Should rape carry a potential life sentence?

[pharphis]

More on topic...

That's the news media hyping the news up.

There's no way that will be the sentence and that reporter knows it.

Maybe the law needs more categories. A serial rapist should get life because they simply don't stop.

I think most of us would agree with that. Though, what would that entail? 2+ rape charges?

 

[pharphis]

And I think we're done here. You "Manospherians" can wallow in your own filth for the rest of your pathetic lives for all I care.

Toodles.

Cool. Come back when you're willing to back up your aspersions. I'll be sure to let my partner know how pathetic my life is. Not much filth though since I vacuumed and cleaned the toilet, today.

edit: and there's only one "manosphere" that I pay much attention to/engage with, and it's those involved in men's rights/issues. I don't bother with the MGTOWs, the PUA ("redpillers"), the incels or any others that people lump in there.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Many women (and men) who have been raped never get over it fully, it is a life sentence for them, so I have no objections to locking up the arrogant ass that thought he had the right and power to just take whatever he wanted from another person for the rest of his natural, and unnatural too.

 

[kellyb]

Many women (and men) who have been raped never get over it fully, it is a life sentence for them, so I have no objections to locking up the arrogant ass that thought he had the right and power to just take whatever he wanted from another person for the rest of his natural, and unnatural too.

I'm not sure "permanent punishment for the permanent injury" actually makes anyone/the world better, though.

But I don't know. I don't think there are any perfect or even good answers to this stuff.

I guess I think the least bad answer is, in light of how fantastically the US is failing by every measurable outcome in terms of rehabilitation and recidivism, to just aim to do things the way the Norwegians do them when it comes to criminal justice.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I'm not sure "permanent punishment for the permanent injury" actually makes anyone/the world better, though.

But I don't know. I don't think there are any perfect or even good answers to this stuff.

I guess I think the least bad answer is, in light of how fantastically the US is failing by every measurable outcome in terms of rehabilitation and recidivism, to just aim to do things the way the Norwegians do them when it comes to criminal justice.

The US isn't failing at it because it's something that they don't do. The vast majority of USers believe that prison should be about punishment and justice, and rehabilitation and reducing recidivism are mamby pamby socialist ideas that have no place in the system.

 

[Checkmite]

I'm not sure "permanent punishment for the permanent injury" actually makes anyone/the world better, though.

In such a situation as the one we're discussing in this thread, none of the options actually makes anyone or the world better, so that truism is not disqualifying of any of them.

I wouldn't feel about about rapists getting a life sentence.

 

[Checkmite]

Given that pillars of society become tom cats, how do we ever regulate?
Harvey Weinstein's me too poster girl is now revealed as a rapist.

We regulate by putting them in jail when they're caught.

If Harvey Weinstein raped Asia Argento, and/or anyone else, he goes to jail. If Argento raped someone, she goes to jail. Why are we talking about this like it's some kind of difficult, nuanced decision full of moral dilemmas? It's not.

 

[kellyb]

In such a situation as the one we're discussing in this thread, none of the options actually makes anyone or the world better, so that truism is not disqualifying of any of them.

I wouldn't feel about about rapists getting a life sentence.

Well, a large part of the motivation for using the state's monopoly on violence as a mechanism for executing a vendetta on behalf of a victim is predicated upon the unspoken sense that revenge has some sort of therapeutic value for the injured party, and I think there might be an element of truth to that, at least sometimes.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Okay people we don't have to go to ground and have the entire discussion about the purpose of a legal system on a base level here yet again.

Every discussions doesn't have to go back to Civics/Philosophy/Language 101 level.

Assuming we're talking about the US Justice System as it operates now without re-inventing the wheel is how we deal with rape fair/equivalent/in proportion to how we deal with other crimes?

 

[kellyb]

Assuming we're talking about the US Justice System as it operates now without re-inventing the wheel is how we deal with rape fair/equivalent/in proportion to how we deal with other crimes?

Of course not. Rape is a crime that usually doesn't leave behind evidence other than victim testimony, and where the motive to make a false report is sometimes high, and where some of the time even if everything happened as reported, it's hard to say if what happened qualifies as criminal.

 

[Arcade22]

It doesn't actually seem you understand what mandatory minimums means.

Mandatory minimums take away a judges discretion of what the sentence should be for a particular crime, taking into consideration a variety of variables. Mandatory minimums are set up by the legislature imposed on the judges and are not able to take into consideration variables which could and do affect what the final sentence should be.

Yup. At its most extreme the resulting sentence is completely dictated by stature.

For example in Sweden sentences for possessing illegal drugs was until relatively recently determined by the amount of the specific substance(s) one was in possession of, almost completely irrespective of the actual circumstances. Even if you were a desperate nobody without any deeper involvement in organized crime just holding onto a large amount of drugs on behalf of someone else could easily result in a (at least as far as Sweden is concerned) very long prison sentence of 10 years or so. The judges just had to look up the "punishment table". This is one of the reasons why Sweden gained a reputation for being very hard on drugs.

Now the prosecutors have to show that you were involved in dealing, producing or otherwise far more involved in handling said drugs if you are going to be given a long prison sentence. Of course this puts much more pressure on the police and prosecutors to secure said evidence but i find that much more desirable than just handing out very long prison sentences even when it's hardly motivated. It's important for criminal sanctions to be proportional to the criminal offence(s) in order to motivate people to moderate their crimes. Even if you have sold drugs (or raped someone), if you could already expect a very long prison sentence then what's going to keep you from doing something even worse? You are screwed either way. This is why the length of prison sentences tend to lose their edge when they get above 10-15 years or something like that: 15, 25, or 60 years in prison all start to look the same.

 

[theprestige]

Yes, rape should carry a potential life sentence.

That was easy.

Thread's up to three pages and we're still talking about this?