California Debates 'yes Means Yes' Sex Assault Law

Eorzea Time
 
 
 
Language: JP EN FR DE
Version 3.1
New Items
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » California debates 'yes means yes' sex assault law
California debates 'yes means yes' sex assault law
First Page 2 3 ... 27 28 29 ... 35 36 37
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2014-10-03 10:29:33
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I've put away more alcohol than I care to admit. College was a crazy time. And in all those binge drinking days I never managed to drink myself to incapacitated, nor have I ever managed it since.

It actually takes quite a bit of dedication to do.

Or help from the roofie fairy.
[+]
 Ragnarok.Corres
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Geloudia
Posts: 1217
By Ragnarok.Corres 2014-10-03 10:29:41
Link | Quote | Reply
 
it's gonne get really funny in the future.
I mean if this can happen in the most feminist country in the world:


imagine what will happen in the US.
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 10:32:42
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Does this law enable fabricated charges against men to be made more easily?
-Yes


What is your reasoning behind this? If the law states that having sex with someone who is incapacitated is now clearly rape, how is that enabling more fake rape charges?
It defines (broadly) that being incapacitated is the same as legally drunk.

Tell me, after having 2 beers, are you so drunk that you cannot make any choices about who you will sleep with or not?

Uh, no, that's not what it says.
Again, I said broadly and is open for interpretation

Quote:
The complainant was incapacitated due to the influence of drugs, alcohol, or medication, so that the complainant could not understand the fact, nature, or extent of the sexual activity.

California legal intoxication limit

Quote:
California's 0.08% BAC Limit

How many beers does it take to get to .08% again?

Intoxication and incapacitation are 2 different things, not just 2 different words. Do you not understand that the law states "incapacitation" while you continue to quote legal limits for driving while intoxicated? People are routinely arrested for DUI that have blood alcohol of .3+ and they are not incapacitated.
You can't use practicability in courts though.

The only weapon and defense a person has in regards to false rape cases is the law and how the judge interprets it.

Since the definition of incapacitation is not specific in this law, lawyers will have to use the next best thing, which is legal limits for intoxication.

Until the law is changed or legal precedence is set, this is all that California lawyers have to go by.

So I ask again, how many false rape charges does it take to change this law or have legal precedence set?
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-10-03 10:36:10
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Can we exterminate the human species yet?
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 10:37:33
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Can we exterminate the human species yet?
Go for it.
 Ragnarok.Corres
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Geloudia
Posts: 1217
By Ragnarok.Corres 2014-10-03 10:43:25
Link | Quote | Reply
 
and quote of the year actually goes to the co-author of the proposed "affimative consent" law when she was asked in June how someone would prove that he had gotten affirmative consent she answered: "Your guess is as good as mine".

So by that i want the state of California to drown. Make it happen. My guess is as good as hers.
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2014-10-03 10:45:49
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Can we exterminate the human species yet?
Go for it.

I honestly don't think it's any fun if we do it to ourselves directly.

I keep holding out hope for the rise of the lizard men. Or even the robots, be it a la The Matrix or Terminator.
[+]
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-10-03 10:46:06
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Does this law enable fabricated charges against men to be made more easily?
-Yes


What is your reasoning behind this? If the law states that having sex with someone who is incapacitated is now clearly rape, how is that enabling more fake rape charges?
It defines (broadly) that being incapacitated is the same as legally drunk.

Tell me, after having 2 beers, are you so drunk that you cannot make any choices about who you will sleep with or not?

Uh, no, that's not what it says.
Again, I said broadly and is open for interpretation

Quote:
The complainant was incapacitated due to the influence of drugs, alcohol, or medication, so that the complainant could not understand the fact, nature, or extent of the sexual activity.

California legal intoxication limit

Quote:
California's 0.08% BAC Limit

How many beers does it take to get to .08% again?

Intoxication and incapacitation are 2 different things, not just 2 different words. Do you not understand that the law states "incapacitation" while you continue to quote legal limits for driving while intoxicated? People are routinely arrested for DUI that have blood alcohol of .3+ and they are not incapacitated.
You can't use practicability in courts though.

