It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

OP/ED: Drudge Rape Poll: Disgusting

page: 7
6
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2006 @ 02:54 PM
link   
We don't know if this man was guilty or innocent. In fact, a jury issued a guilty verdict! He is in prison! What makes you so sure he's innocent? Was he drinking? Was this one-night stand some kind of testament to his morality? Was he also a "drug harlot"? Why no! Of course not! He's male! He can't be a harlot! He's a stud! He's a normal young man! Boys will be boys!


Originally posted by df1
So now you freaking know the meaning of the phrase "rape card" and you have a specific example of why shield laws are immoral, unethical and biased against men.


Well, boo-hoo! Poor babies!

Just remember... if men weren't raping women every minute, there'd be absolutely no need for shield laws and 'rape cards' could not be played... So before you get all caught up in the unfairness, immorality and bias against the poor rapers (too late, I know), remember why we need "rape laws" in the first place!

Somewhere in America, a Woman is Raped Every 2 Minutes



The FBI estimates that only 37% of all rapes are reported to the police. U.S. Justice Department statistics are even lower, with only 26% of all rapes or attempted rapes being reported to law enforcement officials.


Yeah, every once in a while a man is going to suffer because of rape. Women suffer every minute, and their scars last for their entire life, but that doesn't matter to you, huh?

You have a problem with rape shield laws? Take your whining to the men who make them necessary!



[edit on 4-5-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



df1

posted on May, 4 2006 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by police_officer339
Granted.....However I do not see the word Freakin...being needed in an intellectual conversation.

And I see little point in your waving your badge in an intellectual conversation. Much to the detriment of freedom and liberty, police organizations have influence which far exceeds their numbers in terms of rape shield laws, drug laws and even traffic laws. It is not surprising that a police officer would come down on the side of secrecy and the muzzling the media given the heinous acts by police officers regularly exposed by the media.

As for your statistics, mark twain got it right: There are lies, damn lies and statistics. And police organizations are quite adept at using statistical lies to destroy freedom and liberty in america, so it is with rape shield laws. You love these laws because it much easier to gain convictions when an individuals ability to present a defense is unfairly restricted.

So dont bother playing the "cop card", I am unimpressed.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 03:16 PM
link   
This "only 25% of all rapes are reported" thing seem's suspect to me. How can you measure that number if they aren't reported



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
This "only 25% of all rapes are reported" thing seem's suspect to me. How can you measure that number if they aren't reported


"Reporting a rape" is a legal process requiring the victim to go to the police station, fill out forms and sign them, etc. Rape victims that don't report it still tell people about it or go to the hospital or call the police and then back out when it comes to filling out forms. A person only reports a rape if they want it investigated and/or prosecuted.

The FBI and the Justice Department also collect information from Rape Crisis centers, Planned Parenthood and other such organizations where women go to make sure they're not pregnant or carrying a disease from the rape.

I fail to see the humor.


df1

posted on May, 4 2006 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
A person only reports a rape if they want it investigated and/or prosecuted.

The woman can recant without any consequences anytime she wants and do it again and again and again, but none of this can be used by the accused in defending themselves against the charges. This is a travesty which seems to escape you and deputy dawg.

Personally I favor castration of convicted rapists, but the accused deserves the same rights as anyone accused of any other crime. BTW this same secrecy also applies to minors, including those accused of rape. Do you want to defend this crap also?

Judicial secrecy is immoral and clear evidence of an out of control police state.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 05:11 PM
link   
OK, this is a serious issue, and I'd rather have 10 rapists prosecuted with 1 innocent man in jail than the reverse. Yes, that sounds cruel but wouldn't you make the same choice? Especially when sex criminals tend to be repeat offenders?

[edit on 4-5-2006 by Nakash]



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1
The woman can recant without any consequences anytime she wants and do it again and again and again, but none of this can be used by the accused in defending themselves against the charges. This is a travesty which seems to escape you ...


You are mistaken. See D below.

A. I said a person. You always make women the victims of rape. But shield laws also protect men. They protect the alleged victim of sexual assault, whoever that happens to be. You just always make it out to be an evil, drunk harlot, because that fits with your image of making men the victim of rape instead of women.

B. Are you saying that a person's sexual history is relevant in determining if they were actually raped? Because that's what the shield laws keep private. The victim's sexual past. If that's what you're suggesting, please explain.

C. It seems to me that you are working under an assumption that all women who charge men with rape are lying and every man who says he didn't do it is telling the truth, when in fact, that happens in an infinitesimally small percentage of the cases.

