~ archived since 2018 ~

Hypothetical scenario

JeremiahMRA · 2012-01-07T20:43:20+00:00

Frank and Jill are married and living together. They have no children (yet). Jill gets very drunk one night and decides she wants to go out and party. Frank...

JeremiahMRA

January 7, 2012

0 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Hypothetical scenario
Author	JeremiahMRA
Upvotes	0
Comments	31
Date	January 7, 2012 8:43 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/o730a/hypothetical_scenario/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/hypothetical-scenario.1029521 https://theredarchive.com/post/1029521

Comments

[–]mikesteane 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Baadasssss 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]drinkthebleach 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (24 children) | Copy Link

Get the keys off her & ensure she can't get any spares.

What if Jill tries to stop Frank from getting the keys from her? Frank will have to use physical force. Then Jill may scream, the neighbors may hear the scuffle and the scream, the cops will be called, and Frank will be arrested. Now Frank has legal fees, possible jail time, and his neighbors think he's an abuser.

If she doesn't cooperate, call the cops, tell them what she intends to do.

So Jill leaves, gets in the car, and drives away drunk. If Frank try to stop her, maybe she hits him, Frank tries to defend himself, and Jill hurts herself. The neighbors hear the commotion, they call the cops, and Frank is arrested.

Or maybe Frank realizes that no matter what he does, because of the anti-male "justice" system he will be arrested if he makes any attempt to restrain her. He calls the cops as she drives away, hoping she doesn't kill herself or someone else, hoping the cops don't injure or kill her, and costing them $15,000 for the coming legal defense for DUI, if they even have the money.

Do you disagree with this assessment?

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (23 children) | Copy Link

I'll go ahead and make my point now.

Frank in this situation is quite screwed. So is Jill. So is the public. If Jill decides she wants to go drunk driving, there's nothing he can do about it but call the police, lose $15000 that could have been spent on his family and his future kids, if he even can afford it, perhaps lose his wife in a crash or from the police using force against her, and she may even kill other people on the road.

Now we can compare this to how things would work in a more sensible society. If Jill insisted on taking the keys, Frank would take them away by force, and if Jill resisted he would continue to restrain her and use any physical means necessary to stop her behavior. The cops would not be involved at all, no one would be put in danger from a drunk driver, the couple would not lose $15,000 for legal fees, and we wouldn't even have to pay as many taxes because fewer cops would be necessary as families settled most of their disputes themselves. Jill would realize her behavior was unacceptable and Frank would have the power to ensure she doesn't do it again. It's called traditionalism, and it makes a lot more sense than what we have now.

And yes, that means sometimes a man is going to have to slap or restrain his wife to protect himself, her, and the public.

[–]Clever_Ploy 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Calling the cops is the only way to do it. If you were a cop, and on duty, then sure, you could take the keys from her and toss her in the drunk tank. Even then, you'd need proof of intent, or more likely, to catch her driving drunk.

Drunk or not, however, no individual has the given right to restrain or detain another individual, except in self-defense. It's not our right and thus not our responsibility to protect morons from themselves. If it were, then we'd be seeing friends and family members of bank robbers and murderers being held accountable for not being aware of and personally halting the criminal activities of the people they know. Instead, your only real civic duty is to inform the authorities.

So, "smart" Frank is on the phone with the cops before Jill can pull out of the driveway. The imminent threat of being caught by authority might be the only thing that can stop her. With any luck, she'll give up and come inside, or at least ditch the keys and find another way to her party.

And if she leaves in the car anyway, so be it, let her be busted by the police. Being drunk is not an excuse to abandon responsibility for the choices we make.

OH, and also, Frank could just drive her to the damn party himself, or remind her of the existence of taxicabs, instead of being such a buzzkill all the time. Only my opinion though, obviously he's not obliged to do that if he doesn't want to.

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

You 1) have no idea how the real world works, and 2) apparently love the police state, where cops are citizens and your average person is not.

As I've already stated, the best outcome is achieved when Frank restrains Jill, and therefore the silly idea that only police officers are citizens and all other men are powerless peons, which is what you are arguing, is very stupid.

When you are married, your significant other becomes your responsibility. It is as if you are one. It is completely ridiculous to legally prevent a person in such an arrangement from stopping their partner from drunk driving themselves. As I've already stated, it will cost them $15,000 dollars for legal fees, plus their partner will potentially die or kill other people. Clearly the husband must stop his wife from misbehaving, and clearly it must be legal for him to do so.

Some people would rather just give up their freedoms and let the government and the police control their lives and render them powerless. Those people are not only moronic but enemies of freedom.

Drunk or not, however, no individual has the given right to restrain or detain another individual, except in self-defense.

An indefensible platitude. Please, no more of these. Clearly it is right and proper to restrain someone who will hurt others even if they don't directly hurt you.

[–]Clever_Ploy 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Clever_Ploy 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ridiculous. Basically what you're doing here is trying to paint up a situation where it would be okay for a husband to subdue and restrain his wife at his own discretion. That or, you could be advocating that it would be alright for any given individual to subdue and restrain any other individual, so long as their intentions are good. (Like say, the belief that they're preventing a crime.) If you can't see how this blatantly stomps on the concept of equal rights under law, then I don't think we have much to say to one another. If you're willing to state that you don't believe all people should have equal rights under the law, then I really wish you'd remove the MRA from your name, as you do not represent them.

You're honestly sitting here trying to convince people that individual liberty would give you the right to violate another person's individual liberty. That's what you believe.

Also, you know what, reading back a little bit, I can clearly see that you've painted this hypothetical situation to be incredibly specific. Frank in fact only has two options, since you've discounted the possibility of him giving his wife a ride, calling her a cab, or retrieving the keys without her attempting to frame him for assault. I wouldn't argue that such a situation definitely could happen, but if it did, Frank's only remaining options are, in fact, to call the police or tackle his wife for the keys. And you want to give me shit about the real world. Well here's the deal, given the back story you've forced upon this discussion, Jill is uncompromisingly determined to become a criminal, and nothing shy of assault will stop her. Oh. Except the police. They could most certainly help. But then, the government would be standing on your neck, wouldn't it?

So, if every single other possible option is ruled out, except calling for help or becoming violent. You'll choose violence. So be it.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]C0CKPUNCHER 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link