Are Restraining Orders Effective?

[MaggieD]

I'm reading a book called The Gift of Fear. The author's belief is that restraining orders are for the convenience of law enforcement rather than for the protection of the person who takes one out. His advice is (I'm simplifying it) that one NOT take out a restraining order unless one sincerely believes the person will adhere to it...best taken out in the beginning of a relationship rather than a long-standing one (as an example). His philosophy is that, as you begin to take away options from a stalker, he was accelerate his behavior above and beyond what he otherwise would have done. And once that acceleration begins, there's no going back. Another of his philosophies is "Beware the man who has nothing to lose."

What are your thoughts about a restraining order? Effective? Most often the answer? Or rarely the answer?

 

[CalGun]

Yes.

With it the convenience of LE is that they can arrest the violator, and with out it they can ask him or her to leave but can't force them too without another cause like tress pass.

And PS it doesn't mean the offender won't violate it, but just improves LE's options. In my little opinion if you need one you need a 12 gauge too.

 

[joko104]

Usually more harm than good, other than as documentation and allowing police to summarily then act. They probably do work in most hot divorces though - and those pretty routinely handed out merely for the asking.

Paper doesn't stop either fists or bullets.

 

[ric27]

I'm reading a book called The Gift of Fear. The author's belief is that restraining orders are for the convenience of law enforcement rather than for the protection of the person who takes one out. His advice is (I'm simplifying it) that one NOT take out a restraining order unless one sincerely believes the person will adhere to it...best taken out in the beginning of a relationship rather than a long-standing one (as an example). His philosophy is that, as you begin to take away options from a stalker, he was accelerate his behavior above and beyond what he otherwise would have done. And once that acceleration begins, there's no going back. Another of his philosophies is "Beware the man who has nothing to lose."

What are your thoughts about a restraining order? Effective? Most often the answer? Or rarely the answer?

Domestic incidents are easily the most volatile situations to deal with. Cops get killed responding to domestic disputes with sickening regularity. 2 buddies of mine have died.... precisely responding to domestic altercations

On restraining orders it's often a trigger for increased violence by the suspect in an attempt to regain control or prevent loss of the same.

 

[rathi]

Nonsense. A restraining order won't physically protect you, but it will legally. For stalking behavior, simply snapping a picture with a camera phone provides evidence upon which the police can act. In extreme circumstances, a self defense claim is greatly enhanced if you have a restraining order against the person bleeding on the sidewalk outside your apartment.

 

[johnny_rebson]

Restraining orders help the homicide detectives when they are trying to determine who the number one suspect is.

 

[Goshin]

I'm reading a book called The Gift of Fear. The author's belief is that restraining orders are for the convenience of law enforcement rather than for the protection of the person who takes one out. His advice is (I'm simplifying it) that one NOT take out a restraining order unless one sincerely believes the person will adhere to it...best taken out in the beginning of a relationship rather than a long-standing one (as an example). His philosophy is that, as you begin to take away options from a stalker, he was accelerate his behavior above and beyond what he otherwise would have done. And once that acceleration begins, there's no going back. Another of his philosophies is "Beware the man who has nothing to lose."

What are your thoughts about a restraining order? Effective? Most often the answer? Or rarely the answer?

Couple things...

In my state, a restraining order and a PROTECTION ORDER are two different things. The big thing is, the latter has teeth in it... violate it one time, go to jail.

Now, realio trulio... a piece of paper will not protect you from someone intent on harm. The only thing it does is possibly act as a deterrent if the person fears going to jail, and give you an opportunity to put them there if they break it.

However if they show up in attack mode, that piece of paper is worth about as much as wet toilet tissue as far as defending yourself. When seconds count, the police are only minutes away... and since this usually (not always) applies to ladies concerned about attacks by males, they'd best arm their self if they fear a real and serious attack. The most effective weapon for a smaller, weaker person to defend against a determined assault by a larger and stronger person is.... wait for it...

.. a firearm.


If you end up having to shoot, the restraining order/protection order is documention that you feared for your safety, putting you in much better odor for any legal questions that arise from the shooting.

 

[MaggieD]

Restraining orders help the homicide detectives when they are trying to determine who the number one suspect is.

