Being Gang Raped While Unconscious is not Rape

[Themius]

You're being very unpragmatic.

In my opinion the Spanish solution is better than the Anglo-saxon one, where the courts have to deal with a barrage of false rape accusations and innocent people being convicted because the woman decided she wanted to have intercourse while shitdrunk.

False rape accusations are exceedingly rare, why do you people treat them as a fucking epidemic?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah sure, imagine a random guy from gaming forum judging people based on vice clickbait article. He would have much more say in the matter than actual judge who's done whole investigation based on evidence and interrogation.

5 men sentenced to a lesser charge carrying roughly half the time for a sexual abuse charge but not rape charge because victim was unconscious is clickbait how?

- - - Updated - - -

Same as it has to be proven here. So, how exactly is their system "better" when you can be guilty of forcing yourself on an unconscious girl but it isn't rape and those that are falsely convicted have to serve more time than they would here?



As I said, it does not matter they probably would have gotten a lighter sentence in other countries. These men committed rape...they should be convicted of rape.

Here's why I do not get. They're trying to say it is okay because in America or another western country they may have gotten less time... what? That's not an argument.

If someone in America gang raped a 14 year old unconscious person in general that would be rape, and they'd be tried with sexual assault + Rape, not a sexual assault charge without rape. Rape in America is penetration without consent. (which needs revising also)

[Egomaniac]

It definitely is an argument.

You are comparing two different systems. Tell me which system you would prefer:

System A:
In this system of law, it is much easier to see someone convicted under the denominator named "rape", but the punishment is also 2 to 3 times lighter.

System B:
In this system of law, it is much harder to see someone convicted under the denominator named "rape", but it is more easily to see them convicted under the crime described as "sexual harassment", for which the punishment is still relatively high.

---

Personally I would prefer System B. I don't care if they're called "rapists" by law or not, I care that they get a suitably strong punishment for the crime they committed, no matter what legal terminology would be used for the illegal acts.

The suitably strong punishment for Rape in Spain is 15-20 years. These men committed rape. They should serve the same sentence any other rapist would.

[Demasiados]

The suitably strong punishment for Rape in Spain is 15-20 years.

According to the law.

These men committed rape.

Not accoarding to the law.

Having a cake and eating it too, cool.

[Egomaniac]

I am more inclined to agree with the spanish interpretation of the law, that this could not necessarily be denoted as rape.

I would argue it was statutory rape though, due to the girl's age.

Either way I'm satisfied that they received a high punishment, higher than most rapists get.

So, in your view, having sex with someone when they are unconscious isnt rape?

- - - Updated - - -

According to the law.

Not accoarding to the law.

Having a cake and eating it too, cool.

According to the definition of the word.

Rape: unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against a person's will or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception

[Demasiados]

According to the definition of the word.

The law uses LEGAL definitions.

[Machismo]

The law uses LEGAL definitions.

Great, change the shitty law.

Welcome to the conversation.

[Egomaniac]

The law uses LEGAL definitions.

Yes, and this whole thread is about how their legal definition of Rape is wrong.

I don't understand how people can justifiably argue that having sex with a person without their consent is not rape. This should not be a difficult concept to wrap your heads around. That's a fucked up hill to want to die on.

[Demasiados]

...change the shitty law. ...

Agreed.

/10char

[Jotaux]

They did get convicted of a form of rape.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, and this whole thread is about how their legal definition of Rape is wrong.

I don't understand how people can justifiably argue that having sex with a person without their consent is not rape. This should not be a difficult concept to wrap your heads around.

The whole thread is sexual assault vs sexual abuse.

[Machismo]

Yes, I prefer that legal approach.

Depending on the circumstances you could still punish it under other legal denominators, but I think it's generally a good foundation to begin from as to not call it rape when the victim did not directly express non-consent.

This all just seems to be semantics though, but I think it is wise to avoid situations in which drunk women forgot they gave consent the morning after...

So, then knocking someone unconscious, and then sexually assaulting them would be less bad than simply sexually assaulting them while they are conscious?

[Machismo]

I'm inclined to say it would be, yes, to a very minor degree.

That's a pretty terrible mentality to have.

[Themius]

They did get convicted of a form of rape.

- - - Updated - - -



The whole thread is sexual assault vs sexual abuse.

They did not get charged with the equivalent of rape. Take America we have assault that covers a range of crimes. Rape is one of them if there was penetration regardless of whether the person was unconscious or not. Which is how it is most places.

[Egomaniac]

Yes, I prefer that legal approach.

Depending on the circumstances you could still punish it under other legal denominators, but I think it's generally a good foundation to begin from as to not call it rape when the victim did not directly express non-consent.

Would you have a different punishment for people that murder people in their sleep as well? After all, they did not directly express their non-consent to be murdered

This all just seems to be semantics though, but I think it is wise to avoid situations in which drunk women forgot they gave consent the morning after...

Please explain how anything would be any different in regards to false accusations? If convicted, they would still face prison time and, as you keep on pointing out, it's going to be more prison time than they would get under other countries legal systems. So I ask again for you to explain how their system is better when those guilty of rape do not get punished to the fullness of the law and the falsely convicted end up with harsher sentences than they would here?

[Egomaniac]

Because the way I see it, in other western countries they made it increasingly easier for someone to be convicted of rape, with the trade-off that the punishments are much lighter. I'd rather keep rape a rather difficult conviction while also keeping the punishment high.

It changes nothing. They still get convicted of sexual abuse instead of sexual assault and they get the same kind of sentence these fuckers got.

And being convicted of rape is not easier... it's exactly the same as being convicted of any other crime: "Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt".

[Jonnusthegreat]

I'm inclined to say it would be, yes, to a very minor degree.

Why stop at knocking them unconscious? Just find a couple of dead bodies and just have sex with them! They aren't even people, so no crimes are committed! /s

[Demasiados]

Why stop at knocking them unconscious? Just find a couple of dead bodies and just have sex with them! They aren't even people, so no crimes are committed! /s

Actually, thats a crime of desecration of human corpse. No?

[Jonnusthegreat]

Actually, thats a crime of desecration of human corpse.

Did you miss the /s?

[Demasiados]

Did you miss the /s?

I feel like I am here for the first time ever.

[Jonnusthegreat]

I feel like I am here for the first time ever.

It means it was sarcasm. Actually more satire than sarcasm, but they both start with s

[markos82]

Sounds like ay of words. She was passed out therefor no attack happened, which is BS. Any good lawyer could have used her state in her advantage.