Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

New Anti-Rape device - RapeAxe

12357…14

Comments

  • #122
    Undergod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    vinylmesh wrote: »
    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.


    Well that's what the court is there for, to decide if it is true.

    You can't give a crime a lighter sentence just in case someone might be accused in the wrong, that undermines the whole existence of a court.


  • #123
    brummytom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,572 ✭✭✭✭brummytom


    we'llallhavetea wrote: »
    if i was being raped, i would do anything to escape, if i clobbered the rapist over the head to stop him and he died, i don't see that i intentionally killed him, i just wanted him to stop.


    This would be the defining thing for me in the killing of a rapist - intent. If you were just trying to disable him, and flee, but defended yourself with too much force and accidentally killed him, I wouldn't have a problem with that - accidents happen.

    But if someone set out the intentionally kill the attacker, no matter what he'd done, I wouldn't condone that, regardless of his actions.


  • #124
    we'llallhavetea_old
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭we'llallhavetea_old


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    brummytom wrote: »
    This would be the defining thing for me in the killing of a rapist - intent. If you were just trying to disable him, and flee, but defended yourself with too much force and accidentally killed him, I wouldn't have a problem with that - accidents happen.

    But if someone set out the intentionally kill the attacker, no matter what he'd done, I wouldn't condone that, regardless of his actions.

    Yup and i'm pretty sure pete will agree on this.


  • #125
    Zillah
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    we'llallhavetea wrote: »
    i'm sure pete knows how severe rape is

    Really? He keeps dismissing the importance of the long term consequences of the rape and he described rape as simply shoving a penis in and out of a woman. I've seen him claim to understand how severe rape is, and yet I've seen him argue the exact opposite.


  • #126
    AssaultedPeanut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 806 ✭✭✭AssaultedPeanut


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    vinylmesh wrote: »
    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 we accept that a woman can say a few words and as a result a man gets locked up for life :eek:.

    That point is irrelevant though. Because the same goes for any crime resulting in very long/life sentences, like murder, it's upto a jury to decide that.

    EDIT: What Undergod said....


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Earthhorse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,717 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    But the issue is hugely more complex.

    Of course it is, that's why I said it's hard to get statistics on it.
    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.

    It's impossible but if you want numbers you've got to go with what we've got, even if you take it with a grain of salt.
    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.

    So you're not happy with the assertion that the number of false accusations of rape is minor but you are happy with your assertion that a good few innocent men are imprisoned for rape? And you're happy with the other assertions you make too? Why are you happy with one set of assertions and not the other?
    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.

    Of course it is. Ireland has one of the lowest convinction rates for rapists in Europe. It is actually quite difficult get a rape convinction for precisely the reasons you stated. That there are people who make false accusations and that some of them would use this device to back up said accusations, I don't doubt.


  • #128
    we'llallhavetea_old
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭we'llallhavetea_old


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    Zillah wrote: »
    Really? He keeps dismissing the importance of the long term consequences of the rape and he described rape as simply shoving a penis in and out of a woman. I've seen him claim to understand how severe rape is, and yet I've seen him argue the exact opposite.

    well, i can't speak for pete tbh, we'll just have to wait and see what he says.

    can i ask you, do you think it would be justified if the victim of rape managed to free themselves and then turned on the rapist and killed them intentionally?

    personally i wouldn't do it, don't think it would be justified either, not if had the option of running away.


  • #129
    MikeC101
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭MikeC101


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    As far as "shoving his penis in and out of her", that's what rape is, worst that can happen is the women gets pregnant by the bastard.

    Or, (and this is ignoring the psychological long term effects) the rapist decides to kill the victim afterwards. Or beats them so badly that they die. Or drags them off to lock them up in a basement for more extended torture. Or has HIV and passes this on to the victim.

    You can't expect a person attacked by a rapist to try and do some sort of threat assessment in their head and decided, "Ah, he's only going to stick his willy in me a few times". They don't know what's going to happen.