That right there is what my (now) informed opinion is. I think we can Google and find scores of women who've been killed by the very guy they had the restraining order on. The bigger question is, "Would the woman have been killed if no restraining order had been put in place?" While a restraining order is heartily recommended by LEOs, I'm not at all sure it's in the best interests of the person in danger. This book is a good read. I recommend it. (It's Ms Pinkie's original recommendation. She was right.)

The author's thinking isn't new, either. I remember taking a training course when I worked a suicide hotline. For domestic abuse, we were absolutely cautioned against advising any woman to escalate a situation. We were taught that it is exactly at that moment of escalation that a woman is in the very most danger.

I'm making this sound very simplistic. And hopefully everyone reading this thread understands that domestic violence, especially, is not only very tricky, but exceedingly dangerous as well. There is no one size fits all; but it's interesting to contemplate...

 

[MaggieD]

If you end up having to shoot, the restraining order/protection order is documention that you feared for your safety, putting you in much better odor for any legal questions that arise from the shooting.

Realio/Trulio!! I will use that. Ha! What you've said here is probably the crux of its value. I think if I were to be in a position to advise someone who was intent on getting a restraining order, I would advise her to wait until she'd purchased a gun and had firearms training.

 

[Goshin]

Domestic incidents are easily the most volatile situations to deal with. Cops get killed responding to domestic disputes with sickening regularity. 2 buddies of mine have died.... precisely responding to domestic altercations

On restraining orders it's often a trigger for increased violence by the suspect in an attempt to regain control or prevent loss of the same.

That's true. If you really feel that your safety is in question and that you NEED a restraining order, you would do well to prepare youself to back it up with effective self-defense.

I am reminded of Game of Thrones, again...

the critical moment is between 3:00 and 3:15 as Circe tears up Stark's document naming him Protector of the Realm, saying "is this meant to be your shield, Lord Stark? A piece of paper?"

 

[SMTA]

Some very sage advice here. Restraining orders are worthless.

A female friend of ours had one against her ex - he killed her in the parking lot after she finished work.

God made men and women - Sam Colt made them all equal!

 

[MaggieD]

Some very sage advice here. REstraining orders are worthless.

A female friend of ours had one against her ex - he killed her in the parking lot after she finished work.

God made men and women - Sam Colt made them all equal!

Same exact thing happened about five miles from where I live. She had just gotten a restraining order. The guy showed up in the parking lot where she worked and shot her to death. Bastard didn't kill himself either.

 

[johnny_rebson]

If you know a woman who is in fear for her safety because of a violent husband/boyfriend, she can contact the local United Way and they can inform her of safe houses in the area.

 

[Goshin]

Realio/Trulio!! I will use that. Ha! What you've said here is probably the crux of its value. I think if I were to be in a position to advise someone who was intent on getting a restraining order, I would advise her to wait until she'd purchased a gun and had firearms training.

Absolutely. Any woman who is going to take a restraining order out against a man that she fears, needs to be prepared THEN to defend herself against a potentially lethal attack by him.


To be honest, the notion of being prepared to defend yourself is so fundmental to me that I sometimes forget it needs to be said, at least to some folks. There was a moment in this thread where I stopped and blinked a couple times as I remembered "oh, yes that's right... some people may actually NOT be ready to defend themselves against a lethal attack at any given moment... how odd and lacking in foresight of them... better say something about it..."

I tend to think of restraining orders as "getting documentation legally filed as to why I'm probably going to have to shoot this person."

But yes, I suppose there are some poor ladies who actually think that piece of paper is some protection all by itself. We really ought to educate people on the realities of life a bit more thoroughly.

 

[mac]

I'm reading a book called The Gift of Fear. The author's belief is that restraining orders are for the convenience of law enforcement rather than for the protection of the person who takes one out. His advice is (I'm simplifying it) that one NOT take out a restraining order unless one sincerely believes the person will adhere to it...best taken out in the beginning of a relationship rather than a long-standing one (as an example). His philosophy is that, as you begin to take away options from a stalker, he was accelerate his behavior above and beyond what he otherwise would have done. And once that acceleration begins, there's no going back. Another of his philosophies is "Beware the man who has nothing to lose."

What are your thoughts about a restraining order? Effective? Most often the answer? Or rarely the answer?

In my experience, it's a combination of both. A protective order creates an easily monitor-able legal situation that can be easily prosecuted if violated. The charge of abuse can be difficult to prosecute and the protection order offers another avenue. Not taking out the order is foolish, as intimidation can be accomplished without violence and a protection order requires distance. So, with a protection order in place, a potential victim can get the offender locked up with little more than a cell phone pic and a phone call.

