Your view on justice being provided for rape victims.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by DeSnousa, Aug 31, 2005.

  1. DeSnousa macrumors 68000


    Jan 20, 2005
    Brisbane, Australia
    I've completed work on my oral presentation for law. Got a B yay :D

    Any way it was on rape and the last part, the evaluation was does the law provide justice for the victims of rape. I came with the conclusion that no, not really due to the fact that the court process is a bitch for the victim. Also of note that the law is no longer about sentencing but also about rehabilitation for the accused. Meaning some form of ease in the sentencing process.

    Well here the last section of the presentation.

    So whats your views of justice being provided to the victim of rape?

    Also what your views of the focus of rehabilitation in sentencing?
  2. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Jul 4, 2004
    Depends on the country and the process of law within. As long as women are thought of as chattels, then rape will never be prosecuted with the vigour it deserves.

    IMHO rapists are the lowest kind of scum-sucking cowards and deserve no less than life in prison.
  3. DeSnousa thread starter macrumors 68000


    Jan 20, 2005
    Brisbane, Australia
    I know in the knowledge part of the assignment i stated the recent changes in the law.

    In Queensland the law finaly recognised that rape should not be seen as a violation of a husbands commodity. This change was made 1991 :eek:

    As for lowest forms of crime, one of my friends said that he would rather kill than rape. I weird way of looking at it, but a good way of saying just how low the crime of rape is.
  4. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Jul 4, 2004
    Perhaps it may interest you in how rape is viewed by those under Sharia law... there's a long way to go and no evidence that we as a species is growing out of such barbarity.
  5. Peterkro macrumors 68020


    Aug 17, 2004
    Communard de Londres
    Rape is an appalling crime and if UK figures are to be believed seldom punished.
    To say it is as bad as murder however is to go too far IMHO.The example of Sharia law and indeed western countries macho cultures does indeed give one pause for thought about wether humans are evolving.
  6. Applespider macrumors G4


    Jan 20, 2004
    looking through rose-tinted spectacles...
    The victim needs to be protected and the court process made as easy as possible without affecting the accused's right to a fair trial. There are alarmingly, people out there who will accuse wrongly because they regret what they did or want to get back at someone. Unfortunately, not all accusers are actually victims. Part of the horror of going to court for women in the likelihood that irrelevant details such as sexual history and what they were wearing are brought up. If I was attacked and raped on my way home by a stranger, who I'd slept with in the previous weeks and what I was wearing should have absolutely no bearing on the case.

    And in other cases, like warzones, there is no recourse for women who are raped. They are a spoil of war.

    In the western world if the person is proven guilty, then the penalty should be a serious one. If the victim is a child, or there has been any violence or abduction, if the attacker was a stranger, the penalty should be life - especially if there is any risk of the person doing it again. A man in Scotland a couple of years ago got only 5 years for raping a baby!

    Instances where the convicted perhaps genuinely didn't realise the victim wasn't consenting should still carry a 15 year minimum with counselling being an essential part of the sentence. Only by giving stiff sentences, will you increase the seriousness with which the crime is taken. I believe that for many women, being raped is probably their biggest fear. However badly you may be mugged and robbed of your personal possessions, the violation of rape would be far worse and have a far bigger effect on your future life.
  7. mpw Guest

    Jun 18, 2004
    I think we all agree that the law is an ass, at times, in every country and on every issue.

    I agree with most of your post but wouldn’t like to see any minimum sentences as there could be mitigating circumstances that all but absolve the convicted in every reasonable way except in the eyes of the law. Remember the law is an ass.
    I’m pretty sure there’s a legal definition of the detailed mechanics of rape but I think the harm is caused by the violation sexually. Therefore I think it would be wrong to assume or suggest that rape is only ever man against women. Legally I don’t know if female against female rape would be recognized, certainly not in every country, but I’d suggest that it should be. I think the legal definition between sexual assault and rape needs blurring.
    However, I think life is all about love and sex and it’s hopelessly impossible to legislate in either realm with any great level of success.
  8. mactastic macrumors 68040


    Apr 24, 2003
    I've often thought that a person who knowingly falsely accused another of rape should face a similar penalty to that the accused would have faced if convicted. Every time someone makes a false accusation of rape it makes it that much harder for the next actual victim to make their case convincingly.
  9. mpw Guest

    Jun 18, 2004
    Case in point
  10. kalisphoenix macrumors 65816


    Jul 26, 2005
    What the hell does Justice have to do anything?

    A retributivist would say "an eye for an eye." Then we have two rape victims and two rapists, and society is one of them. Not that good.

    What we do in the US is try to deter crime by providing stiff sentences. The problem is drugs. Yes, you heard me: the problem is drugs. Why? Because:
    1. Justice is a person getting what they deserve. What you deserve is to be punished to a degree of severity comparable to that of the crime you have committed.
    2. Due to the War on Drugs, we have completely misallocated the resources we have and the measures we have enacted in order to bring about justice in this country.
    3. Because of this misallocation of funds, personnel, et cetera, the rate of apprehension for almost every single crime in the books is well under 50%!
    4. Because you are more likely to get away with a given crime, the punishment needs to be stiffer in order to deter the crime. If you steal $5 from each of ten people and get caught only on the last theft, and are forced to return the $5 (plus, for the sake of argument, $5 of your own), you're still $40 ahead! Crime and punishment must be balanced not in terms of "just desert" but rather in terms of what punishment is required in order to deter the maximal number of potential criminals without severely damaging the utility of society as a whole.
    5. Okay, I lied -- the problem is not drugs -- the problem is that we have no punishments instituted that are severe enough to sufficiently deter the threat of rape (or murder, or car stereo theft for that matter).

    There is only one conclusion to draw from this -- that the entire concept of "justice" is flawed. It's derived from the notions of people who believe in little semitic guys watching them from the clouds. Instead, what needs to be instituted is a policy of sterilization. Everyone needs to be sterilized at birth, and it can only be reversed when people have proven that they are capable of living serene and harmless existences.


Share This Page