The only weapon and defense a person has in regards to false rape cases is the law and how the judge interprets it.

Since the definition of incapacitation is not specific in this law, lawyers will have to use the next best thing, which is legal limits for intoxication.

Until the law is changed or legal precedence is set, this is all that California lawyers have to go by.

So I ask again, how many false rape charges does it take to change this law or have legal precedence set?

Again, false rape charges aren't a new thing, they also are very difficult to quantify. That's the job of the courts, but the language of the law isn't broad enough for .08 to be considered, it's off by orders of magnitudes. Having something in your eye isn't on the same level as being completely blind, the same concept applies to the law. If someone wanted to argue that they'd had a couple wine coolers and their lapse in judgement was rape, they'd have the right to do that in court, people make all kinds of ridiculous defenses.

The law can't possibly increase the rates of false rape accusations for 2 reasons:
1. Any accusation of rape based on incapacitation would be a legitimate rape charge, even if it doesn't lead to a conviction.
2. Any accusation of rape based on intoxication would be illegitimate before or after this law.
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2014-10-03 11:04:53
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Lakshmi.Flavin said: »
Yes the vast majority are against men because men commit the vast majority of rape.

Yes there are fabricated charges against some men.

No, this does nothing to make it easier to fabricate charges. Right this minute someone can go and make a false accusation in any state besides CA and you know what? The same things that would happen in CA would happen anywhere else.

You act like some woman cries rape in CA now and all of a sudden the man accused is in prison. All this law does is more clearly define what you can be busted for. You still have to prove everything.

So no. You can not suggest that the number of false allegations will increase based on this law.

There are plenty of those cases that are dismissed. out of the hundreds of thousands of rape cases every year there is something like a 3% conviction rate and only somewhere around 20% that even get to the point where they make an arrest. It's kind of humerous how you assume that all someone has to do is yell rape and 5 guys are immediately imprisoned.

The law should be black and white. The government should be able to clearly define the law and be able to uphold it as such. Idk why you'd want a lot of gray in the legal system.

A few things:

Again, I'm not assuming that if a woman cries rape 5 guys automatically go to prison, again you're putting words into my mouth and reading things I've never said.

Do you live in a world where there is no hindrance to your life if you're falsely accused of rape? There's lawyers and cops and public reputations etc. One does not have to get thrown in jail to have their lifestyle negatively impacted. To many people if they hear someone was accused of rape, they believe it!

Are you just assuming that all the rape cases that are dismissed are because the victim was incapacitated and that because she was incapacitated she's SOL? Talk about making presumptions. Again where is the overwhelming data that "No means no", is a broken system?

This specific situation happened to a family member of mine, she was assaulted while she was "incapacitated". When she considered filing charges, no one told her "oh wait, you didn't say no? sorry i can't help you, close your legs next time ***!"

Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Does this law enable fabricated charges against men to be made more easily?
-Yes

What is your reasoning behind this? If the law states that having sex with someone who is incapacitated is now clearly rape, how is that enabling more fake rape charges?

I *** pray you guys are just intentionally being obtuse.

Before this law the job of the guy was too only be sober enough to recognize that if a girl says no, the girl means NO. (not very difficult at all)

After this law, the guy is now expected to be sober enough to be capable to recognize if the girl is sober enough to say YES. (much different than before)

Yes a girl can go to any police station right now and say "So and so raped me" when she didn't even sleep with him. Those charges would very quickly be thrown out as upon investigation there would be no evidence to corroborate such a claim. Because of that, big surprise, there is an incentive to not file false charges. If you set the stage so that a rape charge can be easily validated simply because alcohol/drugs/medications were involved you lower the incentive against filing a false claim.

The question which effectively closes the case becomes:

"Did you feel you had ingested enough alcohol drugs medications to legally be incapacitated?"