D. And by the way...



Rape Shield Law
1. Legislated Exceptions Laws
Twenty-five of the nation’s rape shield laws fall within the legislated exceptions
approach. They contain general prohibitions on evidence of the complainant’s prior
sexual conduct, subject to at least one legislated exception. The exceptions various states allow include: the admission of evidence of prior sexual conduct between the
complainant and the accused; evidence of an alternative source of semen, pregnancy, or injury; evidence of a pattern of prior sexual conduct by the complainant; evidence of bias or motive to fabricate the sexual assault; evidence offered to prove that the accused had a reasonable but mistaken belief in the complainant’s consent; and evidence of prior false accusations of sexual assault by the complainant.




BTW this same secrecy also applies to minors, including those accused of rape. Do you want to defend this crap also?


Yes. If he raped someone, I don't care how many years he's been around.

Being wrongly accused is a terrible thing and I don't have any sympathy with anyone who would wrongly accuse someone of rape. But the sexual history of a rape victim has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not she (or he) was raped.


df1

posted on May, 4 2006 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
OK, this is a serious issue, and I'd rather have 10 rapists prosecuted with 1 innocent man in jail than the reverse. Yes, that sounds cruel but wouldn't you make the same choice?

Rape shield laws have nothing to do with convicting rapists, it has to do with the rights every individual should have to prove they are not guilty of a crime. It is outrageous that anyone would even suggest that an accused murder should have more rights than an accused rapist.

Would you feel the same way about putting 2 innocent men in jail to convict 10? How about 3 innocent men? Or is breaking even and putting 10 innocent men in jail to convict 10 ok with you?


BH,
How many times can a person claim rape and recant before it becomes relevant to the defense?

[edit on 4-5-2006 by df1]



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1
Rape shield laws have nothing to do with convicting rapists, it has to do with the rights every individual should have to prove they are not guilty of a crime.


Wrong! Rape Shield Laws have to do with protecting victims. They have nothing to do with the accused!

In this country, you don't have to prove you're not guilty. There is no such right! It is the burden of the accuser to prove the accused is guilty. And the accusers sexual habits have nothing to do with that. We don't put the victim of sexual assault on trial here, so their information is irrelevant! No wonder you're so confused about this if that's what you think!


Originally posted by df1
BH,
How many times can a person claim rape and recant before it becomes relevant to the defense?


Look it up!

I'm not getting sucked into doing your research for you. You want to prove that shield laws are a bad thing and victimize men? Do it yourself.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Originally posted by police_officer339
Granted.....However I do not see the word Freakin...being needed in an intellectual conversation.

And I see little point in your waving your badge in an intellectual conversation. Much to the detriment of freedom and liberty, police organizations have influence which far exceeds their numbers in terms of rape shield laws, drug laws and even traffic laws. It is not surprising that a police officer would come down on the side of secrecy and the muzzling the media given the heinous acts by police officers regularly exposed by the media.

As for your statistics, mark twain got it right: There are lies, damn lies and statistics. And police organizations are quite adept at using statistical lies to destroy freedom and liberty in america, so it is with rape shield laws. You love these laws because it much easier to gain convictions when an individuals ability to present a defense is unfairly restricted.

So dont bother playing the "cop card", I am unimpressed.



It would appear that he has little to say left about rape, and now begins his time slamming the police. I gave him facts, links to support those facts and he wants to talk about injustice with the police...HMMMMMM

Mark Twain also apparently described you...
Quote:...It is always the way; words will answer as long as it is only a person's neighbor who is in trouble, but when that person gets into trouble himself, it is time that the King rise up and do something.
- Personal Reflections of Joan of Arc

quit whinning and blaming first women then the police for your problems or ineffectiveness in conversation.



posted on May, 5 2006 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
OK, this is a serious issue, and I'd rather have 10 rapists prosecuted with 1 innocent man in jail than the reverse. Yes, that sounds cruel but wouldn't you make the same choice? Especially when sex criminals tend to be repeat offenders?

[edit on 4-5-2006 by Nakash]


So if ten percent of convicted rapists were actually innocent you're fine with them living in cell block "B" of a maximum security prison, as Bubba's girlfriend? This is the dumbest thing I've encountered on ATS since Freemason... Some people...

"Two stupids don't make a smart." Indeed.

-S

[edit on 5-5-2006 by Savonarola]



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Yes I have zero issues with it, rapists are generally repeat offenders, they don't stop with a single woman. If your innocent PROVE IT.



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
Yes I have zero issues with it, rapists are generally repeat offenders, they don't stop with a single woman. If your innocent PROVE IT.