    If a rape victim gets a chance, at any point, to prevent or stop the act, they should take it. And if that ends in the death of the rapist, so be it - if they don't want to risk their victims fighting back they can take the pretty easy step of not raping someone.

    In my opinion a death caused by self defence is not murder.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    If the guy beats her, ties her up, breaks her jaw etc etc etc, we have other laws for these crimes and murder is acceptable under those circumstances.

    How is a victim to know that the rapist isn't going to do these things?
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    It's disgusting to think that any man or woman should be murdered for committing the act of rape.

    I don't believe acting in self defense constitutes murder.


  • #130
    Prof.Badass
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭Prof.Badass


    Undergod wrote: »
    Well that's what the court is there for, to decide if it is true.

    You can't give a crime a lighter sentence just in case someone might be accused in the wrong, that undermines the whole existence of a court.

    Not if the crime comes with a high probability of false conviction. This is especially important in the types of crimes where people get carried away with themselves demanding tougher sentences out of an emotional desire for revenge rather than a rational desire for justice.
    dementedsoul wrote: »
    That point is irrelevant though. Because the same goes for any crime resulting in very long/life sentences, like murder, it's upto a jury to decide that.

    EDIT: What Undergod said....

    The difference is that muder is very proveable, rape not so much. If he claims it was consensual and she says it was rape how are you supposed to know who's telling the truth?

    Past histories of their charcter? Hardly a fair unbiased way of judging things.


  • #131
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Earthhorse wrote: »
    Of course it is, that's why I said it's hard to get statistics on it.



    It's impossible but if you want numbers you've got to go with what we've got, even if you take it with a grain of salt.



    So you're not happy with the assertion that the number of false accusations of rape is minor but you are happy with your assertion that a good few innocent men are imprisoned for rape? And you're happy with the other assertions you make too? Why are you happy with one set of assertions and not the other?



    Of course it is. Ireland has one of the lowest convinction rates for rapists in Europe. It is actually quite difficult get a rape convinction for precisely the reasons you stated. That there are people who make false accusations and that some of them would use this device to back up said accusations, I don't doubt.

    My assertions are based on the notion that we have a very large statistical base to work from. There's a likelihood that there have been mistakes made in both directions. It's intuitive, mind, and distinctly unscientific, but we're agreed that we're working on an unquantifiable basic assumption anyway, so I'm afraid intuition is about as strong an argument as any of us have here. Basically, I take the whole thing with a big pinch of salt, and the one thing I want to avoid is to state things like that which I first contested, which was an argument that there are more men willing to rape someone than there are women willing to falsely accuse a man of rape. That's unsupportable. Personally, I think it's just as likely that a given person will do a bad thing to another person, regardless of their gender, whether it would be to rape them or to ruin their life by a false accusation.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Earthhorse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,717 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    So then, do you think that of the sum total of actual rapes that happen and the number of false accusations of rape are the same or approximately the same?


  • #133
    AssaultedPeanut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 806 ✭✭✭AssaultedPeanut


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    vinylmesh wrote: »
    Not if the crime comes with a high probability of false conviction. This is especially important in the types of crimes where people get carried away with themselves demanding tougher sentences out of an emotional desire for revenge rather than a rational desire for justice.

    The difference is that muder is very proveable, rape not so much. If he claims it was consensual and she says it was rape how are you supposed to know who's telling the truth?

    Past histories of their charcter? Hardly a fair unbiased way of judging things.

    I'd disagree with this part to a certain extent, such as in cases when the murderer is not caught red-handed so it takes a certain level of evidence and witness statements etc. for that person to be convicted. Same as in rape cases were there is little evidence to go by.
    It's the defendants word against the plaintiff.

    They can't just say "well we're finding you guilty and you'll serve a sentence, but not a life sentence, coz we can't be 100% sure if you did it or not".
    You're either found guilty or not-guilty, and that is upto the jury to decide. The length of the sentence should fit the crime.

    It all depends on the case itself obviously.


