Allan Ivarsson Author... of Books

Violence Against Women IIA

Scroll down to content


Violence Against Women IIA

Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence (NT)

Media Release

 By Adam Giles

 Chief Minister of the Northern Territory

 27th May 2014

NT Police are the first Force in Australia to be accredited as a White Ribbon Workplace in recognition of their domestic violence strategies.(vii)

The Giles Government has taken a hard line against domestic and family violence. Abuse of women and children will not be tolerated in the Territory and I’m proud to see Police being recognised for their efforts in spreading this message,” Chief Minister Adam Giles said. (vii)

“The NT Police Force is the first Northern Territory organisation to be accredited as a White Ribbon Workplace after successfully introducing policies and procedures around domestic violence for both staff and the members of the public they interact with.” (vii)

“I’d like to congratulate Police on this achievement and encourage them to continue their good work in protecting families from violence,” Mr Giles said.” (vii)

“Our Police Force has embraced a zero-tolerance approach to this issue, working hard to drive down domestic violence in our community through Project Respect.” (vii)

“This has included a pro-prosecution policy in cases of suspected domestic violence to send a clear message to the community and deter offending.” (vii)

“Targeted domestic violence operations across the Territory have had huge success, protecting scores of women and children from abuse.” (vii)

“Since Strike Force Datsun began in Tennant Creek in February this year, there has been a massive drop in violent offences in the region. Police figures show that domestic violence-related assaults have dropped by 38 per cent compared to the same period last year.” (vii)

Recent alcohol-related operations in regional centres such as Alice Springs have also seen assault figures plummet, meaning fewer women and children are becoming victims of abuse.” (vii)

Assaults were recently cut by 54% during a concentrated operation at bottle shops in Alice Springs and alcohol-related hospital admissions almost halved.” (vii)

Despite all these efforts, domestic violence in our community remains all too common and I urge other Territory organisations to follow the lead of Police and register their interest in becoming a White Ribbon Workplace.” (vii)

A.I. comments… This (vii) is a well written political statement by the ‘Giles Government’. First, we should deal with the obvious, we all know that alcohol affects people in different ways. Of those that drink excessively, some men and women become ‘happy ahimsa drunks’ whilst others become ‘depressed’ and worse some, especially men, become ‘abusive and violent’. Drinking alcohol in moderation is okay, when managed by a self-disciplined person, but unfortunately not all people are self-disciplined, especially the young, whom are the most vulnerable to crossing the line. Wives laugh at their happy drunk husbands and help put them to bed, but wives with abusive drunk husbands who often become violent, are not laughing, they are enduring oppressive abuse of the worse kind.

On the streets and in public places like bottle shops and pubs, it is easy for Police to clean up bad attitude and alcohol related offences. And by ‘easy’ I don’t mean that Police have it easy, on the contrary they experience a thankless tough often physically abused job. What I mean is that compared to stopping ‘Domestic Violence’, stopping drunken hooligans in public places is a lot easier than ending violence in homes. Dealing with issues in private abodes is far more difficult than dealing with issues in public places. Hence, it is easy to understand the ‘Giles Government’ success performance in reducing ‘alcohol-related abuse’ and ‘hoodlum-related non-alcoholic abuse’.

However, dealing with home based ‘Domestic Violence’ is another thing entirely. Since I have not seen the logistics supporting the media letter statement by the NT Giles Government that “Police figures show that domestic violence-related assaults have dropped by 38 per cent compared to the same period last year.” The questions in our mind, is an obvious, “How, what is the criteria foundation of these logistics? Did they really achieve a reduction? Or is the performance logistics, misleading? Why were not the logistics with a thorough explanation of how they were achieved, tabled with the media release statement? It is not enough to just publish ‘glory’ political statements of progress, it must always be verified by provable facts.

Whilst the ‘Zero Tolerance’ objective is correct as opposed to the challenge in change of thinking, tabled early by Dr. Lawrence Sherman, it must be questioned in this Australian NT letter, what does “This has included a pro-prosecution policy in cases of suspected domestic violence to send a clear message to the community and deter offending.” (vii) Mean?

Earlier we read the following statement… “…women whose partners were arrested had far worse life outcomes than those whose partners were not, prompting Sherman to question whether our fervor for punishing bad men may have prevented us “from testing what may be better ideas.” (ii)

 Does this mean that injustice thrives when the law enforced by Police, under political instruction, becomes a ‘Police State’ experience, due to overzealous politicians, putting high pressure demands on police to overstep the mark by arresting men and sometimes women by accusation, when the wife or husband victim, refuses to press charges against their spouse? Be careful world, there is a fine red line between justice and injustice.

Back to the question, what is ‘Pro-prosecution policy in cases of suspected domestic violence’?

