Conviction for Rape?

Recommended Posts

Or the world will be an apocalyptic wasteland and crime will be a thousand times worse than it is now.

 

So optimistic... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are different levels of rape just as there are different levels of most crimes.

 

If you make a plan, commit to the plan, execute the plan, and kill someone.  Cold blooded murder.

You come home and find your wife with another dude and kill him, not cold blooded murder.

 

Really the same thing with rape... and in my opinion, crimes like that deserve no forgiveness or remorse.  If you vet someone, then trap and rape them, then you made the conscious decision to fuck that person up for the rest of their life, and in my opinion should forfeit your own.  Some with premeditated anything else, you went into the situation having weighed what you get out of it, with the possible consequences of getting caught, and came down on the side of rape.  This tells me the penalty is too soft.  If the penalty was death, then maybe the scales would have tipped back the other way.

 

To me, same thing for child molesters.  You inappropriately touch a child, you die.  Plain and simple.  Obviously the definition of child can be blurry, but the majority of these incidents involve children who are 12 or younger.  A 12 year old is not educated enough to give consent, period.

 

 

One thing that aggravates me though, a guy and a girl go to a party.  They have too much to drive and have sex, the next day the girl cries rape.  "She was too drunk to give consent" is normally what is talked about... but the dude was just as drunk normally.  If she was too intoxicated to be responsible for her actions, then how is the guy supposed to be held accountable for his own?  We have all been in the situation where a guy and a girl are together, she is constantly teasing, alluding to sex, etc.  It is part of a dance that has gone on forever.  With two sober people the game is fine, she teases, he knows she is teasing, always hoping for more that night, but ultimately deep down he knows it isn't happening on the 2nd date.  However when your throw mind altering drugs into the equation, her teasing might go farther than it should have, the guy actually believes what is going on is seduction instead of just playful courting rituals.  They get too far gone and have sex, then the next day no one knows what happened.

 

I am not one of those people who blame women and say they ask for rape with short skirts and what not, but I think a lot of the problems when a woman is "raped" by her date are because of the game.  Both my mother and sister were sexually abused, and both of them at young ages.  I have no remorse for anyone who would take advantage of a woman or child, but I do believe that in some situations the woman adds to the problem and women need to protect themselves.

 

If you lay down ground rules at the beginning of a date, for example stating "We will not be having sex tonight", I think it would go a long way to cutting down those misunderstandings.  And if he cuts his losses and leaves, then you didn't really wanna go out with him anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely disagree that women "add" to the problem, I think that's utter nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bit of a generalisation, but I see the point he's trying to make.

 

I remember hearing about a book (possibly by a female author?) in one of my college classes, about the difference between how society viewed sex a century or two ago versus how we treat it today. Apparently, back then sex was really no big deal in comparison to now - where it's such a sensitive subject with all its codes and conventions for how it should be approached (if anyone has read The Game by Neil Strauss, you'll know exactly what I mean), and the incredible extent to which the law gets involved these days... (if anyone knows what book I'm on about, please let me know - I haven't read it, but would really like to).

 

Anyway, I came up with a theory regarding equilibrium. The more value and prestige we apply to a concept - be it sexuality, religion, politics, whatever - the more negative aspects become associated with it in order to balance it out, and perhaps we - the omorashi fetish culture - can understand this better than most. Imagine a world where sex was an everyday thing like going to a restaurant or watching a film - without all the taboo and sensitivity. Where you could walk up to someone you find attractive and say "wanna fuck?", they'd respond with "sure", you get in bed for a couple hours, and then you wouldn't think much more of it. We'd lose that element of prestige that comes with actually making the effort to have sex in reality, but at the same time there'd be so fewer issues like rape and sexual predation (in theory), simply because sex wouldn't be that big of a deal to anyone. We wouldn't be so concerned about things like the other person's attractiveness/desirability, because the act wouldn't be that special of a thing. And fundamentally, as long as you take the necessary precautions to avoid pregnancy and so (and you do it right), sex is fun.

 

But alas, it's just a theory. I've no evidence to back it up, nor do I even think all the world's sexuality-related problems could be solved by changing the mentality of our society, purely because from a realist's point of view, it's pretty close to impossible to even plan a plausible attempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it is right now, they aren't tough enough on rapists. In the ghetto area in which I live, we get two notices a month on another child molester moving in nearby. The fucked up thing, is that there are two grade schools and a high school nearby. These people spend maybe a few years in prison, then are released on probation or parole. I dont like seeing those walk right by school kids walking home from school. They seriously stand outside and smoke, watching them. I keep an eye on them of course, but why these people who touch 7 year olds and are hanging out watching kids instead of at least being castrated is beyond me.

I honestly think if rape is fully provable, then life in prison with no special treatment is sufficient. Instead, however, they are givin special.treatment, and are in a safe part of the prison with others they can relate to.