  • #134
    fizzynicenice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 466 ✭✭fizzynicenice


    No way. Ban that thing.
    All the crazy bitches out there and you want to introduce a device like that to the market???
    A penis slicing rape accusor???
    I'd rather give every knacker in the country a gun than every woman one of thoses.


  • #135
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Earthhorse wrote: »
    So then, do you think that of the sum total of actual rapes that happen and the number of false accusations of rape are the same or approximately the same?

    Absolutely impossible to ascertain, as you have to establish a statistical likelihood in each case based on immeasurable factors, being the propensity of an average member of society to either rape or to falsely report a rape. It's also, as we've agreed, further complicated by the rates of reporting of actual rapes versus falsely claimed rapes. You're not going to be able to get an accurate figure there. Intuitively, I would expect actual rapes are more common, but that's not usefully scientific either. There would also be widespread disagreement over various instances where drunken hook-ups, unremembered, are claimed non-consensual after the fact. Complicating factors such as intoxication and the willingness thereof, make this an absolutely excruciating statistic to eke out. I'm not trying to figure out any definitive numbers here; I'm just looking to avoid general assertions and to explain why they don't make sense.


  • #136
    Prof.Badass
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭Prof.Badass


    dementedsoul wrote: »
    I'd disagree with this part to a certain extent, such as in cases when the murderer is not caught red-handed so it takes a certain level of evidence and witness statements etc. for that person to be convicted. Same as in rape cases were there is little evidence to go by.
    It's the defendants word against the plaintiff.

    They can't just say "well we're finding you guilty and you'll serve a sentence, but not a life sentence, coz we can't be 100% sure if you did it or not".
    You're either found guilty or not-guilty, and that is upto the jury to decide. The length of the sentence should fit the crime.

    It all depends on the case itself obviously.

    You hardly have that much faith in the system do you?

    Personally, the thought of ever having a system where a woman can just say a few words and get the gards to take an innocent man away for the rest of his life sickens me to the core. If you don't feel the same way then i worry about your humanity (and i really hope you're in an extreme minority).

    False claims of rape are shockingly common.


  • #137
    AssaultedPeanut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 806 ✭✭✭AssaultedPeanut


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    vinylmesh wrote: »
    You hardly have that much faith in the system do you?

    Personally, the thought of ever having a system where a woman can merely say a few words to get an innocent man locked up for the rest of his life sickens me to the core. If you don't feel the same way then i worry about your humanity.

    False claims of rape are shockingly common.

    Of course I don't want innocent people to be locked up:confused:
    You missed my point entirely

    You said....
    vinylmesh wrote: »
    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.

    So you're saying rape shouldn't carry a life sentence because of false claim convictions, so that they can get out eventually. That is simply ridiculous. That means that the real rapists (which I presume would be the majority) will also be let out??!

    In that case you could say murder shouldn't carry a life sentence just in case the person happens to be innocent!!!

    No I don't have faith in our judicial system, but I'm saying rapists should be kept behind bars. Convicted rapists who have been proven guilty.


  • #138
    Zillah
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    we'llallhavetea wrote: »
    can i ask you, do you think it would be justified if the victim of rape managed to free themselves and then turned on the rapist and killed them intentionally?

    If we're confident that the victim can make a clear getaway, sure. They should just get the hell out. If there was a very real chance of their attacker simply catching them again I could forgive them giving a kick to the balls before they run.

    If the attacker were on the ground and the victim turned and slashed their throat, yes, that would be going too far.


  • #139
    we'llallhavetea_old
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭we'llallhavetea_old


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    Zillah wrote: »
    If we're confident that the victim can make a clear getaway, sure. They should just get the hell out. If there was a very real chance of their attacker simply catching them again I could forgive them giving a kick to the balls before they run.

    If the attacker were on the ground and the victim turned and slashed their throat, yes, that would be going too far.

    well then we're on the same page. what are you disagreeing with pete over?

    sorry if i missed something (genuinely).