A Pro-prosecution policy has a high risk of creating injustice, excessive misuse of prosecution power and damaging misery for a family that becomes a victim of such powerful legalised abuse. There is no doubt that Sherman’s observation that “Women whose partners were arrested had far worse life outcomes than those whose partners were not.” …is true. Hence, the NT Giles report may or may not be misleading, when it claims that “Police figures show that domestic violence-related assaults have dropped by 38 per cent compared to the same period last year.” (vii) Was Pro-prosecution the reason for the rapid drop? What impact did this have on the families, husbands, wives and children, when the victim was seeking simply temporary support from police to diffuse a volatile emotional problem, and did not want to prosecute their spouse or adult child? Yes, there is a repetitive risk of repeat violence in a family, but the victim must be held accountable to decide, when to prosecute, not the police. Misuse of power creates injustice.

A pro-prosecution policy simply means that a suspect may be prosecuted even when the victim refuses to prosecute. When police attend a complaint of domestic violence in a home, launched by the victim, or another person in the house, or even by neighbours, a person most likely will be arrested, even when the victim refuses to prosecute the abuser, if the police on the spot decide to arrest someone. The alleged abuser is forcibly removed from the house and taken to temporary gaol until a prosecution decision is made by legal advisors and a decision is made what to do with the prisoner. Whilst the advantage of this pro-prosecution policy may sometimes stop a repeat offence of domestic violence it may also be an overreaction charge and may long-term do more harm to the attitude of the claimed criminal and to the wholesome wellbeing of the distressed family. There is no perfect ideal solution that gets a police subsequent pro-prosecutor decision right every time. The prosecutors and arresting police will never know long-term, the impacts of their decision, good or bad; they are just doing their job to the best of their ability, as they see the situation at the time of their mandatory action enforced by political Pro-Prosecution Legislation or is it just a Policy, which is not enforced by mandatory law enforcement and is more a discretion decision, which lies in the mind thinking decision of the Police Officer, be they be truly experienced in understanding people or are not very experienced in dealing with such societal problems? A decision is made, good or bad, right or wrong, just or unjust, and the risk of injustice and people being proportionally hurt, both victim, the accused abuser, and other family members becomes fuzzy and not identified, unless a good accurate research analysis, follows up with impact studies years later. And even those studies are vulnerable to error, depending upon the quality of the skills of the researcher and their understanding of human nature and significant concerns. It is naïve to believe there is a nice perfect solution when using ‘Pro-Prosecution Policy’, it is hard enough to get prosecution justice when the victim prosecutes, let alone when police launch the suspected prosecution.

After domestic violence, many cases too often, including the abused victim, drop the charges against the abuser, and they husband and wife or parents and child make up and don’t want the prosecution to continue. The domestic violence may reoccur down the track, but the victim must have the courage of conviction to make the decision, not the police. The victim is accountable for their own inaction, when domestic violence repeats in their own home, the police and the law are not accountable, because of the cowardice of the victim, to act correctly true to their knowledge of their partner’s or children’s or relatives character.

In pro-prosecution policy, the victim does not get the opportunity to drop the charges. The trained police use photographs of the victim as evidence and they may proceed with the charges of violent abuse in court, whether the victim is present or not.

Of course, there is the scenario where a partner is vindictive by nature and after a bad argument launches police intervention to stop the conflict and gain power over her/his partner and later regrets the foolish emotional overreaction, and is caught with a pro-prosecution mistake that cannot be reversed. The alleged abuser may get charged, regardless, and the healing of the relationship may as consequence be prevented from ever being fixed. Every couple, every family member, engages in a family argument, even amongst the best in relationships and even the truly kind caring, fall over sometime during their life. Not one of us is that good that perfect, to avoid conflict, unless of course we are submissive cowards that are afraid to say anything.

The 1949 film American classic romance/comedy/drama titled ‘Adam’s Rib’ starring Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn, is a fiction example of two legal minds, man and woman, as partners and competitors in temporary conflict, which heals in the end. Of course, this film was a sendup of Chauvinism versus Feminism as to “Who wears the pants?”, which in the generation society before the ‘Baby Boomers’, was a common friends/family question mark. With the better recognition of evolving quality of the sex’s in the ‘Western World’ that philosophical concern phased itself out.

Only belief systems in Islam, Ultra-Orthodox Judaism, Communism and some Asian societies still cling to the unequal idea that men over women, must still rule. In the West, true to right values, men and women stand united as sharing equal caring partners, which is why ‘Domestic Violence’ is caused by wrong thinking bad belief systems, or lack thereof, and subsequently the players in abusive wrong thinking have not been taught the right way of living calm ‘Emotional Intelligence’. Here’s the think… if ‘Pro-Prosecution, Mandatory Arrest’ existed in the classic film of ‘Adam’s Rib’, the temporary conflict may never have been healed and may have continued to retain a permanent scar on the minds of two separated people. True enough, there was no violence in this fictional story, but the intensity of abuse was real and aggressive, as does happen in real life. When does non-physical violence still become a mental emotional abuse of mind that can leave permanent scars of mind, never to be forgotten? Sometimes a physical fight, like in the boxing ring and Martial Arts and in football, is easier to recover from, than mental emotional abuse. Healing process needs to be able to simply acknowledge error on both sides and repair itself, but that is only true when both people share the same belief system that they were both wrong in different ways. My teenage children used to say to me, “I would rather a slap than a lecture”. So much for fear of being hurt.

