Quote:
Originally posted by AXPGoBot
I agree w/ IHeartMATT, I believe that there are a lot of people out there that do take advantage of this law. If a rape is actually a "rape" (in other words, it has been done violently, or unwillingly to the women to the point where it is traumatic for her), it's usually fairly easy to identify/prosecute. It sounds to me like this new law is not something that someone would've gotten away with before its exsistance. However, by now explicitly stating it, I think it's going to create a lot of unfair entrapment (is that the right use of the word?). Let's face it, the court system is INCREDIBLY biased in favor of women in rape victims. And in most cases, they should be. Rape is such a horrible crime, and in some cases, can be worse than murder. But if all a woman has to do is have sex with someone and then change her mind midway through, who's to say that the guy didn't stop right away? What if he did, but she says he didn't, or what if she never even said "stop" but claimed she did? There are some really sick chicks out there that will take advantage of this, and for that reason, I feel it's wrong. Rape is something not taken lightly, and anyone truly guilty of this crime gets what they deserve 99.9% of the time already. Stricter laws are both unnecessary for this reason, as well as promote abuse of the system.
GoBot has spoken...
|
There will always be liars. It's like saying that if a girl who goes to a guys bedroom has agreed to sex - because who knows what she said or he said.
If I said no mid-way through sex and the guy ignored me and kept on going - that would be tramatic and violent. To force yourself on another at ANY point can be tramatic.
Now, that said, I don't know if there really needed to be a law about this. Should previous laws cover this??? When someone (yes, any one) says NO you STOP. No questions...