  • #140
    Zillah
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    we'llallhavetea wrote: »
    well then we're on the same page. what are you disagreeing with pete over?

    sorry if i missed something (genuinely).

    Take the following scenario:

    Lady is walking down a dark alley. Man jumps out, knocks her to the ground, tears off her clothes and tries to rape her. She finds a broken bottle on the ground and shoves it into his neck. She runs away, he bleeds to death in seconds.

    I say "Good on ya girl, you did the right thing".
    Pete says "She's a murderer, all he was doing was raping her".


  • #141
    WindSock
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,239 ✭✭✭✭WindSock


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    I'm just looking to avoid general assertions and to explain why they don't make sense.

    Oh I know it is an assumption. It is my guessing only though, but to me I think it is a fairly obvious assumption. Of course I could never prove it. A thing like that couldn't easily be proved.
    I do believe there are plenty of fked up women out there that would do something like that.
    But I honestly believe there are much less than there are actual perpetraitors of carrying out the act of rape.

    vinylmesh wrote: »
    Personally, the thought of ever having a system where a woman can just say a few words and get the gards to take an innocent man away for the rest of his life

    The system isn't like that here. They have to go to court and get their sexual history get cross examined over a long period of time. So much so, that many victims have said they feel deterred from reporting the crime.


    Are the consequences of going to court for (falsely) accusing someone of rape as little a detterent to that of a rapist?


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,316 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    vinylmesh wrote: »
    So what about false claims of rape (where in actuality it was consensual but she says it was rape)?
    Undergod wrote: »
    You can't give a crime a lighter sentence just in case someone might be accused in the wrong, that undermines the whole existence of a court.
    There has been threads about it, but at the moment, if you have raped, you get a sentence, if you have not raped, your name is blackened, and the accuser gets away scot free.
    PeterIanStaker wrote: »
    I think rape should carry a mandatory life sentence, and I mean LIFE not this out-in-15-years Nanny State bull****
    And if it's false, the woman should still get away scot free, I take it?
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    As far as "shoving his penis in and out of her", that's what rape is, worst that can happen is the women gets pregnant by the bastard.
    For the most part, rape is power play. Although most rape is done with penis, not all of it is.

    =-=

    Africa is a f**ked up place. I know a few people from South Africa, and all have lots of guns in their houses for personal protection. In some areas walking down the street is no longer an option for white folk. Corruption is pretty bad, so yes, in Africa the device seems to a good idea, but not here.

    As someone pointed out, rape is often done by a gang, and thus if this happened to one of them, she'd most likely die. People may not agree with what Pete has said about it being just about "in and out", but in a way it is only "in and out", and not "smashing her head with the nearest blunt object". The former will leave psychological scars, the latter death. It depends what you wish to choose.


  • #143
    we'llallhavetea_old
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭we'llallhavetea_old


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    Zillah wrote: »
    Take the following scenario:

    Lady is walking down a dark alley. Man jumps out, knocks her to the ground, tears off her clothes and tries to rape her. She finds a broken bottle on the ground and shoves it into his neck. She runs away, he bleeds to death in seconds.

    I say "Good on ya girl, you did the right thing".
    Pete says "She's a murderer, all he was doing was raping her".

    i'd put this scenario to him before you assume thats his response.


  • #144
    Zillah
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    we'llallhavetea wrote: »
    i'd put this scenario to him before you assume thats his response.

    Well, take a look at one of his first posts in this thread.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    I think it's ludicrous to say that if a woman murders a man while raping her, that it is fine and justifiable.

    He is NOT trying to kill a woman, he is shoving his penis in and out of her, why should he die? Why should he get his throat slashed?

    If a woman rapes a man or another woman, should she have her throat slashed too?

    He's really very clear. Shoving his penis in and out of her does not justify her killing him.


