WrongPlanet.net
WP Members: > 80,000



Aspie Affection

New Today: 13
New Yesterday: 15

Is life in prison/the death penalty too harsh for rape? Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index -> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion     
blauSamstag
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Apr 06, 2011
Posts: 1890

PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2011 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

godoftruemercy wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Violent rape or statutory rape?

ruveyn


Rape is always rape, whether or not "violence" takes place. So people don't use the term "violent rape," because it promotes the idea that you have to be physically overwhelmed or extremely injured to have been raped.

Statutory rape is a weird one, though. I guess a thorough case-by-case evaluation would be needed.


I think it's unrealistic to consider all forms of unwanted sex to weigh the same on the balance of justice.

We had a guy out here who would wait for unaccompanied female joggers on a mountain trail and jump them, violently raping them. He admitted as much in court. I say kill him. He's just an unruly dog that needs to be put down.

A wealthy man who is married to a woman who no longer loves him but is dependent on him financially, who insists on (but does not force) sex is an as*hole who deserves to be shunned by polite society but it's unclear whether you could really say a crime had been committed in the legal sense.

There are many shades of gray between these two characters. I think it's right for the law to recognize and clarify differences between individual crimes in sentencing guidelines.

But some people should just never be on the streets again. Unfortunately execution in the USA is a fairly expensive proposition, with life in prison generally the cheaper option for the state. I'm sure the endless appeals play a part in that, but the real costs of the execution itself - and insuring the execution - are expensive as well. Warehousing people who can't behave in society is relatively cheap. Especially if we stop locking up nonviolent drug offenders.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
godoftruemercy
Toucan
Toucan


Joined: Sep 20, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 298

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

blauSamstag wrote:
godoftruemercy wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Violent rape or statutory rape?

ruveyn


Rape is always rape, whether or not "violence" takes place. So people don't use the term "violent rape," because it promotes the idea that you have to be physically overwhelmed or extremely injured to have been raped.

Statutory rape is a weird one, though. I guess a thorough case-by-case evaluation would be needed.


I think it's unrealistic to consider all forms of unwanted sex to weigh the same on the balance of justice.

We had a guy out here who would wait for unaccompanied female joggers on a mountain trail and jump them, violently raping them. He admitted as much in court. I say kill him. He's just an unruly dog that needs to be put down.

A wealthy man who is married to a woman who no longer loves him but is dependent on him financially, who insists on (but does not force) sex is an as*hole who deserves to be shunned by polite society but it's unclear whether you could really say a crime had been committed in the legal sense.

There are many shades of gray between these two characters. I think it's right for the law to recognize and clarify differences between individual crimes in sentencing guidelines.

But some people should just never be on the streets again. Unfortunately execution in the USA is a fairly expensive proposition, with life in prison generally the cheaper option for the state. I'm sure the endless appeals play a part in that, but the real costs of the execution itself - and insuring the execution - are expensive as well. Warehousing people who can't behave in society is relatively cheap. Especially if we stop locking up nonviolent drug offenders.


Unfortunately, rape happens to be one of those things with a very clear cut definition. If someone does not consent or cannot consent, it is rape. Your latter example, I believe, is coercion, which some feminist thinkers think might belong in the category of sexual assault. Here's an essay on the topic of those gray areas-trigger warning, though, and big time. This might be a good topic for another thread.

http://www.racialicious.com/2008/12/21/original-essay-the-not-rape-epidemic/

Really, I don't understand why rapists get 3-5 or probation in some cases and people go in for possession at all. What's the point of having a prison system if you can't keep all of the people with rampant uncontrolled paraphilias in it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LKL
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Jul 22, 2007
Age: 38
Posts: 7600

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I support long prison sentences and/or testosterone inhibition, but not the death penalty - mainly b/c I don't accept the death penalty in general. There are some crimes that are so heinous that they deserve the death penalty, like torturing someone to death, but where there's even a shred of a doubt, there's a chance that the state is executing an innocent person. States shouldn't be in the business of doing that. And, as someone already mentioned, it costs too much anyway.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Beauty_pact
Everlastingly suicidal otaku
Phoenix


Joined: Oct 15, 2010
Age: 133
Posts: 1357
Location: SvÝ■jo­

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LKL wrote:
I support long prison sentences and/or testosterone inhibition, but not the death penalty - mainly b/c I don't accept the death penalty in general. There are some crimes that are so heinous that they deserve the death penalty, like torturing someone to death, but where there's even a shred of a doubt, there's a chance that the state is executing an innocent person. States shouldn't be in the business of doing that. And, as someone already mentioned, it costs too much anyway.


