You're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about. And the more you try to explain your objection to the NYS bill, the more garbled and confused your thinking gets.
The NYS bill specifically referred to a pilot project involving the requesting and issuance of temporary
orders of protection in Family Court by audio-visual means.
First you tried to explain your objections to that portion of the bill by rambling all over the place about criminal charges and due process rights of criminal defendants--matters totally unrelated to that section of the NYS bill about Family Court and the issuing of temporary restraining orders by audio-visual means.
Now you are rambling about permanent orders of protection, also unrelated to what the NYS bill referred to. When something says it pertains to temporary orders, your thinking has to be pretty scrambled to conclude they are talking about permanent orders, as you have done.
. Feminist groups are opposing attempts to make this process fair
The NYS legislature is now a "feminist group"?
The legislature had no problem agreeing to pass that section of the bill pertaining to the pilot project in Family Court--the section you think is "unfair", and that you gave as your reason for not supporting the entire bill.
Are you aware your thinking makes no sense? You are so hell bent on attacking feminists, you can't even focus on a specific section of a proposed NYS bill that has no connection whatsoever with criminal proceedings, due process issues, or specifically feminist concerns, or which would disadvantage anyone in terms of their legal rights. Using audio-visual communications is already part of our general legal system, and there is no reason not to have a pilot project to explore its utility in NYS Family Court regarding temporary orders of protection, where it might enable such orders to be requested and obtained more rapidly by those who seek the protection of that court.
And what makes you think that the process and procedures for granting a permanent restraining order in NYS are not already being carried out in a lawful manner? Don't you think someone in the NYS judiciary, or legislature, or the governor's office, would have noticed if this wasn't being done in a lawful manner?
You seem to be trying to downplay the ongoing continuing risks one individual might pose to others, or their ongoing interference with the rights of others to live a life without being subjected to threat, or jeopardy, or menace, or harm, the sort of things that would be involved in the issuing of permanent restraining orders.
Your thinking is too scrambled and confused to make discussion with you worthwhile, and it's founded on distortions such as those you blatantly displayed in your interpretation of the NYS bill regarding the Family Court pilot project. Mainly you want to kvetch about feminists without providing concrete objective evidence, and links, to support such views. That doesn't lead to productive discussion of anything.