Pro-Prosecution, Mandatory Arrest subject to the discretion of police, leaves the decision wide open to inexperienced error in judgement and consequently potential healing between people, may be permanently blocked leaving emotional scars forever. Injustice raises its ugly head instead of justice. Psychology sessions cannot heal memory scars, at best if the consultant is any good in understanding human nature, all they can do as a mentor, is advise and guide, how to deal with emotional mental wounds, not by healing process, but rather by calm acceptance of reality and then learning to have the confidence to focusing on getting on with their life, using ‘Emotional Intelligence’ combined with ‘Positive Mental Attitude’. Good consultants use calm ahimsa PMA philosophy, not psychology. Not all degree qualified Psychologists understand the power of good wisdom philosophy.

The problem is compounded by the dark side of human nature, when the dangerous thinking emotionally unstable partner is married or living with, a naïve partner that blindly believes makeup of the relationship has happened, all is forgiven and dreams of never happening again, inspires the victim to stand by her/his partner, only to discover too late, they are victims of their own murder.

Society to often blames governments for not doing enough, which is why governments become overzealous about solutions. But the truth is… the victim is accountable for their own wrong decisions, not society and not government.

We will never get justice right using a pro-prosecution policy, injustice can too often be the consequence of such mandatory policy. Mandatory? Yes, even though police/prosecution discretion is allowed, the tendency of error in judgment is to prosecute sometimes justly and at other times unjustly. We are on a merry-go-round here, continuing to go around in circles, with no completely right answer, right result. Hence, it is clear… ‘Pro-Prosecution’ is a bad policy, and a bad piece of legislation open to misuse as a form of totalitarianism, creating a police state mentality and such threatening reality is not acceptable, not now, not ever.

People are accountable for their thinking and their actions founded upon their belief system, be it right or wrong, and they alone not independent police, not governments and not society must be held accountable for their wrong thinking and wrong decisions and consequent wrong actions.

‘Philosophical Intelligence’ makes it clear that prosecution must always be the consequence of a victim launching action, in other words the complainant is accountable for not only initiating the self-protective action, but also for being accurate, truthful and right in the filed allegations against the claimed abuser criminal.

Even the United Nations does not have the right to establish a pro-prosecution policy. No government, no society has the right to create such pro-prosecution policy/legislation.

‘Cosmic Law’ using ‘Reality Based Ethics’ on Prosecution, states clearly…

“Thou shalt not prosecute persons based on suspicion, without evidence of fact and thou shalt not prosecute, without the victim’s testimony except, when the victim is speechless by death or serious injury.”

“Thou shalt write written warnings, on two sequential incidents, for all ‘Domestic Violence’ abusive incidents that do not involve cruelty, murder or attempted murder, before launching on the third incident, prosecution process.”

The Case for More Research to Test Victim Empowerment Approaches? (viii)

…mmm… Are study researchers, analysts, getting too carried away with what subjects they choose to study? What makes them so sure that they have the skills to accurately analyse human problems and identify correct solutions? Having a University Degree does not mean that a person has real life skills to understand problems and solutions about human nature. Being an observer of hell is not the same understanding, as living hell. You must have lived through hardship and conflict and emotional physical struggle and even pain, to understand reality, and even then, there is a high risk of not having the right pragmatic philosophical intelligence skills and the essential advanced communication skills that has the P.I. ability to think with open mind, completely outside the square, void of fixed dogma belief system mentality.

Test Victim Empowerment Approaches? Is a wrong foundation objective idea; Understanding human problems is not about testing empowerment, it is about reviewing their beliefs, their philosophy or lack thereof and it is about reviewing by research what existent legal process exists, which gives victims the right to self-defence by prosecution process. A victim does not have to be empowered as much as they must have the right to be heard, true to the right of freedom of speech, and must have the freedom of choice right to decide whether they wish to proceed with prosecution or not. As to whether the prosecution is justified or not is a decision for the court, to be heard from the reality arguments and facts tabled by the defender and the prosecutor. A victim as happened in the earlier 20th Century, too often was ignored and did not get a legal hearing by the police or by the courts, and this reality was true even amongst teenagers that were being sexually abused at home and were not believed, when they told the truth, seeking desperately societal help to escape their nightmare. The concern is not about giving victims empowerment that is a dangerous thinking idea that can swing incorrectly the other way, and make the alleged abuser, the victim of misuse of legalised excessive power rights as now exists, under the banner of pro-prosecution, mandatory prosecution rights. And as existed during the 1970’s to 1990’s Australian Family Law Court prosecution process, when the woman had all the rights over custody of the children, regardless of whether they were a good or bad mother, and the father had no access rights. A vindictive mother was empowered by bad laws to block regular child access by the father, even when he was a good kind man.