  • #145
    Earthhorse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,717 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    Absolutely impossible to ascertain, as you have to establish a statistical likelihood in each case based on immeasurable factors, being the propensity of an average member of society to either rape or to falsely report a rape. It's also, as we've agreed, further complicated by the rates of reporting of actual rapes versus falsely claimed rapes. You're not going to be able to get an accurate figure there. Intuitively, I would expect actual rapes are more common, but that's not usefully scientific either. There would also be widespread disagreement over various instances where drunken hook-ups, unremembered, are claimed non-consensual after the fact. Complicating factors such as intoxication and the willingness thereof, make this an absolutely excruciating statistic to eke out. I'm not trying to figure out any definitive numbers here; I'm just looking to avoid general assertions and to explain why they don't make sense.

    I don't know, I'm not sure it's useful to avoid all assertions in a discussion like this. At some point we have to accept that we aren't going to be able to produce numbers to back up every point we make. So long as everyone involved knows it's an assertion and not a cast in stone fact, I think it adds to the debate.


  • #146
    we'llallhavetea_old
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭we'llallhavetea_old


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    I think it's ludicrous to say that if a woman murders a man while raping her, that it is fine and justifiable.

    He is NOT trying to kill a woman, he is shoving his penis in and out of her, why should he die? Why should he get his throat slashed?

    If a woman rapes a man or another woman, should she have her throat slashed too?

    oh dear.. i'm holding out for pete on this. :o

    Zillah wrote: »
    He's really very clear. Shoving his penis in and out of her does not justify her killing him.

    well i really hope he doesn't disagree with our scenario.


  • #147
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Earthhorse wrote: »
    I don't know, I'm not sure it's useful to avoid all assertions in a discussion like this. At some point we have to accept that we aren't going to be able to produce numbers to back up every point we make. So long as everyone involved knows it's an assertion and not a cast in stone fact, I think it adds to the debate.

    Personally, I think it works. It avoids entrenched positions over arguments with no defensible proof to them. It also avoids division along entrenched and emotionally charged gender lines. Those things are unhelpful. Avoiding them is better for the debate, to my mind.


  • #148
    tororosso
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 437 ✭✭tororosso


    Zillah wrote: »
    Well, take a look at one of his first posts in this thread.



    He's really very clear. Shoving his penis in and out of her does not justify her killing him.

    There is no justification to killing another human in this regards. Sorry but if somebody gets the sh@t kicked out of them they dont then have a legal justification to respond by taking the assailants life. If somebody gets raped that is a crime. It is up to the legal authorities to deal with it and nobody else. Sure why not create lynch mobs to go around killing people who commit these kind of disgusting crimes. And your question asking OutlawPete is he a rapist is disgraceful...


  • #149
    Zillah
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    tororosso wrote: »
    There is no justification to killing another human in this regards. Sorry but if somebody gets the sh@t kicked out of them they dont then have a legal justification to respond by taking the assailants life. If somebody gets raped that is a crime. It is up to the legal authorities to deal with it and nobody else. Sure why not create lynch mobs to go around killing people who commit these kind of disgusting crimes. And your question asking OutlawPete is he a rapist is disgraceful...

    Congratulations on not bothering to read the thread and completely miss everyone's points.

    I explicitly said that killing a rapist as a punishment after the fact is excessive, but that I think using lethal force to defend oneself during a rape is acceptable.


  • #150
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    tororosso wrote: »
    And your question asking OutlawPete is he a rapist is disgraceful...

    In Zillah's defence, i think it's pretty clear she was just exagerating to make a point, not actually accusing anyone of being a rapist!


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    tororosso
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 437 ✭✭tororosso


    Zillah wrote: »
    Congratulations on not bothering to read the thread and completely miss everyone's points.

    I explicitly said that killing a rapist as a punishment after the fact is excessive, but that I think using lethal force to defend oneself during a rape is acceptable.

    I have read the thread and you are basically justifying killing an individual because he is carrying out the crime of rape. I didnt miss your points. I abhor rape but your position is entrenched and emotional and irrational. You attacked the character of another poster because his opinion was completely opposed to your own.


Advertisement