"Yes! Even though everyone only saw me have two beers I took three Xanax I got from my friend cause I was so nervous."
 Cerberus.Anjisnu
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: anjisnu
Posts: 2803
By Cerberus.Anjisnu 2014-10-03 11:11:30
Link | Quote | Reply
 
28 pages did all the mods quit?
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 11:13:06
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Cerberus.Anjisnu said: »
28 pages did all the mods quit?
We haven't gotten to Yzz level of trolling.
 Cerberus.Anjisnu
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: anjisnu
Posts: 2803
By Cerberus.Anjisnu 2014-10-03 11:13:44
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Slackers
 Lakshmi.Flavin
Offline
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
user: Flavin
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-10-03 11:31:09
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Saying someone acts like a if be were to happen is not putting words in their mouth. You're beyond words atm for even responding to that seriously.

I live in a world where most people don't even worry about things like that. Maybe it's just me but I don't think it's hard to go out and bang some girl without being worried about being accused of rape. False accusations can be damaging no one is arguing against that. You still have nothing that logically promotes the idea that this would increase the amount of false rape accusations. It doesn't give any greater incentive and the investigations still function the same way.

No. I'm not assuming that at all. I don't even get where you come up with that. Rape cases are dismissed most of the time because whether they are true or not it's hard to prove. It is a broken system... 3% conviction rate on rape cases. Hundreds of thousands of reported rape cases and add more to that that are unreported because the system isn't helping the victim both male and female.

So wait... you're telling me that you think it's wrong to take sexual advantage of an incapacitated person but you're against a law that defines this as rape? how well did the no means no system work here? I mean... you're telling her to report it which is what she would do under this current law and the only thing that would be different is that they'd have this law to go by that better defines rape and consent.

Your example still does nothing to clarify on how this would increase false rape reports. All it does is have you telling all of us that it places undue burden on the male to be able to tell if a girl is too wasted to tell them no which is ridiculous. Are you trying to tell us that it's too hard for a person to tell when someone else is passed out or so far gone that don't even know what's going on? Appearantly a guy can "drink like a ***" and therefore not be held to a legal standard I guess lol...

Self control Nausi.

It takes the same amount of validation. You still ahve to prove the act took place. The burden of proof is there. The only difference is that rape is more clearly defined. I don't get how you keep coming back to this whole this make it so easy to convict.

Where does it say that it's based on the victims feelings on how effected they were by drugs or alcohol? Again, more baseless assumptions on your part for whatever reason.
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-10-03 11:40:19
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ramyrez said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Can we exterminate the human species yet?
Go for it.

I honestly don't think it's any fun if we do it to ourselves directly.

I keep holding out hope for the rise of the lizard men. Or even the robots, be it a la The Matrix or Terminator.
Machines will take over before you know it.
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2014-10-03 11:43:19
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ramyrez said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Can we exterminate the human species yet?
Go for it.

I honestly don't think it's any fun if we do it to ourselves directly.

I keep holding out hope for the rise of the lizard men. Or even the robots, be it a la The Matrix or Terminator.
Machines will take over before you know it.

Can I vote Matrix?

At least then we get mostly pleasant dreams of a normal world while we power the robots.
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2014-10-03 11:46:48
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ramyrez said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Can we exterminate the human species yet?
Go for it.

I honestly don't think it's any fun if we do it to ourselves directly.

I keep holding out hope for the rise of the lizard men. Or even the robots, be it a la The Matrix or Terminator.
Machines will take over before you know it.

Long as they run Windows 95 everything will be ok.

YouTube Video Placeholder

YouTube Video Placeholder
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2014-10-03 11:51:22
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Cerberus.Anjisnu said: »
28 pages did all the mods quit?

Better question is do they care ?
[+]
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-10-03 11:54:41
Link | Quote | Reply
 
fonewear said: »
YouTube Video Placeholder
WTF is this?!

An hour of those knuckleheads talking about windows 95!

Where do you find this stuff? lol
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2014-10-03 11:55:24
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Apparently I need a new hobby !
[+]
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-10-03 11:55:33
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
I *** pray you guys are just intentionally being obtuse.