The correct objective is the research study of ‘What legal due process exists in each State/Nation that gives victims legal right to get a justice hearing and the right to assistance, without being rejected, because they cannot afford the legal costs involved in administration of justice. This can be summarised by title as… “Investigate Justice Protection for Victims Rights”.

And on the other side of the fence, an “Investigation of Alleged Abusers Rights” needs to be studied, because there is also the slight risk that an abuser has been victimised by false charges by a vindictive prosecutor, be that person a family member, a past friend, a stranger, a police officer, or a legal prosecutor. ‘Truthful Justice’ demands all sides of case view, must be tabled to identify right understanding and right conclusions and right decisions, so that truth, justice and the right way prevails.

The following statements in review (viii) re-identify the critical path concerns tabled previously, this review by another point of view helps strengthen our understanding of historical societal change in thinking reality.

The thing that is disturbing about the process of ‘Pro-Prosecution’ is the emphasis on ‘Mandatory Prosecution’, which encourages a miscarriage of justice and potential emotional damage to families caught up in such conflict struggles.

The criminal justice system has only recently begun to consider violence between adult intimate partners a public matter worthy of legal concern. Advocates lobbied successfully to change the way perpetrators and victims are treated within the system. As a result, new laws have proliferated, including pro-arrest and mandatory, or no-drop, prosecution policies. Mandatory arrest approaches direct police to detain a perpetrator when there is probable cause that a domestic assault has occurred, regardless of the victim’s wishes. Mandatory prosecution requires government attorneys to bring criminal charges against batterers.” (viii)

More than one-third of U.S. police departments reported adopting pro-arrest policies because of empirical data showing arrest to be a deterrent against future spousal violence. Recent data suggest that arrest may actually increase abuse for some women. The number of jurisdictions implementing mandatory prosecution has increased, even though data on the benefits and drawbacks of the policy are scarce.” (viii)

A.I. comments… Once again politicians jump in kneejerk reaction without clear understanding of reality and make decisions based upon the trend, the fashion in thinking, even ‘though data on the benefits and drawbacks of the policy are scarce’.

“Recent data suggest that arrest may actually increase abuse for some women.” (viii) This data feedback, may only be a limited sample, but philosophical pragmatic logic, indicates that emotional nastiness can arise, when people, man or woman, are pro-arrested by pro-prosecution policy, without the consent of the claimed victim. It is obvious by their distress under arrest and their frustrated lack of empowerment to fight the law, with whom they feel distinct resentment, that down the track their overreactive emotional anger may build up in their mind and after release, they may be accepted back by the victim in makeup mode, and then down the track, in an emotional moment, take further abuse action against the victim, simply because the alleged perpetrator never found inner peace within self, because their belief system, their philosophy was full of holes lacking emotional intelligence.

The very fact so many people openly ‘hate police’ whilst others openly ‘like police’ indicates a divided society which thrives in the field of negative/positive belief systems. The very idea of injustice in someone’s head, be it right or wrong thinking, can and does inspire emotional resentment against police, simply doing their duty as instructed by political law makers. The lawmakers, the politicians legislating law, never get blamed by the public, the allegations are fired directly at police on duty that are responsible for enforcing the law, be it a right or wrong law. And the occasional incident of ‘Shades of Police’ that are corrupt completely, or by degrees, does not help the justice process when a ‘Pro-Prosecution Policy’ exists. In a ‘Mandatory Arrest Policy’ process, victims can increase on both sides of the fence, impacting upon the inner peace and happiness of entire families for decades to come.

A written warning, three strikes and you are out process, tabled by Police, called back more than twice to ‘Domestic Violence’ situations would be a more ‘Just Process’ backed by ‘Mandatory Arrest’ after the third call back incident. If different police officers are in the call back process, there is a higher probability that real truthful justice will exist, which gives good families the opportunity to heal themselves. This written warning system works well in Industries, which gives employees the opportunity to lift their work performance delivery standards or leave on good terms, before they are forced to leave, by being fired.

Certainly the ‘Pro-Prosecution Policy’ is a dangerous ideas philosophy, and in the wrong hands managed by ‘shades of blue’ policy, with a not very good integrity, it can be used as an unjust bully dictatorship method and may evolve in years ahead, to become an absolute form of totalitarianism, being also eventually used outside the issues of ‘Domestic Violence’, creating the beginning of a ‘Police State’ process, the people being ruled by the dictatorship of ‘Big Brother’, where ‘Freedom of Speech’ and ‘Freedom of Choice’ no longer exists, as is the existent reality in Communist and Sharia Law lands that control the people by ‘Thought Police’ dictatorship, a method which even Erdogan in Turkey is striving to impose, as did Stalin, Hitler and Mao and many others, in violent anti-freedom apartheid history.