It's the court's job to prove someone's guilty, not innocent (Innocent until proven guilty). No one, ever, should have to be locked away "just in case".

Another ultra-dumb comment.

-S



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Savonarola

Originally posted by Nakash
Yes I have zero issues with it, rapists are generally repeat offenders, they don't stop with a single woman. If your innocent PROVE IT.


It's the court's job to prove someone's guilty, not innocent (Innocent until proven guilty). No one, ever, should have to be locked away "just in case".

Another ultra-dumb comment.

So if ten percent of convicted rapists were actually innocent you're fine with them living in cell block "B" of a maximum security prison, as Bubba's girlfriend? This is the dumbest thing I've encountered on ATS since Freemason... Some people...

"Two stupids don't make a smart." Indeed.

-S


I am fully convinced that the only reason to begin throwing around insults like "dumb", "stupid" is the complete lack of ability to engage in and support an argument.

Our system of justice is not perfect, not by a long shot, but it is the best out there. Being imperfect some innocent people will be wronged and go to prison; perhaps even be executed.

However....

Your attitude is indicative of that era we can never be proud of when women were chattel and men had all the rights. As men we can never fully understand the devastation rape causes women. All we can do is observe the effects and they are horrific. What we can do is protect the potential victim so that more and more victims feel free to come forth and report the atrocity.

I for one feel shame that the number of reported rapes could be so low. Everywhere I look the facts and figures say it is anywhere between 16 and 30 percent. That means at a minimum 70 percent of these crimes go unreported.
And to answer the question as to how do they know how many, as they are unreported? Well, think about it, Psychologists, Counselors, Woman's groups, Advocates Centers, etc...You get the idea. That's a none question but I thought I would address it.

Rape Shield Laws are 100% necessary until we get the crime of Rape reported 100%



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

You have a problem with rape shield laws? Take your whining to the men who make them necessary!






Sorry to interrupt, but do you believe for one second that all the 'shield laws' will do anything to alleviate the situation? what a woman in countries with such abysimal stats needs is a handgun and some practice. how about lobbying for that? deters and kills much better than a piece of paper in a stack with a million others written in double-talk®, the native language of the profession...

Considering things like AIDS, i think rape should be considered 'assault with a lethal weapon' legitimizing the use of lethal force, no?

[edit on 7-5-2006 by Long Lance]



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   
HEY HEY Longlance....
Now that is an idea..



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Long Lance
Sorry to interrupt, but do you believe for one second that all the 'shield laws' will do anything to alleviate the situation?


No. That's not what rape shield laws are meant to do. The purpose of rape shield laws is to allow and encourage future victims to come forth and report when they've been attacked. It's to assure them that if they report rape, their identity will be kept secret and their sexual history will not be used against them in court . I don't expect rape shield laws to stop rape.



what a woman in countries with such abysimal stats needs is a handgun and some practice.


I agree with you 100%




Considering things like AIDS, i think rape should be considered 'assault with a lethal weapon' legitimizing the use of lethal force, no?


I agree with you 100%


df1

posted on May, 7 2006 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
And to answer the question as to how do they know how many, as they are unreported? Well, think about it, Psychologists, Counselors, Woman's groups, Advocates Centers, etc...You get the idea.

With all due respect, what you have done is provide a list of groups which benefit by receiving more funding if the unreported rape numbers are higher and less funding if the numbers are lower. This is how social programs are funded in america, thus it does not make a convincing case for the validity of the unreported rape numbers claimed.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


what a woman in countries with such abysimal stats needs is a handgun and some practice.


I agree with you 100%




Considering things like AIDS, i think rape should be considered 'assault with a lethal weapon' legitimizing the use of lethal force, no?


I agree with you 100%




I also agree 100%



[edit on 7-5-2006 by df1]



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 06:44 PM
link   
hey, with a name such as Savanoral, I doubt Bubba will ever understand what rape does to women. Too bad, our current system supports the victims and not the "poor rapists".



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
hey, with a name such as Savanoral, I doubt Bubba will ever understand what rape does to women. Too bad, our current system supports the victims and not the "poor rapists".


I'm not defending rapists. I'm saying that if even one innocent person goes to jail, that "one" is too many. Yes, rape is a crime. Yes, rapists should be prosecuted and imprisoned. No, someone accused but not a "proven" rapist shouldn't go to jail.

You said you'd be okay with innocent men going to jail for crimes they didn't commit so long as the we got rapists off the streets. If that's your interpretation of law and justice, that the ends justify the means, we might as well destroy the entire human race... because everyone's guilty of something, right?

That's what I mean by dumb.

-S

[edit on 7-5-2006 by Savonarola]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join