Degrees of rape - The poll

[Halibut]

Silly tarts who go out dressed like hoes and getting blind drunk do not deserve as much legal protection as prioity as those genuinely innocent women.

 

Yes of course they do.

 

The ridiculous law that men can do a few strokes (consented) inside but have to suddenly stop at his critical moment because a girl says 'no'... is bloody stupid.

 

You're actually saying that rape is alright there aren't you?

 

 

Tyson, for example, was fellated by Washington in a cab - and fully satiated in a hotel room -before his 'conviction'...what a load...

 

Her fellating him in the cab, consenting or coerced does not mean she wasn't raped.

[MC Spyda]

Agree with that, example 1 in the op isn't rape. so whats the point in debating it.

 

You can'r be only minimally raped or seriously raped. You're either raped and violated or you aren't.

If there is other additional trauma then that should reflect the severity of prosecution and punishment as seperate issues.

 

You can be minimally raped. I'll repeat a scenario that I mentioned earlier, which is rape, but I doubt anyone in their right mind would class it high up their with the worst kinds of rape.

 

...2 people have consented, then during the act, the female decides she no longer wants to continue, the male gets carried away and for a brief few seconds carries on, but then realises his wrong doing and stops. I would have thought in this case, some 'credit' would be given for not carrying on.

 

This is rape, no doubt about it. People think that this person should receive the same kind of punishment as someone that carried on right through until the end regardless?

[willman]

You can be minimally raped. I'll repeat a scenario that I mentioned earlier, which is rape, but I doubt anyone in their right mind would class it high up their with the worst kinds of rape.

 

...2 people have consented, then during the act, the female decides she no longer wants to continue, the male gets carried away and for a brief few seconds carries on, but then realises his wrong doing and stops. I would have thought in this case, some 'credit' would be given for not carrying on.

 

This is rape, no doubt about it. People think that this person should receive the same kind of punishment as someone that carried on right through until the end regardless?

 

But it's rape - you can't be only slightly killed or only slightly robbed.

I think the legal procedure should be the same, no amendments - but as you said mitigating circumstances, so perhaps his punishment will be less severe but the offence is the same.

What next people can only be a minimal paedo?

[MC Spyda]

But it's rape - you can't be only slightly killed or only slightly robbed.

I think the legal procedure should be the same, no amendments - but as you said mitigating circumstances, so perhaps his punishment will be less severe but the offence is the same.

What next people can only be a minimal paedo?

 

Oh indeed it is rape, I agree, the point is just that some rape is worse than others, as people have said, each case should be judged on its individual basis, not a blanket sentence for the literal act of rape itself.

[willman]

Oh indeed it is rape, I agree, the point is just that some rape is worse than others, as people have said, each case should be judged on its individual basis, not a blanket sentence for the literal act of rape itself.

 

But there needs to be a blanket sentence as starting point surely.

But thats just my opinion obviously,i'd like to think the crime was punished more severely than shoplifting but perhaps not as severely as a serial killer.

[MC Spyda]

But there needs to be a blanket sentence as starting point surely.

But thats just my opinion obviously,i'd like to think the crime was punished more severely than shoplifting but perhaps not as severely as a serial killer.

 

You might be right there. Do you have an idea of what you would like to see as the blanket starting point? I presume something like the example I gave would be that starting point.

[aelfheah]

Halibut, yes- girls who dress like professional slappers deserve what they get in the scenario above. As do serial or date rapists by what women (and most men) feel they should. By the above description, decent girls don't.

[willman]

You might be right there. Do you have an idea of what you would like to see as the blanket starting point? I presume something like the example I gave would be that starting point.

 

Possibly - after all, taking few brief seconds in the heat of the moment may feel like hours for the recipient, who may well have been contemplating saying no all along.

[willman]

Halibut, yes- girls who dress like professional slappers deserve what they get in the scenario above. As do serial or date rapists by what women (and most men) feel they should. By the above description, decent girls don't.

 

Perhaps you'd like to subscribe to that type of thinking to all crimes.

People with big cars and plasma's deserve to get robbed more than poor people. People who look like thugs or chavs should be locked up 'cos they deserve it for looking that way.

I'm sure thats what they did in the '70's with people of African descent.

 

You're opinion of someone isn't theirs.

[ronthenekred]

Lets quote the whole post ... you chose to quote it selectively.

.

 

The reason I was selective is because the following scenarios were all the same with a different theme with one common denominator (rape). If it makes you feel any better I'll oblige by replying to a few as there are so many.

 

Rape (real rape) is always an heinous offence and (IMO) anybody convicted of Rape should receive a salutory sentence.

 

That sent alarm bells ringing and you only got into your 3rd word.

 

But there are indeed differences between rapes and some rapes are indeed worse than others.

 

You disagree?

 

A drunken man who comes home from the pub and rapes his wife has committed na heinous offence. The offence of rape. On conviction, he should be (IMO) castrated and locked up.

 

A man who rapes a 3 year old child has committed an heinous offence. It has happened. 99.99% of the time I don't approve of the death penalty ... there are exceptions.

 

If an 18 year old (adult) man has a 15 year old long-standing girlfriend and he has sexual intercourse with that child, the man is guilty of rape. She (a minor) could not have consented, so it is rape.

 

Yes it's rape, and she could also have consented, as could a 12 yr old.

 

Is that as heinous an offence as the man who raped the 3- year old child?

 

The offence of rape? No. The offence of raping a child? I can't think of anything more heinous.

 

Then there was the case of the man who took an under-age child to Gretna. Rape. - The fact that you have been seeing this child and claim to be in love with her is 'in love' is irrelevant. She was 15, you were 18. An adult. Guilty. Go to jail.

 

Guilty of rape? yes. go to jail? depends on the circumstances.

 

And there was the case of the 29 - year old woman who abducted a 14- year old male and took him to Florida. Apparently she F*****d his brains out.

 

She was 'recovered' to the UK (The court in Florida was going to send her down for a long time.)

 

"Oh, you poor dear woman, You poor 29 year old victim. That nasty 15 year old male must've lead you astray! Take a 'telling off'. These wicked male children must learn that they can't get away with luring midle-aged birds."

 

UK law. Females can't rape males (Even if the female is 50 and the male is 10.)

 

Males can rape females.

 

Perhaps the law needs to be changed? If a predatory male can be convicted of raping an under-age female, shouldn't that work both ways?

 

It should certainly be looked at more carefully, but we are talking about present rape law.

 

Rape as an heinous offence. Without doubt in the context of some of your scenarios.

 

Should an 18-year old male who has sexual intercourse with his 15yr 11 month girlfriend be treated as harshly as a gang-rapist?

 

Absolutely not.

 

Rape is a very serious offence and (on conviction) should be punished harshly.

 

Harshly yes, depending on the circumstances surrounding the rape.

 

If the punishment for rape is (say) 15 years imprisonment and given that a jury would only convict a person who they are convinced is guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt' then should a jury who are convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is innocent and that the charge is wholly fallacious be permitted to send the person who made the complaint to jail for the same time?

 

If the accuser was found to be lying I'd base my sentence on the evidence surrounding the lie and charge, or are you suggesting an eye for an eye?..

 

Exempt DNA evidence, rape is often 'He says - She says'.

 

If the 'going rate' is 10 years - and if we do believe in trial by jury - shouldn't that be an 'each way' sentence?