“An investigation of the combined data from all the mandatory arrest studies found that the policy’s success is tied to whether an offender is “good risk” or “bad risk”. (ix) Good risk batterers are defined as having ties to the community through marriage, employment, etc. (x) They are likely to suffer embarrassment and stigmatization as a result of being arrested and are therefore less inclined to reoffend. Bad risk offenders do not possess the same community attachments, are less likely to be embarrassed by detainment, and are prone to future violence.” (viii)

“Overall, mandatory arrest studies indicate a need to individualize intervention strategies based on local demographics.” (viii)

A.I. comments… Good risk offenders, Bad risk offenders subject to Mandatory Arrest? Police are too busy dealing with emotional abuse problems to take time out to decide by human nature analysis who is a good risk offender and who is a bad risk offender. Their job is to strive to diffuse a conflict and arrest the offenders as policy/legislation demands.

A written warning system without arrest, in first and second incidents will stop the ‘Good Risk’ offenders from constantly reoffending if they are people, man or woman, that are genuinely embarrassed by police presence at their home and are genuinely concerned by police attention impacts that will harm their public image in community activity attachments. A sense of shame will help people reform themselves when they truly feel shame, but others don’t feel such guilt, because their belief system does not feel embarrassment or any sense of shame, and that reality is especially true of people that hate police and are always throughout their life criticising, whinging and running down good police, every which way. Hence, ‘Bad Risk’ offenders after a second warning, on their third offence, will be mandatorily arrested and prosecuted.

It is reasonable as part of written warning, to recommend that abusers attend mandatory counselling for alcohol and drug related offences, when the victim refuses to prosecute the offender. Or and attend mandatory counselling to learn ‘Emotional Intelligence’.

A Mandatory Action, Written Warning System is a far better, more reasonable process, than a bully Pro-Prosecution, Mandatory Arrest Process. Three Strikes and you are out, is a far fairer justice process in much the same way a person can lose their vehicle licence if they lose all their points due to negligent driving.

Once when I and five other vehicles were pulled over by Police, going ten k’s over the speed limit down a 60k hill, in the late 1980’s, in Western Sydney, we were given the opportunity to attend a two-hour mandatory police training centre, to avoid being fined and loss of points against driving licence. Our registered attendance name, waved the charges against us. It proved to be the best training experience I ever attended. In those earlier days, when I was young, the ‘Three Second Safety Gap’ and how to handle a car skid was never taught when people got their driving licence. I knew by common sense about driving with gap safety, but I never knew how to correct a car skid, I learned the hard way when I hit an oil slick on the road, and was lucky to survive, when I was 19 years old (1968), and I never knew how to stay focused on the road and at the same time, manually measure seconds of speed and distance to ensure safe distances between vehicles. This brief education insight was so important that when my children learned to drive years later, I passed the knowledge I learned at a police lecture, forward. Now after the year 2,000 I believe that the good news is that such knowledge and more is now mandatory instruction at the point of driver training, to qualify for a vehicle licence.

On the issue of ‘individualize intervention strategies based on local demographics’. (viii) That idea may have worked well before Western Society opened the gates of their culture to accept a wide range of different cultures, in which some assimilate well and others refuse to assimilate. The most dangerous anti-freedom apartheid culture belief system is the doctrine of Islam, which legally approved or not in every Western Land, is ruled by ‘Sharia Law’ parallel to a countries Western Laws. Police going into no-go Islamic Zones, will never be able to stop Muslim men beating and abusing their wives, because it is approved by ‘Sharia Law’ as also approved in the Qur’an. To outlaw ‘Domestic Violence’ in Islam would require Politicians to outlaw the beating text in the Koran by condemnation legislation and I doubt at present, there exists many politicians in the West that have the courage to create legislation, which is enforced to stop ‘Sharia Law’ and its anti-freedom apartheid dictatorship. And I will comfortably bet most Muslim Clerics and Muslim Leaders of Organisations and in Politics would refuse to outlaw any Qur’an Surah teaching.

(viii) ‘Mandatory Arrest and Prosecution Policies for Domestic Violence: A Critical Literature Review and the Case for More Research to Test Victim Empowerment Approaches’ Reviewed by David M. Heger, Policy Analyst, University of Missouri-St. Louis. From an article of the same title by: Linda G. Mills, University of California-Los Angeles Published: Criminal Justice & Behaviour, 1998, 25, 3, Sept 306-318.