Many who are raped are mentally tortured to death, when they take their lives, later, as a result from what was done to them. Does that mean that you'd agree to the death penalty for rapists, in the event of that happening? They did torture someone/some to death, after all.

Some systems of death penalty only cost so much because they are ineffectively constructed. I do agree that it'd be horrible if someone innocent would be put to death, however, but then again, many innocents are currently in jail, all over the world, getting frequently raped, and many people actually seem to find that acceptable, and even funny, amazingly. I'd much rather be put to death than raped in jail, personally.

Just for the record, again, my imaginary torture system would only be for people that you can be sure were guilty. However, I suppose it would also be sort of pointless, if it wasn't known about... retribution is good, but merely that is just not good enough... there should be a positive, preventative result from it, too. But making it public might not be very good, either; it probably could mess up society in new ways, even if it hypothetically would lead to less rape. I guess maybe the best solution to it all indeed would be if the human species just was entirely wiped out from an asteroid impact. The little good with humanity is completely overshadowed by all the bad... even if one never should forget about the good. It's a losing battle, though... history clearly tells that you can forget about hope for humanity. Sorry, I'm rambling. =_=
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
SomeRandomGuy


Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 15664
Location: Eating over the sink.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 8:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Beauty_pact wrote:
LKL wrote:
I support long prison sentences and/or testosterone inhibition, but not the death penalty - mainly b/c I don't accept the death penalty in general. There are some crimes that are so heinous that they deserve the death penalty, like torturing someone to death, but where there's even a shred of a doubt, there's a chance that the state is executing an innocent person. States shouldn't be in the business of doing that. And, as someone already mentioned, it costs too much anyway.


Many who are raped are mentally tortured to death, when they take their lives, later, as a result from what was done to them. Does that mean that you'd agree to the death penalty for rapists, in the event of that happening? They did torture someone/some to death, after all.

Under this kind of outlook abusive parents and school bullies should also get the death penalty. You have to be really careful how much you want to extend the analogy of psychological suffering and PTSD amounting to torture.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Burnbridge
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Aug 25, 2011
Age: 39
Posts: 971
Location: Columbus, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

godoftruemercy wrote:
Unfortunately, rape happens to be one of those things with a very clear cut definition. If someone does not consent or cannot consent, it is rape. Your latter example, I believe, is coercion, which some feminist thinkers think might belong in the category of sexual assault.


Nope. Legally in the US the only distinction between rape and sexual assault is that the first involves "penetration" and the latter does not. Insufficient consent╣ or false consent▓ given under duress, if followed by penetration, is rape. If followed by touching an external body part (including external genitalia, arms, cheeks, etc) is sexual assault.

-
╣. Such as body language, a look in someone's eyes, or no positive "yes" answer
▓. Such as when a person lies about their STD status, etc
_________________
No dx yet ... AS=171/200,NT=13/200 ... EQ=9/SQ=128 ... AQ=39 ... MB=IntJ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ruveyn
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Sep 22, 2008
Age: 78
Posts: 31520
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

godoftruemercy wrote:


Rape is always rape, whether or not "violence" takes place. So people don't use the term "violent rape," because it promotes the idea that you have to be physically overwhelmed or extremely injured to have been raped.


Apparently you do not know what "statutory rape" means. Under the laws in some states consenting sexual intercourse with a person who is below the legal age minimum for consenting to sexual intercouse is legally defined as rape. So you are saying that having consenting sex with a girl one day before her sixteenth birthday is the same awful horrible crime as having consenting sex with the same girl one day after her sixteenth birthday. Oh how dreadful!

When I was a kid we used to have the saying: "Sixteen will get you twenty"

ruveyn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tequila
Meh
Phoenix


Joined: Feb 26, 2006
Posts: 29138
Location: Lancashire, UK

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ruveyn wrote:
Apparently you do not know what "statutory rape" means.


Indeed; in the UK, underage sex is often not prosecuted depending on circumstances.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
godoftruemercy
Toucan
Toucan


Joined: Sep 20, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 298

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ruveyn wrote:
godoftruemercy wrote:


Rape is always rape, whether or not "violence" takes place. So people don't use the term "violent rape," because it promotes the idea that you have to be physically overwhelmed or extremely injured to have been raped.


