"They" want to push the inclusion criteria further. As they push this "predominant aggrrssor" concept, they're including "coercive control" language. From memory these include 1) threatening suicide or to kill animals 2) restricting financial access 3) using demeaning language (calling someone a B) 4) prohibiting access to medical/911/etc, 5) cyber stalking, and one other I can remember.
Under the proposed language, one could conceivably have a spouse frivolously spending joint income (and all your income is considered joint when married), research their browser history to discover they are gaming/gambling it away, call the financial institution to cancel all cards/sweep the account, and then get into an argument when she (or he) comes home and say "you stupid (insert whatever)", and your ass just popped on 3/6 markers for coercive control.
I've read opinions from these same people stating the advent of smart home devices (ie- a smart thermostat) is creating new ways for spouses to abuse the other because they are in charge of the climate control in the residence, and they are now empowered over the other. Haha- if that's the case, growing up my parents should have been spending decades behind bars!
Ya bro, in AZ you don’t need to have any physical contact to be charged (and possibly convicted) of DV. This also applies to anyone 15 or older. 2 brothers of age can get into a skirmish over the damn Xbox and find themselves with a DV conviction that will stick with them for life. They would be precluded from military service and any other work with the federal govt.
lol
