Thread: Triggering (Abuse): Republicans redefine rape for abortion laws
View Single Post
  (#39 (permalink)) Old
DeletedAccount84
Guest
 
DeletedAccount84's Avatar
Edit avatar
 

Posts: n/a

Re: Republicans redefine rape for abortion laws - February 2nd 2011, 01:06 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew View Post


they need to address the issues at least then. Because it's abused more than its used properly from what I can see.


Do you know how few rape defendants are ever actually convicted? You are from the UK. In the UK we have one of the lowest rape conviction rates in Europe I believe, so I highly doubt its actually particularly abused, and if it is, rarely successfully. And the police handle rape cases infamously poorly. They basically intergergate the victim (I've personally witnessed the police basically telling my friend it was her fault she got raped, and that it really was consentual and she was just feeling regret.), and make it really hard to press charges, if they dont simply brush it off (here's one you should care about, as it probably effects male rape victims). There was meant to be a huge investigation in the way in which our police force investigate rape and handle potential victims, but that got cut by the LibDems.

I'd be more likely to believe it got abused more than not if rape wasn't dealt with so badly. The tabloids like to paint a picture that innocent men are going to jail left, right and centre because girls regret sleeping with them days later, but this is illogical to believe. Particularly as if they aren't rape victims, I see it is even less likely that they'll go get a rape exam before washing, and that there won't be physical marks, eye witnesses, or anything. It's very hard to prove rape, even harder if its not rape.

Quote:
Also: Why? Because you dont agree with it?
Statory rape is generally there to protect young people being taken advantage of by older people. It's unlikely if they are at least both teens they will ever be charged, even if one is above the age of consent and the other is say, 15. It's essentially to provide protection against abuse. Is that a good enough answer for you? If not, do you think 30 year olds should be allowed to sleep with children? If not, why?
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
Users of TeenHelp have rated post 573232 as the most helpful or liked. Click here to skip right to it!