(ix) Berk, R.A. (1992) Campbell, A., Klap, R., & Western, B. “Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, (83, 170-200). A Bayesian analysis of the Colorado Springs Spouse Abuse Experiment.

(x) Berk, R.A. (1993). What the scientific evidence shows: On the average, we can do better than arrest. In R.J. Gelles & D.R. Loeske (Eds.), Current controversies on family violence (pp. 323-336). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

(xi) Ford, D.A., & Regoli, M.J. (1993). The criminal prosecution of wife assaulters: Process, problems, and effects. In N. Zoe Hilton (Ed.), Legal responses to wife assault: Current trends and evaluation (pp. 127-164). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

A.I. comments… I did not directly find the source links (ix) & (x) & (xi), I found them through the link source (viii). This is what ‘Cosmicism’ does keeps searching all points of view to fine the reality truth, be it good or bad, right or wrong, just or unjust. There is nothing fair about life, to be fair, to live fair, we each as individuals must seek to live fair in all things. But to succeed, we must always defend the values of freedom and must reject all forms of totalitarianism and for that reason we must be completely intolerant of anti-freedom apartheid dangerous ideas and wrong dictatorship belief systems.

 Slight diversion from ‘Violence Against Women’ subject…

As I wrote to an Aussie friend on the 20th July 2016, who was concerned that Donald Trump would lose the vote for Presidency and that Hillary Clinton would win, I answered as follows…

I have not had the time to follow convention live media news. I am heavily involved in a lot of projects. But I have had feedback from American supporters of Trump that claim that Trump is standing strong and the left and Muslims are striving to take Trump down. Trump has enemies in his own camp.

Like I said, if Trump does not win the Presidents seat and Clinton wins, it will be the end of freedom. There is no one out there stronger than Trump. There are no Reagan’s or Roosevelt’s, we are facing serious perilous times. We must stay positive in mental attitude and trust that Trump wins & gets it right. If he fails, there is no one else, the entire Western World is falling apart at the seams and China is now reaching out for more power control over the West, with Australia & America at the top of its agenda.

The entire freedom resistance global activist movement is focused on fighting Islam, whilst other anti-freedom totalitarian forces are being ignored and are on the rise. The Western World is now in a giant whirlpool of rising conflict from within. In WWII people in every Nation stood united against two common enemies. During the cold war people stood united against Communism. And then left thinking fools allowed Socialism & Communism to become accepted and later extended to acceptance of Multiculturalism which has destroyed the West, because the Multiculturalism idea does not have any house rules which outlaws political totalitarianism. There is nothing wrong with ‘Cultural Assimilation’, most races are capable of integration, the colour of a person is not the concern, but it is wrong to accept belief systems into culture that reject ‘Freedom of Speech’ and ‘Freedom of Choice’ as does, Communism, Fascism, Islam and Socialism.

Totalitarianism is coming back, people are philosophically confused and divided against each other. The short-lived age of freedom is coming to an end. Ignorance is on the rise, our children are so mesmerized by technology and the false knowledge dictatorship of psychology, they have no pragmatic survival common sense. Too many of the degree qualified people coming out of our Universities are being brainwashed by the backward thinking socialist left.

We are trapped in the biggest political socialist con game the West has ever been caught up in. Totalitarian forces are using every type of corrupt scam they can to control the West. In the end after the fall of the West it will be a final battle between Islam & Communism as to who rules the world and Islam will lose. We only have one chance left to save freedom, we need Trump as a stepping stone to buy time. There are no Churchill’s there is no one else yet.

Right now, I am doing massive research on the subject of ‘Domestic Violence’ movement on the rise. It is turning into another form of Totalitarianism, as in Australia & America ‘Pro-Prosecution, Mandatory Arrest’ is becoming the ‘Police Decision’ without approval of so-called victims; a ‘Police State Mentality’.

The police are just doing their job as instructed by law. The politicians are the inferior thinking culprits creating ‘Mandatory Arrest Policies’ and the people blame the police, instead of attacking the politicians that hide with their secret insidious agendas behind the lines. We in Australia no longer have freedom of speech and even in America despite the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech is under attack as has happened in Canada, Britain and throughout Europe.

Not one ‘Belief System’ in the world is dealing correctly with today’s worldview complex problems and that includes Atheism, Agnosticism, Christianity & Judaism, the key players in the West. We all have to change the way we think. Einstein recognised that fact, but very few recognise the truth of what Einstein saw.

Yes, the dangers are real, which is why we must keep promoting Trump to everyone we know, to encourage Americans to vote for Trump.

Back to the serious concern of ‘Domestic Violence’ and more…

 It is an anti-freedom of speech and anti-freedom of choice action, to deny victims the right to not prosecute abusers and to deny victims who started to prosecute, the right to change their mind, by dropping prosecution charges. Such decisions must be respected, lest we as a society, start to allow freedom to be replaced by dictatorship laws, swinging towards supporting draconian totalitarian bully thinking and action. Loss of freedom of speech and choice is not acceptable, even when at times the victim makes naïve wrong decisions.

