What if ALL employers immediately fired any employee who engaged in domestic violence?

[apples and oranges]

That would make men and women think twice before hitting their partners.

[Glassunion]

1. I doubt it.

Sadly I feel the abuse would still continue. But the premise is nice.

[Shankapotomus]

2. And so the self-employed?

They can go on abusing?

[Kurska]

3. Accused or convicted?

You don't think it could be horrifically abused if it was based on just an accusation? I don't like the idea of employers acting as a proxy for the legal system, in any context.

How bout an accused murdered? Would they get their job back if found innocent?

[apples and oranges]

7. Ray Rice has not been convicted.

Was he even arrested?

[Kurska]

8. He plead down to a lesser charge.

Which he was able to do, mostly, because his fiance/wife stopped cooperating with the investigation.

[NYC_SKP]

4. Well, that and huge fines for employers who enable and hide evidence.

What if the Ravens franchise had to be sold, proceeds going to shelters and programs?

That would be a bit of justice right there.

[Thinkingabout]

5. Domestic Violence is usually kept quiet, the victim suffers and protects the abuser.

As a friend told me one time, "you don't know until you have suffered yourself." It seems to cycle generation to generation. I am hoping more awareness to this happens in the future. About firing employees who abuse, from some stories it may be in the executives who also abuse.

[pnwmom]

6. And the unintended consequence is an immediate stop of child support payments.

This kind of issue is more complicated than it first appears.

[Glassunion]

12. They should go to jail.

However that would also immediately stop the child support.

[pnwmom]

13. Which is why a lot of women are reluctant to report.

Maybe, in that case, the government should be paying the child support.

[apples and oranges]

14. Ray Rice has children but he still should be fired

and held accountable for his actions.

[pnwmom]

15. I agree in his case. n/t

[Liberal Veteran]

9. Sounds like an awful can of worms to open.

I've been a victim of domestic violence many years ago and understand the toll it takes, but I can't see how this would help. This would likely cause a rash of revenge violence for the loss of the job and the domestic partner would likely be a target for that revenge. It would also be very hard to enforce. Does the person get fired for the arrest, accusation, or conviction?

And really, when it comes down to it, I am very leery of the idea of giving employers more reason to poke their noses into the lives of employees.

[winter is coming]

10. Domestic violence isn't a rational choice susceptible to "thinking twice".

IMO, it's far more likely that the thought of losing one's job would probably intensify the abuse, as the victim would be blamed.

[freshwest]

11. My former corporate employer would fire anyone arrested/convicted of any crime.

They didn't have to beg workers to come to work there, the union wages, benefit and retirement were enough incentive to behave well off work as well as on the job. DV wasn't accepted behavior. Although DA as a term has its problems. It's assault, kidnapping, rape, killing in most cases. If it was between strangers it would be taken more seriously, perhaps, not subject to the whims of regressives.

Guess the OP is about sports teams, so I'll go there. They're meant to appeal to the element of society, of all levels of income, who enjoy the gladiatorial experience.

We know what happened in the ancient arenas of Rome and what went on in that society beyond the Coliseum was worse for slaves. The arena was the place for owners to put on shows to display their power to humans who were ready to cheer other lesser valued humans and animals being slaughtered for their pleasure. It was intoxicating for them, but it's nauseating to me.

The baser element has the potential to exist in all sports throughout history. There are better aspects from the sporting world, a sense of community, but does anyone think that the owners of these teams pay for that?

I don't think so, they are usually keen to get cities to foot the bills while they take the profits. The games themselves and the players are now tied into the bottom line on wins only. Those able to give a good game for the love of athletic achievement, are injured or other strategies to prevent them doing so.

It's all about the numbers. I wonder if the amount of gambling revenues that those numbers create, is a bigger part of the game than the game itself. We saw that owner in CA who virtually called his black players well-paid slaves far beneath him. His world view was or is, that all flesh is for sale, like animals. Like the Coliseum, like Stadiums.

We found out that the cheerleaders for the teams were not making even minimum wage. Their value is less than the players.

I'm not feeling well and am expressing this badly. But some businesses do care, others don't. The only message the sports owners see is money. But the games won't be boycotted, most likely. I am glad to see them being taken to task in social media, they might start caring about the private lives that surround their sports. I think most of the players are far better than the owners, who just want to make a profit.

No, I'm not for taking anyone's beloved sports away from them and won't get drawn into the fan game. All sports are not the same, either. But football is the talk of the day and I think that is what the OP is about.

[NutmegYankee]

16. I oppose employers poking their noses into private lives of employees.

We have a Justice system to handle these things.