Rape is one of the.worst crimes someone could commit, so the punishment should fit the crime, or at put them where no one could get raped by them again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you guys believe that if someone rapes a person, they will do it again given the chance? I really think there's varying levels of severity regarding rape. Especially since a lot of people claim rape when they really just made a bad decision. Life in prison and the death penelty should only be for extreme cases where someone is doing something again and again after all other options of rehab and punishment have failed. Not for a one time occurrence.

 

I get that rape is bad, very bad, but I don't get why people want to torture and take someone's life just for doing it once. How is that going to help anything, at all? It's definitely not going to give the raped their innocence, viriginity, dignity, etc back. You'll just have one dead person.

 

I cheated on a girlfriend one time in 12th grade, never did it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you guys believe that if someone rapes a person, they will do it again given the chance? I really think there's varying levels of severity regarding rape. Especially since a lot of people claim rape when they really just made a bad decision. Life in prison and the death penelty should only be for extreme cases where someone is doing something again and again after all other options of rehab and punishment have failed. Not for a one time occurrence.

 

I get that rape is bad, very bad, but I don't get why people want to torture and take someone's life just for doing it once. How is that going to help anything, at all? It's definitely not going to give the raped their innocence, viriginity, dignity, etc back. You'll just have one dead person.

 

I cheated on a girlfriend one time in 12th grade, never did it again.

Yes, I believe the vast majority of people that commit a rape can and will do so again if given the chance.

I fully understand why someone would want to torture a rapist, even one time is too many and the fact that it was only "one time" does NOT make it any less horrific for the victim.

It can help the victim get some sense of justice.

You really can't compare cheating and raping, they are not remotely similar in any way.

 

Edited by vexer6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't comparing them, I was just saying I did something bad and never did it again.

 

I don't understand why torture is a justifiable option. All you're doing is perpetuating the problem. Someone close to that person will want to come after the torturer, then it just keeps going and going. Or the torturer will just be arrested and possibly put in jail for life or executed.

 

Surely there's a more sensible way to justify the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why torture is a justifiable option.

Holy demoncratic inquisition, apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't buy the idea that a severe enough crime can strip a potential punishment of being classified as cruel, nor do I buy the notion that revenge is the only, or even best, route to closure for victims. Also, within the limits dictated by practicality, I don't agree with the concept that an act can be classified as a crime if committed by a private citizen but the same act can be considered justice when committed by an appointed agent of the state.

That said, I can agree that a quick, cheap execution is probably the most practical solution for dealing with the complete monsters, and such individuals are probably rare enough that any data that could be collected from studying them would be of little practical use. Even if I didn't find the concept of executions immoral(I take "Thou Shalt not Kill" far more seriously than most Bible thumpers), I would be opposed to how the US handles them simply because an execution ends up costing taxpayers more than a life sentence.

However, it isn't in regards to the complete monsters that I feel the US Legal System(to call them a Justice system would either be a misnomer or admitting that evil can be justice under certain perspectives) fails the greatest number of people. From what I've seen and heard, the US legal system has a bad habit of labeling people criminals for victimless acts, punishing petty criminals by forcing them into an environment that's more likely to turn them into harden criminals rather than contributing members of society, and little to no serious effort is made to help the victims recover from the psychological wounds. I also can't help wondering how many of the more dangerous individuals manage to slip through the cracks because resources are tied-up focusing on petty criminals and the prosecuted non-criminals.

Psychological and sociological research into why people decide to inflict harm upon others with goals of minimizing the number of individuals who start down a path of deliberate harm, minimizing the number of individuals who escalate to acts that cause greater damage, and maximizing the number of individuals who turn away from destructive behavior sounds like a good plan of action moving forward. Certaintly sounds a lot etter than "let's harm those who harm others" mentality the present legal system seems to be built on.

Also, while I will agree that isolation/execution can prevent the unrepentant from causing further harm, it can also prevent the the repentant from atoning, and I think the current system favors the assumption that criminals are unrepentant. Granted, it can be argued that some crimes are too severe to ever risk that the perpetrator will atone given the opportunity, no matter how much remorse they show.

Still, given how rare the true monsters are, I think optimizing that part of the legal system beyond containment can wait until we straighten out the other 99+%.

t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally do not believe in "Thou Shalt Not Kill" when it comes to murderers.

I fail to see how the term justice system is a "misnomer"

The vast majority of murderers and rapists never "atone" for their crimes and are "unrepentant", they have no regrets whatsoever and will do it again if they can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well let's look at it this way. In many cases the male is drunk and although he is a countable for his actions he doesn't deserve to die. In my opinion the only time the death penalty should be allowed is heinous crimes toward children such as human trafficking or Tourture. Although child molesters are some of the worst kind of people on the planet I don't believe the death penalty is worth all the money put into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, since this thread got bumped, I'd have to say I agree with most of what past me said. I still think the death penalty is universally immoral and hypocritical given that homicide is illegal in most circumstances. I still think very little of what the legal system in the US does can be called Justice by a moral person, and I still think first-time offenders deserve an opportunity to atone.

