Restraining Restraining Orders: The Foolishness of the State

This is a momentary shift in my usual topic of choice, it was something that was put on my heart to write. Enjoy.

Charles E. Corry, Ph.D (Equal Justice Foundation) proposes that as little as 35% and as much as 80% of the Restraining Orders filed in California, Texas and Colorado fall either under the category of entirely false accusations or pointless and malicious allegations that have little to nothing to do with personal protection and everything to do with personal attack. 

It is posited that these "false" Restraining Orders put a significant strain on both the legal system they are involved in, and the Law Enforcement system that enforces them. This strain prevents protection resulting in, and has been linked to, an incalculable number of fatalities and abuses in legitimate Domestic Abuse cases. 

In more than 70% of divorce cases the use of a Restraining Order was used to prevent "awkward circumstances", in which the prosecuting party was simply too immature to deal with the ramifications of the mutual failings of a bad marriage. Instead of trying to work things out, or attempting to make the best of a bad situation, even greater strain is placed on undeserving parties (including accused husbands and wives, and indirectly the children of the aforementioned) that causes significant psychological and emotional harm. Thus turning the tables back from the original purpose, which was to "prevent psychological, physical or emotional abuse".

Even on the low end of the percentage scale, nearly 250,000 fathers and mothers (statistically more predominant that men are falsely accused) per year have false Restraining Orders filed against them. In terms of Judicial Man power, that is between 5 minutes to 30 minutes spent IN THE CASE ALONE per false case. That estimates to nearly 62,500 excessive state man hours in court alone, not including preparation, paperwork, etc. Those man hours could be instead spent investigating, prosecuting, and otherwise pursing and preventing actual crime and abuse. 

This is all not to say that Restraining Orders are useless, nor is it to say that I disagree with the context of a Restraining Order in its form. The problem is frivolous claims. Yet another hole in the system of our Judiciary that hemorrhages funds AND risks the lives and well being of the citizens it claims to be protecting. Currently, the Judiciary takes a position of "better safe than sorry" on Restraining Orders filed. Nearly 96% of Restraining Orders filed for are fully granted (usually ex parte) by a Judge. The logic there is to say that, at the very least something is being done either way; but that logic excludes the Law of Diminishing Return. At some point the court system and the Law Enforcement system become entirely bogged down by the excess of false claims and then become incapable to answer to legitimate claims.

Where is the boundary on the foolishness of the government playing into the insanity of the populace? At what point does the government cease to listen to the loudest voice, and begin to listen to the clearest? At what point does the government cease to allow itself to be manipulated into a weapon of the opportune, and begin to retain its purpose as the shield of the unprotected? Utter foolishness.