People must be accountable for their own decisions and actions, we cannot and must not strive to overprotect people at the high risk of creating a dangerous form of mandatory dictatorship. Pro-Prosecution, Pro-Mandatory Arrest will do more harm long-term to society than the risk of repeat offenders, because victims lacked the courage to file prosecution against an offender, for whatever reasons.

Having said all this, a written warning statement, should be given to the victim explaining to them that failure to prosecute after experiencing serious abuse, constitutes a high risk of becoming a victim again. With this understanding, the police and the law have done their duty and the victim has been protected by a fair warning process.

Meanwhile, the abuser has also been given a written warning, facing mandatory arrest, three strikes and you’re out, if the abuser keeps reoffending.

This justice strategy is not about giving victim’s personal empowerment, which vindictive women and men may misuse, it is about giving women or in some rare cases men, the right to protect themselves from repeated abuse. People should not be able to use the weapon of prosecution, as a bargaining chip to control their partners, such licensed behaviour becomes another form of partner dictatorship and is not an acceptable form of relationship process. Such couples should separate, if they are not prepared to work as a team, in a genuine caring ahimsa friendship based partnership.

The above comments are made by A.I. in response to the following extract from (viii).

“Few studies have examined mandatory prosecution policies. In fact, Ford and Regoli (1993) (xi) conducted the only randomized study of no-drop prosecution. They found that the type of prosecution strategy used (drop-permitted versus no-drop #) has a significant effect on the future behaviour of the batterer. Victims who chose to file charges against the perpetrator under a drop-permitted policy were less likely to experience future violence, than were victims whose batterers were prosecuted without their input. # However, the opposite was true for victims who chose to drop charges against their batterers; they were more likely to experience abuse again than those dealt with under mandatory prosecution.” (viii)

A.I. comments… The above paragraph research observation makes absolute pragmatic common sense. This analysis is not about psychology evaluation it is about ‘Philosophical Intelligence’ observations and implied conclusions. ‘Good Philosophy’ used the right way, under the banner of ‘Cosmic Philosophy’ can solve problems in an accurate way, by observation, experience, understanding of human nature, in beliefs and by pragmatic common sense deduction. This is the change in thinking path that humanity must learn, void of overreaction, founded upon calm ‘Emotional Intelligence’ that has the ability to live with open mind, thinking outside the square, void of fixed dogma mentality.

Whilst the last sentence # (viii) is no doubt a true sample case of reality, nevertheless, we must not use this as a misguided reason to across the board, impose ‘Mandatory Prosecution’. We still come back to the truth that once we lose the right to freedom of speech and freedom of choice, we are no longer living true to liberty values and are sliding downwards, towards a thought police state that can easily misuse power and overstep the mark. Such a society is not acceptable, not now, not ever. Freedom is the benchmark of justice, without freedom, justice fades and eventually ceases to exist. For that absolute reason, “drop permitted policy” must always exist and the variance results, must be dealt with under the umbrella of ‘Drop permitted policy’, void of pro-prosecution, pro-mandatory arrest.

The variance of results, under a ‘Drop permitted policy’ can then be resolved by a written warning process, and by ensuring that even victims are accountable for their own decisions, as are abusers.

Some people are caught in a criminal habit merry-go-round, they don’t reform, they don’t change, they don’t want to change, they don’t try to change, they cannot be reformed, because they think blindly in what they believe. These habitual criminals and abusers are trapped in this fixed dogma, living a life of recidivism. Psychology cannot reform them, only those that are given new education and training opportunities that are enthusiastic to learn new skills can change themselves, motivated by opportunity to learn and run in a new direction of good, order self-improvement. No one can reform anyone, we must reform ourselves, all we can do is give people the opportunity to learn, then it is up to them to use the tools of education and training or not.

All fixed dogma belief systems even cults and religions, suffer from the same merry-go-round mentality, except their different belief systems may be non-violent or may be violent. Criminals that hate and religious people that hate, have a lot in common, being apathetic towards alternative points of view, being resistant to looking at the false knowledge in their own backyard, by refusing to step outside the square and think with open mind, looking inwards, at self, ideas and their own belief system philosophy. For even religion and cults is a philosophy. And Atheism is a philosophy, a belief system interwoven with its own various political beliefs, be they supportive of ‘Freedom Values’ or against ‘Liberty Values’.

One could argue that recidivism, performance result thinking-behaviour, should be measured over a three-year period, but of course such a measure must be related to belief system training and upgraded skills training, to determine if in fact the additional skills education training is helping the process of change in a human being, or is identifying the concern that some individuals refuse to change their thinking and ways of behaviour.

