New Anti-Rape device - RapeAxe

OutlawPete wrote: »

I am talking about THERE and THEN, the worst thing can happen, not long term.

We are talking about Murder here.

Killing another human being.

Rape does not justify a person to kill another human being unless they fear for the safety of their lives.

I see the point you're trying to make, i just think it's nonsense. For example, what person, man or woman, whilst being raped, would possible not fear for their life, and what person would not take the opportunity to end their ordeal if say a knife or gun or weapon of some sort came to hand?

Or say someone you knew came to you in a distressed state and told you they had just killed someone who was raping or trying to rape them. Would you say, "you f'ucking killed them? Why? Jesus they were only trying to rape you!" or would you say, "f'uck them, they got what they deserved!"

I know which one i'd say, and frankly anyone who disagrees with me is wrong, it is not a matter of opinion as far as i'm concerned, it is a set in stone natural law!

WindSock wrote: »

Yes, and I would say there are far more rapists than there are women willing to falsly accuse a guy of raping them.

I can't say that I have any opinion on this really, I have no notion what the figures might be.

But my point was it does happen- and it's very difficult for a man who's been falsely accused to get away from the accusation. Even if it goes nowhere legally, it's a massively damaging thing to have associated with you. This device adds a potentially vicious layer of physical assault on top.

That's not to say that I think it should be banned or anything, just thought it was worth considering.

If I was being raped, I'd sure as hell try kill the person, or at very least cause some serious damage to them.

I don't think a rapist should be sentenced to death (they should however be stuck in prison for many many years to come).
BUT, I do feel that if a woman or man killed the person who was raping them, then it is somewhat acceptable. It's self defence, and who's to know if the rapist isn't going to kill you after they've raped you. I wouldnt be taking the chance anyway

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Based on what though? That's come up a few times in this thread with nothing to support it. Personally, I feel it's reasonably likely, but as an assertion, it's something I'm very uncomfortable with.

It's very difficult to get good data on that. Different studies have it ranging from 2% to 4X%. Nevertheless, I think it's a pretty sound assertion.

Earthhorse wrote: »

It's very difficult to get good data on that. Different studies have it ranging from 2% to 4X%. Nevertheless, I think it's a pretty sound assertion.

Have what? What is the assertion the percentages refer to?

OutlawPete wrote: »

Your reasons are all based on what happens AFTER the rape.

So why don't you believe that all rapists should receive capital punishment?

You're really not listening to me.

Let's do it in big letters, because this has to be the third of fourth time I've said this:

Killing a rapist is justified if it prevents or interrupts the rape. Killing him after the fact is vindictive.

Should I bold it? Underscore?

OutlawPete wrote: »

I told you I put that question to sbsquarepants, the "you" was directed at them.

Sorry Pete, i thought i'd answered.

I would alway feel sympathy with the victim and never, ever with the rapist, regardless of gender or anything else. I can't imagine any sane person would sit around the dinner table and say "that poor poor git, all they wanted was a quick rape and then off home and now they're dead, why is always the nice ones!"

Earthhorse wrote: »

Percentage of rape claims that are false rape claims.

But the issue is hugely more complex. You've to take into account reported rapes versus unreported, in terms of those that definitely took place, then analyse the percentage of rapes that get reported, getting a statistical figure for the likelihood that a rape that takes place is reported, and then taking into account the fact that there's a hundred percent likelihood that a false rape claim is going to be reported. Then you've to look at the investigative path to discovering whether a rape took place. Since not all rapes are physically damaging, often the only evidence is the testimony of the victim, and since supporting evidence is difficult to come by, this will carry huge weight. I'm not saying rape isn't a huge problem. I'm saying that to accurately ascertain exactly how many rapes occur as against how many are claimed and as against how many occur and are not reported is just about impossible. That's why I'm not comfortable with assertions like that made, because I'm willing to bet there are a good few innocent men imprisoned for rape, just like I'm damn certain there are a lot of guilty rapists going free, and there are a lot of crazy and sick people out there, male and female, perfectly happy to ruin the lives of other people, male and female, in their own twisted little ways. Basically I have a problem that an accusation can carry so much weight with so little supporting evidence, and especially when the mere accusation can be so personally damaging. I acknowledge that it's a necessity in order to obtain convictions, but it's a power to be very wary of.

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

I think rape should carry a mandatory life sentence, and I mean LIFE not this out-in-15-years Nanny State bull****.

So what about false claims of rape (where in actuality it was consensual but she says it was rape)? Obviously we can't have a situation where genuine rapes go unpunished, but at the same time we can't have a situation where a woman can say a few words and as a result a man gets locked up for life :eek:.

At least the way it is now men can reassure themselves that if they do fall victim of this most foul injustice that at least they'll eventually get out and begin to regain something of a life for themselves.