Anyone in fear of physical/psychological abuse should exercise every legal means available.

 

[wolfman24]

Domestic incidents are easily the most volatile situations to deal with. Cops get killed responding to domestic disputes with sickening regularity. 2 buddies of mine have died.... precisely responding to domestic altercations

On restraining orders it's often a trigger for increased violence by the suspect in an attempt to regain control or prevent loss of the same.

I agree with this

 

[SMTA]

Same exact thing happened about five miles from where I live. She had just gotten a restraining order. The guy showed up in the parking lot where she worked and shot her to death. Bastard didn't kill himself either.

Yea, neither did this POS. Jail is too good for him.

Slimy weasels don't have enough backbone to just off themselves.

 

[Tonawanda]

This may sound a little corny, but there is actually a real war against women by sometimes someone close to them, or by complete strangers. Strangers pose a great danger to women, and I only mention this in this thread because it should be on the mind of all women all the time.

Some very good ideas already expressed in this thread, but because there are so many different situations and variables, it’s next to impossible to make a recommendation when to get that order of protection. The victims of domestic violence need to be aware that there is help for them beyond calling the police.

I would suggest reaching out to an agency that specializes in domestic and family violence. There are usually county and state agencies that have 24 hr hotlines with counselors/advocates that are trained, experienced and have resources available to them. It is more likely that a woman will be able to communicate with another woman outside of her immediate family and law enforcement. Hopefully, a counselor will be able to guide and give them alternatives in their situation.

This is a important discussion women should be encouraged to have.

 

[Goshin]

This may sound a little corny, but there is actually a real war against women by sometimes someone close to them, or by complete strangers. Strangers pose a great danger to women, and I only mention this in this thread because it should be on the mind of all women all the time.

Some very good ideas already expressed in this thread, but because there are so many different situations and variables, it’s next to impossible to make a recommendation when to get that order of protection. The victims of domestic violence need to be aware that there is help for them beyond calling the police.

I would suggest reaching out to an agency that specializes in domestic and family violence. There are usually county and state agencies that have 24 hr hotlines with counselors/advocates that are trained, experienced and have resources available to them. It is more likely that a woman will be able to communicate with another woman outside of her immediate family and law enforcement. Hopefully, a counselor will be able to guide and give them alternatives in their situation.

This is a important discussion women should be encouraged to have.

Yes. I've dealt with women who were so psychologically battered that they were almost incapable of thinking rationally about their abuser or their situation. It is very sad, and it can be fatal. They desperately need help and in many cases they need a lot of counceling before they can even THINK CLEARLY about the situation they are in and what they should do.

Many of them have been so emotionally traumatized that they simply can't even think about the idea of having to defend themselves against him... the thought of him coming at them just paralyzes them with fear, or else they unrealistically assert "oh he'd never KILL me.." despite having been beated to a pulp.


They need to be relocated to a safehomes shelter if at all possible.

 

[rathi]

That right there is what my (now) informed opinion is. I think we can Google and find scores of women who've been killed by the very guy they had the restraining order on. The bigger question is, "Would the woman have been killed if no restraining order had been put in place?" While a restraining order is heartily recommended by LEOs, I'm not at all sure it's in the best interests of the person in danger. This book is a good read. I recommend it. (It's Ms Pinkie's original recommendation. She was right.)

Your argument plays into the worst part of domestic abuse: the feeling of fear and helplessness. You are advocating letting the abuser remove the victims ability to exercise their most basic legal rights. You don't ensure the safety of someone by trying to avoid "provoking" the murderer you do so by physically preventing the murderer from being able to hurt their victim.

The author's thinking isn't new, either. I remember taking a training course when I worked a suicide hotline. For domestic abuse, we were absolutely cautioned against advising any woman to escalate a situation. We were taught that it is exactly at that moment of escalation that a woman is in the very most danger.

That is only valid insofar as the victim should wait to confront their abuser only when they are either in a physically safe place or when they can ensure they have the upper hand if things get violent. The situation is inevitably going to "escalated" when the victim tries to leave, the only question is picking the most advantageous circumstances for it to happen.

 

[radcen]

The only real benefit to having an RO, IMO, is that it establishes a paper trail if something does happen later on.

The downside to ROs is that they are also too often used illegitimately in divorce/child custody cases as a weapon of leverage in their own right.

 

[Caine]

Yes.

With it the convenience of LE is that they can arrest the violator, and with out it they can ask him or her to leave but can't force them too without another cause like tress pass.

And PS it doesn't mean the offender won't violate it, but just improves LE's options. In my little opinion if you need one you need a 12 gauge too.

Spot on.

Law Enforcement can try all that they can, but Law Enforcement can't do everything.

Each individual is responsible for ensuring their own safety in these situations. A restraining/protective order can help Law Enforcement do the best they can, but they aren't body guards, and its up to the protected person to ensure that they are taking their own safety into consideration.

 

[jamesrage]

I'm reading a book called The Gift of Fear. The author's belief is that restraining orders are for the convenience of law enforcement rather than for the protection of the person who takes one out. His advice is (I'm simplifying it) that one NOT take out a restraining order unless one sincerely believes the person will adhere to it...best taken out in the beginning of a relationship rather than a long-standing one (as an example). His philosophy is that, as you begin to take away options from a stalker, he was accelerate his behavior above and beyond what he otherwise would have done. And once that acceleration begins, there's no going back. Another of his philosophies is "Beware the man who has nothing to lose."

What are your thoughts about a restraining order? Effective? Most often the answer? Or rarely the answer?

No it will not stop someone determined to cause harm or death to someone else.It will deter those who actually fear going to jail and it gives the police ability to intervene should that restraining order be violated.Like others have said by filing a restraining order you basically have legal documentation that states you fear for your safety or life should you have to use lethal force to protect yourself.

 

[Caine]

The only real benefit to having an RO, IMO, is that it establishes a paper trail if something does happen later on.

The downside to ROs is that they are also too often used illegitimately in divorce/child custody cases as a weapon of leverage in their own right.

This is also true.

I've been subpoenaed to court many times on the behalf of the person who is being SERVED with a protective order in order to help them DEFEND against the issuance of said protective order based upon my involvement in a case where one wasn't even warranted.

There are women out there that will use Law Enforcement to their advantage in civil disputes by trying to turn them into criminal ones. This bothers me to no end.

Far too often I come across women who think I am just supposed to believe them and act on their behalf, even if my actions take me outside of the law.

The worst is the women to claim they are "scared" and can't articulate why they are scared and after telling the story of what happened which ends up being an argument and not a crime, they tell the story several times and then all of a sudden... "Well... he pushed me" "and... and... he threatened to kill me!!!" Two crimes she conveniently forgot the first 10 minutes of talking to her....

 

[MMC]

Recently we had a case down by us. Girl worked in a beauty Salon. But she was coming into work with black-eyes and bruises all over. She woulkd just tell her workers she fell or had some accident. Then she came up missing. People concerned and called the police to investigate. They found blood over the place she was living at but did not find any body. After talking to her boyfriend they arrested him. It's been about a month since they did. Now they just found the body over the border in Indiana out in some field.

Her co-workers tried to get her to file an OP but she wouldn't. Police were involved with the couple before and even the Cops on told her to get one that it would help to expedite matters and give them more options.

Illinois and Chicago is very serious about them. Whether involved with Divorce and custody situations. Women that get the Order, those Cops will follow the order and special conditions to the tee. That's not to say some don't fall out the loop. Women here are also able to go into Court with as an Emergency Session. If they have marks on them and are beat up. It's AutoD. Emrgency OP is ordered. County not local. County Sherriff's show up with the order in hand. If the Spouse of B/f are living on the premises. They will be put out of the home. Or Apt. Regardless if they own it or not. They will be allowed to grab their clothes and leave. No matter if children are present. Usually they will have the Wife of partner somewhere around the corner in a car waiting. The papers have the court date for them to appear for a regular hearing. Which will determine who owns what and who will be leaving. As well if children involved who they will be staying with.

Now the OPs are pretty much standard 250 - 500 feet from the property. Nor going on the property. Not even with Visitation occurring......

Course if one see the County Sherriff pull up and they leave before they are given any papers. Its void issue. As if he returns later to the house. Even tho there is an order out. The Charges will be dropped due to the individual never receiving the papers. Thus feigning they knew nothing of any orders. That's not to say that they couldn't be taken in but with out holds they could bond out if they have the money in their pocket no sooner than they are done printing him.

RO' here could be enacted for several years with good cause.