If people locked into different fixed dogma belief systems like religion and new age for example, refuse to walk away from false knowledge ideas, what makes the current worldview think that they can reform people and save themselves from their own wrong belief system thinking?

Until the world is willing to step outside the square, strengthened by open mind, on an eternal quest for truth, like all good scientists do, thinking objectively, exploring for higher understanding, the world will never climb out of the ‘Habit of War’ and societal violence and abuse, and will never truly learn ‘Emotional Intelligence’ and better communication skills, which aids development of calm feelings, inner peace, positive mental attitude and constructive consciousness.

Humankind must change the way they think and be willing to put all ideas, good and bad, right and wrong, true and false, just and unjust, on the table. This means all ‘belief systems’ religious and political, are on the table including the evolving open minded objective thinking of ‘Cosmicism’. We humans must change, and ‘Cosmicism’ is just a philosophical tool, a companion to science that helps us become smarter than just clever. The question is… “How many people have the courage to change the way they think, by putting all of their beliefs openly and honestly on the table for scrutineering, to determine that which is false knowledge and that which is yet to be proven and that which is a provable fact?” Blind faith is naïve and foolish.

Do you have that courage? Well how can you expect criminals to toss their mindless fixed dogma into the garbage bin, if you are not willing to do the same?

One of the justifications argued by many is that ‘Pro-Prosecution and Mandatory Arrest’ is necessary, because battered women are too helpless and afraid to make self-protection decisions. That may be true of some women, just like some men are afraid to fight for their right to be free from bullying. This weakness, this fear, is not a sex thing, it is a human fear thing, founded too often on lack of confidence. For courage needs confidence to stand up and be counted, even when the odds of winning are against us.

Fear is real. People who say they have no fear are idiots. Courage is simply about facing our fears and doing what must be done, because it is the right thing to do, true to our beliefs and values.

The right to decide, a mark of respect for the individual’s right to freedom of speech and choice, gives male and female victims of abuse, the right to recognise their own indignation and inner strength to oppose the abuser bully. Self-empowerment is different to governments giving people limited power, by ruling as mandatory dictators, forcing people to conform to their ideas, rather than what people think is the right thing to do.

Those that make women look weak by overruling their decision not to prosecute, are not too bright and have no respect for the right of women to make their own choices, their own decisions, be it right or wrong. Good decisions are made, bad decisions are made, that is a fact of life, we must all live with, we are accountable by our mistakes, how we learn from our errors determines the kind of person we are, and our choices becomes our karma.

Throughout history, courageous women have had to fight against enemies in home territory war against invaders. Hell, in the Australian/American/Canadian Frontier Outback of the pre-20th Century, was very real, as Pioneer Women fought dangerous animals and humans in a fight to survive. There were no police, no army, there to help them, they stood with friends and often even alone, courageously fighting for their right to survive. Don’t underestimate the courage of women. The worst thing we can do is wrap up children and women and weak men in cottonwool. Everyone must learn to stand up and be counted. There is no place for the totalitarian process of ‘Pro-Prosecution and Mandatory Arrest’ without victim agreement. Justice is served by giving the victim the right to decide whether they wish to prosecute or not.

We do not need research empirical information to determine how society should response to domestic violence. Researchers get a bit carried away as to how far they should extend research, so that they can dictate to society, how they should think and behave. Such research striving to dictate guidelines, becomes a form of totalitarianism when it is misused. The truth is that the decision of how to manage domestic violence issues is more about pragmatic common sense and about caring humane reality based ethics principles, than it is about a response to some empirical research. This is why… Psychology constantly fails to get it right, the researchers get so lost in spending funds to justify their investigations and conclusions, that they lose sight of pragmatic philosophical common sense.

Service programs to help victims is a good essential societal goal, but such programs and the welfare mentors/consultants need to ensure that they don’t become dictators, as many too often do in roll play, which does more harm than good. Advice not dictatorship, guidance not forced help, is the right path to live true, but even this realisation is only true, when philosophical intelligence is used, founded upon the wisdom of pragmatic common sense.

Reduction of violence against women can only be truly achieved, generation after generation, by a change in the way humans think and believe. All belief systems are now on the table, under the banner of ‘Cosmicism’.

Source: Published in ‘Combat Women’ 2017

Allan Peter Ivarsson © 2016


Smoking is not wise…

But bashing the opposite sex is not only disgraceful… it is cowardly.

And Women Hitting Men is equally as evil, as men hitting women.

To be Continued…

‘Blasphemy Law’ is equally as evil as deliberate assault of a person.

The impact upon the mind is equally damaging.

Blasphemy poster 011 2017 image 011

Blasphemy poster 007 2015 image 007

Blasphemy poster 010 2015 image 010

‘Blue Light Defiance’ Books… Published on Kindle & Paperback

Go to to see Book Range Prices





%d bloggers like this: