• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'She didn't affirmatively say no'

Gathomas88 said:
Do you have a source for this? From what I've read online, the only penetration which took place was digital, and it was apparently so minor that she wouldn't have been known anything had happened at all if someone hadn't told her the next day.

Don't mistake me here, wrong is wrong. However, I wouldn't put this kind of act on anywhere near the same level as the kinds of "break in and broomstick handle" rape cases we usually tend to hear about in the MSM.



Can you provide any specific examples of this besides the DA's idiocy?

They hardly look like a bunch of hardened sociopaths.

View attachment 67144230

They look like a couple of teenagers who made a mistake and are now scared out of their wits.



If you passed out after only two drinks, he probably did a lot more than just get you drunk. It's very likely that he spiked your drink with a roofie.

That displays a certain degree of premeditated "intent to rape" which I'm not necessarily sure was present in the Steubenville case.

I might be wrong, of course. We'll simply have to see what comes out of the trial.



Nearly every study I'm aware of has concluded that "zero tolerance" policies which focus more on revenge than rehabilitation tend to do anything but "deter future crime." You need look no further than the war on drugs if you want proof of that.

As I said before, I certainly believe that the boys deserve to be punished. However, I think the degree of punishment should match the degree of guilt. I can't really get behind the idea of essentially using a couple of clueless 16 year olds as "fattened calves" to be offered up for the greater glory of the womens' rights and anti-rape movements.

There are simply much more serious offenders out there.



They (most likely) did the crime and they're going to have to live with the consequences of that fact. However, keeping in mind that the defendants are just a couple of 16 year old kids, I wouldn't quite "throw the book at them" if there didn't appear to be a pressing need to do so.
Click to expand...

I really hate it when violent crime is referred to as making a simple "mistake".
 
X Factor said:
I really hate it when violent crime is referred to as making a simple "mistake".
Click to expand...

Yeah, violating someone is just an "honest mistake." /s
 
X Factor said:
I really hate it when violent crime is referred to as making a simple "mistake".
Click to expand...

The whole thing here is that it really wasn't "violent" in the traditional sense so much as in the legal sense. They didn't beat or even really force themselves onto the girl in question, and they don't seem to have started the night with the intention of doing anything inappropriate.

It seems more like they took advantage of a passed out drunk girl as an opportunity to play doctor, cop a few feels, and go for some mild finger action.

Is it disgusting? Yes.

Should they be punished? Yes.

Should they be punished to the same degree as someone who goes into a given situation with the deliberate intention of committing rape and then beats their victim to a bloody pulp before violating them in a manner which might leave the victim vulnerable to possible pregnancy and disease?

I'm going to go ahead and say "no."

calamity said:
Everything You Need To Know About The Steubenville Rape Trial | ThinkProgress

When rapists get raped, it is funny...in an ironic sort of way.
Click to expand...

The key word you are missing there is "allegedly." I also have not seen that claim repeated by any other source.
 
Last edited:
Gathomas88 said:
The whole thing here is that it really wasn't "violent" in the traditional sense so much as in the legal sense. They didn't beat or even really force themselves onto the girl in question, and they don't seem to have started the night with the intention of doing anything inappropriate.

It seems more like they took advantage of a passed out drunk girl as an opportunity to play doctor, cop a few feels, and go for some mild finger action.

Is it disgusting? Yes.

Should they be punished? Yes.

Should they be punished to the same degree as someone who goes into a given situation with the deliberate intention to commit rape and then beats their victim to a bloody pulp before raping them in a way which might leave them vulnerable to possible pregnancy and disease?

I'm going to go ahead and say "no."
Click to expand...

Beating someone to a bloody pulp is not required for something to be violent. Taking sexual advantage of someone who can't defend herself is not some harmless "boys will be boys" prank.
 
Even if the guy who offered $3 to urinate on this girl, who was by now sitting topless on the street, testified--which he did yesterday--that it was "just a joke."
 
X Factor said:
Beating someone to a bloody pulp is not required for something to be violent. Taking sexual advantage of someone who can't defend herself is not some harmless "boys will be boys" prank.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was. I'm simply suggesting that we leave some room for simple common sense here.

The girl in question suffered no lasting harm, and any bad reputation she has earned as a result of the incident likely won't follow her past high school.

As such, I don't really see any justification to send the perpetrators "up the river" for 10-20. Give them a sentence which fits the crime, not the emotionally charged overreactions of the common "joe everyman" on the street and the yellow journalists trying to make a buck off of the shock value surrunding the case.
 
Gathomas88 said:
I didn't say it was. I'm simply suggesting that we leave some room for simple common sense here.

The girl in question suffered no lasting harm, and any bad reputation she has earned as a result of the incident likely won't follow her past high school.

As such, I don't really see any justification to send the perpetrators "up the river" for 10-20. Give them a sentence which fits the crime, not the emotionally charged overreactions of the common "joe everyman" on the street and the yellow journalists trying to make a buck off of the shock value surrunding the case.
Click to expand...

She suffered "no lasting harm"? Srsly?
 
X Factor said:
She suffered "no lasting harm"? Srsly?
Click to expand...

Ya srsly. She wouldn't have even known that anything had taken place at all if she hadn't heard about it from friends afterwards.

No physical harm was done to the girl, and it's rather difficult to argue for significant emotional harm when she can't even remember the event.

She was violated and publically humiliated, which is something that should certainly be addressed. Again, however; in my opinion, mere public humilation does not warrant the possibility of sending the boys responsible to prison for ten years or more.

Simply put, that is not justice. It is "feel good" revenge sentencing.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Ya srsly. She wouldn't have even known that anything had taken place at all if she hadn't heard about it from friends afterwards.

No physical harm was done to the girl, and it's rather difficult to argue for significant emotional harm when she can't even remember the event.

She was publically humiliated, which is something that should certainly be addressed. Again, however; in my opinion, mere public humilation does not warrant the possibility of sending the boys responsible to prison for ten years or more.

Simply put, that is not justice. It is "feel good" revenge sentencing.
Click to expand...

Wow. You are sooo wrong here. Let me put this in perspective for you: a girl is roofied and raped. Since she doesn't remember it, no crime took place. Come on!

Really. Just wow.
 
Gathomas88 said:
I didn't say it was. I'm simply suggesting that we leave some room for simple common sense here.

The girl in question suffered no lasting harm, and any bad reputation she has earned as a result of the incident likely won't follow her past high school.

As such, I don't really see any justification to send the perpetrators "up the river" for 10-20. Give them a sentence which fits the crime, not the emotionally charged overreactions of the common "joe everyman" on the street and the yellow journalists trying to make a buck off of the shock value surrunding the case.
Click to expand...

If it turns out that these guys took a drunk girl....too drunk to stand up and barely conscious...and "shared" her with people at various parties and if one of the kids made a video tape about "she's so dead" jokes these kids have exhibited signs that they lack any and concern and compassion for their fellow human being and that they are willing to take pleasure in simply using another human being for their own warped sense of pleasure. That kind of person, in my opinion, is someone that serves no benefit to society and actually harms society by their very existence. If they did these things then 10-20 would be a walk in the park compared to what they'd get if I was deciding.
 
MaggieD said:
Wow. You are sooo wrong here. Let me put this in perspective for you: a girl is roofied and raped. Since she doesn't remember it, no crime took place. Come on!

Really. Just wow.
Click to expand...

Not even remotely what I said.

First off, she was not roofied. She was drunk. There is a difference.

Secondly, if things happened as the prosecution claims, there can be absolutely no doubt that a sexual assault and rape took place. The defendants should be held accountable for that.

All I'm saying is that the assault which ultimately took place was incredibly small scale in the grand scheme of things and was committed by minors under the influence of alcohol, which should be taken into account where sentencing is concerned.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Not even remotely what I said.

First off, she was not roofied. She was drunk. There is a difference.

Secondly, there can be absolutely no doubt that a sexual assault and rape took place. The defendants should be held accountable for that.

All I'm saying is that the assault which ultimately took place was incredibly minor and took place under the influence of alcohol, which should be taken into account where sentencing is concerned.
Click to expand...

You really need to look inside yourself. I think you really believe that -- that what took place was "incredibly minor" -- and I think you couldn't be more wrong.
 
she did not say no but she did not say yes
 
MaggieD said:
You really need to look inside yourself. I think you really believe that -- that what took place was "incredibly minor" -- and I think you couldn't be more wrong.
Click to expand...

Compared to what happened to that girl in India? She was beaten half to death and anally raped with a steel pipe until her intestines were forcibly dragged from her body.

Comparatively speaking, I simply don't see a bunch of liquored up teens getting out of hand at a party as being all that heinous of a crime.

It is a crime, surely. I just think the difference of degree between this incident and several others in recent history should be kept in mind during the sentencing.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Compared to what happened to that girl in India? She was beaten and anally raped with a steel pipe until her intestines were forcibly dragged from her body.

Comparatively speaking, I simply don't see a bunch of liquored up teens getting out of hand at a party as being all that heinous of a crime.

It is a crime, surely. I just think the difference of degree between this incident and several others in recent history should be kept in mind during the sentencing.
Click to expand...
Hey, they didn't choke the life out of her either. Maybe we should pin a medal on those boyz. /s
 
Gathomas88 said:
Compared to what happened to that girl in India? She was beaten half to death and anally raped with a steel pipe until her intestines were forcibly dragged from her body.

Comparatively speaking, I simply don't see a bunch of liquored up teens getting out of hand at a party as being all that heinous of a crime.

It is a crime, surely. I just think the difference of degree between this incident and several others in recent history should be kept in mind during the sentencing.
Click to expand...

You are showing your age. Times have changed.
 
calamity said:
Hey, they didn't choke the life out of her either. Maybe we should pin a medal on those boyz. /s
Click to expand...

Or send them to juvie for a few years. You know... Like I originally suggested. :roll:

MaggieD said:
You are showing your age. Times have changed.
Click to expand...

How old do you think I am? wtf.gif
 
Gathomas88 said:
Ya srsly. She wouldn't have even known that anything had taken place at all if she hadn't heard about it from friends afterwards.

No physical harm was done to the girl, and it's rather difficult to argue for significant emotional harm when she can't even remember the event.

She was violated and publically humiliated, which is something that should certainly be addressed. Again, however; in my opinion, mere public humilation does not warrant the possibility of sending the boys responsible to prison for ten years or more.

Simply put, that is not justice. It is "feel good" revenge sentencing.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with feel good revenge. They are rapists boo hoo. If you can't do the time don't do the crime.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Try that argument at any law school in the country. Go ahead. I'll wait.
Click to expand...

Who cares. They acted like animals, and will likely be put into a cage with others who act like animals.

They raped a girl and bragged I can't muster any sympathy for them.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Compared to what happened to that girl in India? She was beaten half to death and anally raped with a steel pipe until her intestines were forcibly dragged from her body.

Comparatively speaking, I simply don't see a bunch of liquored up teens getting out of hand at a party as being all that heinous of a crime.

It is a crime, surely. I just think the difference of degree between this incident and several others in recent history should be kept in mind during the sentencing.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, we shouldn't be considering India in this matter. This is the USA and we have different standards we expect people to live up to.
 
Lutherf said:
With all due respect, we shouldn't be considering India in this matter. This is the USA and we have different standards we expect people to live up to.
Click to expand...

True enough, but it's not like such violent rapes are exactly unheard of in the United States either.

To be perfectly frank, this entire story smacks of artificially constructed media crisis. We've seen this scenario play out time and again. Middle Class teenagers do something stupid and inappropriate, media jumps on it like a ravenous carrion bird, and the next thing you know, every soccer mom and overly protective father from New York to L.A. is up in arms in righteous fury.

While I have never denied the nature of the crime, I do think that the reaction people have to the event is maybe just a tad out of proportion with the actual nature of the assault which took place.
 
Basically what we are saying is that everyone is responsible for the safety of females except the females themselves. The female can choose to stay at a drunken pary of leave, she can choose to hang out with groups of drunken males, or not, she can say yes, no or maybe and the entire world has to respond. But, at the end of the day she never has any resposibility in the matter. Where can I get a membership card into that exclusive club?
 
Gathomas88 said:
True enough, but it's not like such violent rapes are exactly unheard of in the United States either.

To be perfectly frank, this entire story smacks of artificially constructed media crisis. We've seen this scenario play out time and again. Middle Class teenagers do something stupid and inappropriate, media jumps on it like a ravenous carrion bird, and the next thing you know, every soccer mom and overly protective father from New York to L.A. is up in arms in righteous fury.

While I have never denied the nature of the crime, I do think that the reaction people have to the event is maybe just a tad out of proportion with the actual nature of the assault which took place.
Click to expand...

People are appalled that the teens raped a girl and bragged about it.

You just say it could be worse. Yeah it could.

When someone robs a bank they go to jail. They dont get a lighter sentence for robbery because they didn't kill anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom