Read on Twitter
I& #39;m going to say this one time, and one time only:
Voting YES on SQ 805 is a vote to protect survivors of domestic violence. (THREAD)
Voting YES on SQ 805 is a vote to protect survivors of domestic violence. (THREAD)
If your problem with SQ 805 is that you think the system does not punish enough or take seriously enough domestic abuse and violence, your problem is not with SQ 805, it is with the DAs who are opposing SQ 805.
The use of incarceration as a "solution" or "preventative" for domestic violence is a long standing practice, and is also one that decades of research have shown to be ineffective. It is not a deterrent for violence and often only amplifies sexist & abusive behaviors.
Longer sentences do not make us safer. They extend the shelf life of a temporary “solution” (calling it a solution is generous). I& #39;ve been through this with a loved one. What their abuser needed was mental health and substance abuse intervention, not incarceration.
The same laws that folks want to rely on to incarcerate perpetrators of violence are currently incarcerating THOUSANDS of women every year, who are themselves victims and survivors of domestic violence. https://twitter.com/sheabutterfemme/status/1318618567768743939?s=20">https://twitter.com/sheabutte...
Standing with and supporting victims is about doing it all the time, even when it& #39;s not convenient - including when they are incarcerated for substance use, for selling drugs, and for fighting back against their abusers. That’s why I’m an enthusiastic YES on SQ 805.
When I was a crisis advocate, I saw 1st hand how the system treats survivors. When I was assaulted, I didn’t report because I knew the system wouldn’t believe me. If you think the system doesn’t take DV seriously enough, your problem is with the system (aka the DAs), not SQ 805.
The violent vs nonviolent distinctions our laws make have nothing to do with how much ~violence is done. If it did, the state would have to examine itself for the violence it does to folks daily. Instead, it’s about a range of punishment, a set of options for DAs to choose from.
SQ 805 lets prosecutors still have allllllll that discretion - what charge they put on someone, how many years they think that person should get based on what’s in the law (5 to 10, 10 to 20, whatever).
What SQ 805 will prevent DAs from doing is deciding that a single mother of two who has sold drugs in the past should go to jail for 20 years for accidentally shoplifting some photos worth $2.99 because she’s a ~criminal in the eyes of the system.
The DAs who oppose SQ 805 are also the same ones who are quick to criminalize Black women (yes, more than just Black women but specifically Black women) for failing to be the “perfect victim.”
The domestic violence organizations that oppose SQ 805 rely on their relationships with the DAs to have the cases of their clients taken seriously in the courtroom. The DAs hold *extraordinary* power over the amount of ~justice victims are able to access.
And again, it is my personal opinion as a survivor of violence that the criminal ~justice system will never be the mechanism that does justice to survivors like me (please don’t get me started on how mistreated queer & trans people are by DAs).
All this to say - and clearly I have a LOT to say - is that the problem is with the SYSTEM failing to do justice to survivors of violence. It is a failure to treat domestic violence as a serious issue requiring front-end disruption rather than a band-aid solution after the fact.
A vote for SQ 805 is a vote to end excessive and cruel repeat punishment of Oklahomans - including and especially survivors of violence - who are incarcerated for decades for crimes of survival.