Apparently you do not know what "statutory rape" means. Under the laws in some states consenting sexual intercourse with a person who is below the legal age minimum for consenting to sexual intercouse is legally defined as rape. So you are saying that having consenting sex with a girl one day before her sixteenth birthday is the same awful horrible crime as having consenting sex with the same girl one day after her sixteenth birthday. Oh how dreadful!

When I was a kid we used to have the saying: "Sixteen will get you twenty"

ruveyn


Yeah, I was talking about statutory rape laws, which are weird, often varied, and need to be way more case-based. So I agree with you. In NY the official age of consent is 17, but if you're up to four years older than a 16-year old, sex is considered consensual. Personally, I think it's a good system-what you want to be avoiding with a statutory rape law is authority figures/older people in general pressuring/coercing/deceiving children into sex. I don't know if we're an exception. Also, in the state where I live I'm pretty sure you can have statutory sexual assault and statutory rape.

Quote:
Nope. Legally in the US the only distinction between rape and sexual assault is that the first involves "penetration" and the latter does not. Insufficient consent╣ or false consent▓ given under duress, if followed by penetration, is rape. If followed by touching an external body part (including external genitalia, arms, cheeks, etc) is sexual assault.

-
╣. Such as body language, a look in someone's eyes, or no positive "yes" answer
▓. Such as when a person lies about their STD status, etc


Ooh, I meant sexual assault as an umbrella term for rape, legal sexual assault, and all the fun "not-rape"-type exploitative acts that aren't illegal. Danged autism!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Burnbridge
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Aug 25, 2011
Age: 39
Posts: 971
Location: Columbus, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

godoftruemercy wrote:
Ooh, I meant sexual assault as an umbrella term for rape, legal sexual assault, and all the fun "not-rape"-type exploitative acts that aren't illegal. Danged autism!


I think "intimate violence" is perhaps the umbrella term you were looking for?
_________________
No dx yet ... AS=171/200,NT=13/200 ... EQ=9/SQ=128 ... AQ=39 ... MB=IntJ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
godoftruemercy
Toucan
Toucan


Joined: Sep 20, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 298

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Burnbridge wrote:
godoftruemercy wrote:
Ooh, I meant sexual assault as an umbrella term for rape, legal sexual assault, and all the fun "not-rape"-type exploitative acts that aren't illegal. Danged autism!


I think "intimate violence" is perhaps the umbrella term you were looking for?


That'll do it! Thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LKL
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Jul 22, 2007
Age: 38
Posts: 7600

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Beauty_pact wrote:
LKL wrote:
I support long prison sentences and/or testosterone inhibition, but not the death penalty - mainly b/c I don't accept the death penalty in general. There are some crimes that are so heinous that they deserve the death penalty, like torturing someone to death, but where there's even a shred of a doubt, there's a chance that the state is executing an innocent person. States shouldn't be in the business of doing that. And, as someone already mentioned, it costs too much anyway.


Many who are raped are mentally tortured to death, when they take their lives, later, as a result from what was done to them. Does that mean that you'd agree to the death penalty for rapists, in the event of that happening? They did torture someone/some to death, after all.

No. I think that the crime would *deserve* death, but that the criminal justice system is not infalliable so to keep from killing the wrong person, the state shouldn't kill anyone. Letting someone, who deserves death, rot in prison for a few decades instead is the lesser evil to the possibility of having killed the wrong person.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
91
Forgot the Candlesticks
Phoenix


Joined: Oct 31, 2010
Posts: 3063
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LKL wrote:
No. I think that the crime would *deserve* death, but that the criminal justice system is not infalliable so to keep from killing the wrong person, the state shouldn't kill anyone. Letting someone, who deserves death, rot in prison for a few decades instead is the lesser evil to the possibility of having killed the wrong person.


+1

"Many that live deserve death but some that die deserve life" Tolkien
_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index -> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion   
Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  

 
Read more Articles on Wrong Planet



Wrong Planet is a Registered Trademark.
Copyright 2004-2014, Wrong Planet, LLC and Alex Plank. Alex does public speaking for Autism.

Advertise on Wrong Planet

Alex Hotchalk / Glam 

Alex Plank  Aspie Affection 

Terms of Service - You must read this as a user of Wrong Planet | Privacy Policy

Subscribe: RSS Feed  Wrong Planet News  Wrong Planet Forums




fine art