Who organizes a filibuster against an anti-sexual assault bill?
The proposal to take SA cases out of the chain entirely was a huge deal, so I actually didn't find that too crazy. The people against this bill agree there needs to be change, they just didn't like this particular bill.
I kind of agree with meltoine on this - I'd like to know if it was only the pulling of cases out of the chain of command that was the issue with the bill that was filibustered, or if there was something else.
Because it really feels like the chain of command has failed to demonstrate that it can responsibly handle SA cases with all of the high-profile cases hitting the news lately. (and really, they are only hitting the news due to the ranks involved, I have to assume there are a not insubstantial number of lower ranking situations that are poorly handled, as well)
The proposal to take SA cases out of the chain entirely was a huge deal, so I actually didn't find that too crazy. The people against this bill agree there needs to be change, they just didn't like this particular bill.
I kind of agree with meltoine on this - I'd like to know if it was only the pulling of cases out of the chain of command that was the issue with the bill that was filibustered, or if there was something else.
Because it really feels like the chain of command has failed to demonstrate that it can responsibly handle SA cases with all of the high-profile cases hitting the news lately. (and really, they are only hitting the news due to the ranks involved, I have to assume there are a not insubstantial number of lower ranking situations that are poorly handled, as well)
I agree with audette. I'll admit that I'm not well acquainted with the military justice system*, but Gillibrand's bill made sense to me. It seems like having the chain of command involved in the prosecution can set up some major conflicts of interest if someone in that chain is also involved in the crime (either directly, or indirectly by trying to protect the perpetrator).
*I know that you are ojo, so if there is a compelling reason for keeping the status quo, then I'll defer to you on that.