Reasons I'm glad I'm not female or american or both

[Psychosplodge]

Amazing how council tax evasion always is though isn't it?

[White Tiger88]

Amazing how council tax evasion always is though isn't it?

How the hell did that come up?????

[Wolfshade]

I wouldn't know, though that reminds me a local council owes my 2p and has done for the last 5 years...

[Psychosplodge]

How the hell did that come up?????

Example of how the system views the seriousness of crimes by prosecution rates?
Fraud, tax evasion etc are often given far harsher sentences than violence, rape and even manslaughter.

[White Tiger88]

Example of how the system views the seriousness of crimes by prosecution rates?
Fraud, tax evasion etc are often given far harsher sentences than violence, rape and even manslaughter.

Point taken......Don't worry us Canadians are worse then you guys its only 5 years for a running a guy over well he is directing traffic.

[Wolfshade]

I can beat that.

Lorry driver runs into the back of a cyclist and crushes her to death, the police found no connection between her death and the actions of the driver. The driver pleaded guilty to the minor charge brought of driving with uncorrected defective vision. He was fined £200 pounds, given three points on his licence and permitted to carry on driving a tipper lorry. He continued to drive and was involved in a further three incidents before mowing down an concentration camp surivor as she crossed at a pedestrian crossing, he was then found guilty of one count of causing death my dangerous driving again not wearing his glasses. The sentence was 4 years imprisonment for the causing death by dangerous driving with disqualification from driving for 6 years following which he would be required to take an extended driving test. On the tachograph matter he was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment to be served concurrently (i.e 4 years in total)

Police later admitted the investigation had been substandard for the death of the cyclist and carried out a full review following the death of the lorry driver's second victim but the CPS again decided that no charge would be brought with respect to his first kill.

[Psychosplodge]

Ah but if she'd been on the pavement he wunt have got her...

or maybe he would looking at that.

[Wildeybeast]

The thing that is most disgusting is that the only people with anything truly valid to say on the subject are the survivors of rape, yet no-one listens to them. That's why I think things like Project Unbreakable are so critical.

Their main site is down at the moment (it's normally here - [url]http://projectunbreakable.tumblr.com/[/url]) but for those of you with Facebook, it's all still up on their facebook page (here - [url]https://www.facebook.com/projectunbreakable/photos_stream[/url])

Before anyone without personal, first-hand experience of rape wants to make a comment about it, they could do worse than to just read what the survivors here have written. Every portrait photo is of a rape survivor. Each one writes a statement on a placard that is to do with their experience. It's harrowing, harrowing stuff, but I think absolutely essential to understanding why the nonsense these politicians have come out with is so damaging, ignorant, and evil.

Man I got through two lines of that and couldn't stomach any more.

Sean I have to disagree that telling boys they may get false rape claims against them is pertinent advice. Telling them to keep it in their pants and if they can't to suit up is pertinent advice. They do that, no pregnancy to initiate the bleated false rape claim. What kind of warped view of women is that kid going to have if dad is saying to him 'have fun dipping your wick, just beware that the lying ***** may try to eff your life forever'?

[Sean_OBrien]

What kind of warped view of women is that kid going to have if dad is saying to him 'have fun dipping your wick, just beware that the lying ***** may try to eff your life forever'?

I don't see that statement in the other statement - though I tend to be an overly rational person. I don't think telling a kid that there are potential legal hazards related to having sex is any more damaging than telling a kid not to go up and pet stray animals (and no - I am not making an equivalency between women and animals). If you pet that stray dog - it might bite you. It might have rabies. It might well try and kill you. Telling that to a kid won't make them afraid of dogs, just cautious around dogs that they don't know.

In the same way - telling a young son that he should wait until marriage (committed relationship) is good advice. Telling them that if they don't decide to wait they should wear a condom is pertinent advice. Telling them about all the fun diseases which are out there which go 'round and 'round again is pertinent advice. Telling them about pregnancy and the related issues is pertinent advice. In the same way, telling them about the laws is also pertinent advice. That includes the risk of having a false rape claim put against them and other related issues like statutory rape.

None of those issues should skew their view on women or sex anymore than similar advice related to other potential hazards. What will skew their view points is if they are careless and end up on the wrong side of a false claim (whichever manner in which it comes). If the young couple suffers through a wonky age of consent case like the one story which I linked to...how much fun will the holiday dinners be at the in-laws house? If they are wrongly accused (even if later acquitted) by a girl who is trying to cover up acts to her parents - do you think they will feel the same regarding relationships later? How about their friends and close associates? Do you think the claim against their buddy will impact their views on women and rape claims which they hear about in the future? What kind of a chilling effect do the false rape claims have on actual rape claims?

The wording could have been better perhaps - but I think I would have a hard time in determining the specific words which a 12 or 13 year old kid would be able to understand to the level the the potential gravity of actions that they may become involved in may pose both in the short and long term.

It becomes even more problematic with increased laws regarding inebriation relating to the ability to give consent (normally filed under a diminished capacity clause within the statutes). While there is a problem in that regard, nearly 40% of rapists are also intoxicated as well - and it is important to understand I am not attempting to justify rape - but when the definition of rape is extended to include a girl who is defined by the court to be too drunk to provide informed consent to have sex, it also needs to be extended to the male parties as well.

Again - me with laws again...but just a quick example, in North Carolina if a woman is legally intoxicated, she is legally incapable of giving consent to have sex. That would be a few drinks in a few hours time. If you have sex while she is intoxicated, it is second degree rape and carries a sentence of up to 17 years. There is no protection or consideration if the guy also is intoxicated, so if two people go out to a club and have a good time with drinks and dancing then go home and make whoopy - the guy is legally a rapist. Ignorance of the law is not protection from the law.

[Psychosplodge]

. If the young couple suffers through a wonky age of consent case like the one story which I linked to...how much fun will the holiday dinners be at the in-laws house? If they are wrongly accused (even if later acquitted) by a girl who is trying to cover up acts to her parents - do you think they will feel the same

I may be being naive here, but I think that may be something more prevalent to your culture than ours, which is possibly why it doesn't sound as bad to you.
Also I'm pretty sure our statutory rape age is lower than the actual age of consent.