Though, I do have to ask:

1. What percentage of rapists are single incident, single victim at the time of first conviction? Multiple incident, single victim? Multiple victims with a single incident per victim? Multiple victims with multiple incidents per victim? I'd argue these categories are, in general, progressively worse, but I have my doubts the courts properly distinguish between them.

2. What percentage of rapists released after a first conviction receive a second conviction?

3. How does the incidence of prison rape committed by those convicted of rape compare to the general prison population?

4. How do these number compare between the US and countries with harsher penalties for rape? Countries with lighter penalties for rape? If a correlation exists between frequency of rape and severity of punishment, is it proportionate or inverse? Is the correlation due to a causal link?

5. Are there other factors with equal or greater impact on the incidence of rape compared to severity of punishment? How can the US encourage factors that lead to lower incidence of rape? discourage factors that lead to higher incidence?

I'd try to find the answers to these myself, but my track record of finding statistics I can both trust and are presented in a format my screen reader can comprehend has been rather lousy, and I suspect some of the sources I'm looking for only exist in print rather than online. Then again, given the kneejerk reaction so many people have to issues of sex, it wouldn't surprise me if no one has tried to do the statistical analysis or whoever did had their career crucified in the court of public opinion.

Edited by Jeffery Mewtamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I personally do not believe in "Thou Shalt Not Kill" when it comes to murderers.

Because our legal systems aren't perfect and the release of innocent people who have spend years behind bars, happens on a yearly basis in almost every democratic country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why just women first off, men get raped too, really wish people would remember every gender is at risk, and in my opinion, i'd like to replace the testing of animals with pedophiles and rapists, what better way to test human products then on a human? they end up going to jail for the rest of their lives anyway, might as well get put forth into something good like science and stop killing animals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^First of all, I don't believe a pedophile is anymore likely to molest a child than a member of the general population is to commit rape. Being attracted to someone you can't legally have even if they returned your feelings doesn't magically drop one's self-control to zero. I've also read that most child molesters aren't actually pedophiles and target children for reasons other than sexual preference.

Also, even if you replace pedophile with child molestor(which I hope is what you really meant), even if I didn't find the idea of using prisoners as human guinea pigs morally repulsive, I'd question the usefulness of limiting human trials to sexual criminals. I'm pretty sure clinical trials for new pharmaceuticals generally seek out volunteers from among the section of the population that suffers from the condition the new drug or treatment is intended to treat, and unless rape is far more prevalent than I think it is, I'd suspect you'd be hard press to find a sufficient sample size of convicts suffering from a particular ailment. Granted, if you were to study rapists and found that the majority of them have a particular mental illness, that might be an indicator that people with that mental illness are more prone to behaviors that lead to committing rape, which could potentially help to identify people who are heading down that path and steer them away before they cross the line.

It's easy to say "lets make bad people suffer", but perhaps we should be asking such questions as:
-What benefit is there in making bad people suffer?
-Can these benefits be achieved without making bad people suffer?
-If making bad people suffer is the only practical means of achieving these benefits, are they worth inflicting said suffering?
-If there is no benefit to making bad people suffer beyond someone getting their jollies from making or seeing bad people suffer, are these people any better than the bad people being made to suffer?

I'm no oracle, but I suspect most of the suffering inflicted on bad people has at best less benefit than people think it does, often does more harm than good in the long run, and even when the benefits are real, can more often than not be achieved while inflicting less suffering upon bad people. And while you could argue someone getting their jollies from the suffering of bad people isn't as bad as someone getting their jollies from the suffering of good people, I'd argue a sadist is still a sadist even if their victims are all other sadists and that such jollies are a piss poor justification for making bad people suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any rapist, regardless of sex, deserves to be locked away forever, especially if they are a serial rapist. I was orally raped at 16 by a 30 year old man who'd been using his online profiles to lure naive underage girls from ages 12-16 with promises of love and respect, then turning the relationship one-sided so he always got whatever he wanted out of his victim, and eventually luring them out on "meet-ups" with him so he could push them into a dark corner/alleyway to rape them orally, anally, and/or vaginally. He would also take pictures of the rapes, and he'd keep them on his computer and phone to jack off to. I was then orally and vaginally raped at 19 by my ex-best friend's brother who I'd met for the first time that night, who I later learned was also a serial rapist who did this to every girl friend of his sister that came over. IMO, they both deserve death because they know exactly what they're doing is evil but they do it anyway for their entertainment and sexual gratification, and they admitted to WANTING to break their victims down to the point of insanity because "it's fun." Or lock them up forever, at the very least. Too bad the cops didn't GAF either time :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All sex offenders should be dealt with in the same way in my opinion; full life sentences. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though I did recently watch a BBC documentary by Louis Theroux called "a place for paedophiles"  which focuses on Coallinga mental hospital in California where sex offenders can be sent after serving their prison sentence and can be kept there indefinitely, very interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.