , they have the right to arrest any one for any thing, if charges have been filed against the person arrested. I think that domestic violence is why this law was passed, there is so much of this going on. I think also that when they go out on a domestic disturbance, some one is going to jail, and should. Men and women both are equally responsible for this type violence, some how some way. As you stated, about a female could put you in jail at the drop of a hat, based on hearsay. It is not hearsay, it is a direct complaint, to a law enforcement officer, called the victim statement or witness statement. hearsay, is when you say that some one else told you something and that person is not there to back up what you said they said. Means some one else said it, and your are telling some one else what that other person said, that is called hearsay.

Answer 3

I'm not sure about this, but I think a person can be arrested and detained for suspicion of a crime. Due process is that they must be proven guilty before they are sentenced and condemned. Unfortunately, just being detained can be a horrible experience and few "rights" are allowed. "You have the right to remain silent, etc." While being detained you can be strip searched, lied to, yelled at, badgered into a confession and all kinds of other unpleasant things. There's the good cop, bad cop ordeal. Psychological manipulation and other things. About the only thing they can't do is torture, deprive a person of medical attention and stuff like that. I've heard of women who are just pissed off at their boyfriend or husband and call the police and lie about being attacked. The police haul the guy off to jail and he sits there waiting until he can get out on bail. He has to go to court and then it's his word against hers. If he has enough money to pay for a lawyer then he bears the expense. If he or his lawyer can prove that the woman is lying then she can be charged with perjury. "And justice for all" sometimes.

Answer 4

Excellent point, to which I don't know. Women want equal treatment, BUT only when they don't have to play on an equal playing field, eg, women tennis players want equal pay as their men counterparts but only play 3 sets rather than 5 like the men! Don't the men deserve more on account of more commercials being sold? I think so.
I would like to ask you something from a totally different end of the spectrum: Why do we allow Muslims to become American citizens even though their religion does not allow them to see women as their "equal"?
When they are getting sworn in, don't they say they are going to follow the "Constitution" : where everyone is considered equal.
Are we not just playing along ie, just as in the question you purposed? .
P.S. I can't ask this in the question in the "Answers" forum because "Yahoo" told me it offends some people, when is the U.S. of ******* A going to start doing what is right and quit whimpering out to the liberals?

Answer 5

you brought up a scary but interesting question. If this hasn't been challengend, it really should. It appears to me, that one should be extremely careful of the nature of the person or people we choose to befriend, or hope for a unbiased police officer to investigate any allegations that might be bought up against a person. And by the way this is totally irrevelant to your question, but I'm amazed that BarB could actually navagate herself through a computer, because her answer was so off the WHOLE question.

Answer 6

I was in a bad relationship for several years. When we argued my girlfriend would scratch, hit, bite, kick and scream at me. I know I should have ended the relationship but I loved her and I wanted to help her deal with her emotional problems (she was abused as a child). I put up with her abuse for more than two years when it finally became too much for me. I slapped her once across the face so hard she went flying to the floor. I thought I had ripped her head off. After that she never hit me again but we didn't stay together much after that either.
Violence has no part in a good relationship. If you have it in yours end it. Forget about your offended legal sensibilities.

Answer 7

I believe there have been challenges of those laws and they have stood - for one reason or another.
Don't move in with a woman unless you intend to be her husband. Even then, any violence falls on your head.
Be nice, don't fight. If she has to argue, leave as peacefully as you can. Don't worry about belongings, just leave.

Answer 8

So---what? You and your sweetie get into a physical altercation and you are upset because the police arrest you? And, you are correct - the primary agressor is arrested - I fail to see why you disagree with this.

Bottom line here, bucko! Keep your hands to yourself. No one has the right to lay hands on another person. PERIOD.