Before this law the job of the guy was too only be sober enough to recognize that if a girl says no, the girl means NO. (not very difficult at all)

After this law, the guy is now expected to be sober enough to be capable to recognize if the girl is sober enough to say YES. (much different than before)

Yes a girl can go to any police station right now and say "So and so raped me" when she didn't even sleep with him. Those charges would very quickly be thrown out as upon investigation there would be no evidence to corroborate such a claim. Because of that, big surprise, there is an incentive to not file false charges. If you set the stage so that a rape charge can be easily validated simply because alcohol/drugs/medications were involved you lower the incentive against filing a false claim.

The question which effectively closes the case becomes:

"Did you feel you had ingested enough alcohol drugs medications to legally be incapacitated?"

"Yes! Even though everyone only saw me have two beers I took three Xanax I got from my friend cause I was so nervous."

So, basically what you're saying is that we should disavow any legislation that more clearly defines what is ALREADY legitimate rape because in your twisted mind, that makes it illegitimate?

It's already illegal to have sex with someone who is incapacitated, as they already cannot legally give consent. This law just bypasses the need to prove that you couldn't have fought back. Again we go back to the example I gave that if you bludgeon a woman then have sex with her while she's unconscious, do you think that should only be considered an assault, because she didn't fight back when you had sex with her?
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2014-10-03 11:55:58
Link | Quote | Reply
 
That video made Jennifer Aniston famous though...


YouTube Video Placeholder
 Quetzalcoatl.Maldini
Offline
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
user: maldini
Posts: 303
By Quetzalcoatl.Maldini 2014-10-03 12:21:11
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
fonewear said: »
YouTube Video Placeholder
WTF is this?!

An hour of those knuckleheads talking about windows 95!

Where do you find this stuff? lol
Ah 1990's Jenifer Aniston, the reason many of hetrosexual males watched Friends...
[+]
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2014-10-03 12:21:51
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ok let me try it this way,

I think we all clearly know what non consensual sex is (I hope anyways). Is there any difference in the amount of actual "non consensual sex" that has happened from the day before the law was passed to the day after the law was passed? NO (generally).

BUT by changing the LEGAL definition, more people are engaging in non consensual sex today than the day before the law was passed. If two people are heavily intoxicated they, by this law cannot consent to sex. Therefore when they inevitably do have sex, they have just committed a crime (even though we all know they didn't).

And yet you don't see any potential for abuse?
[+]
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2014-10-03 12:23:27
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »
Ah 1990's Jenifer Aniston, the reason many of hetrosexual males watched Friends...

So true. Courtney Cox too.

I can live without Lisa Kudrow though.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 4028
By Blazed1979 2014-10-03 12:27:54
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Corres said: »

How about stopping people who seem too calm and accusing them of smoking pot, or people who seem too confident and accusing them of using cocain, or a man with a leather jacket of being a rapist.
 Quetzalcoatl.Maldini
Offline
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
user: maldini
Posts: 303
By Quetzalcoatl.Maldini 2014-10-03 12:30:33
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ramyrez said: »
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »
Ah 1990's Jenifer Aniston, the reason many of hetrosexual males watched Friends...

So true. Courtney Cox too.

I can live without Lisa Kudrow though.

She (Cox) was hotter in Misfits of Science.
Kudro was there for the lesbians.
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2014-10-03 12:31:59
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »
Ramyrez said: »
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »
Ah 1990's Jenifer Aniston, the reason many of hetrosexual males watched Friends...

So true. Courtney Cox too.

I can live without Lisa Kudrow though.

She (Cox) was hotter in Misfits of Science.
Kudro was there for the lesbians.

Frankly, I think both of them look great to this day.
Offline
Posts: 4028
By Blazed1979 2014-10-03 12:36:08
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Sorry to ruin your childhood memories Ram & Mald.
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-10-03 12:37:54
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Ok let me try it this way,

I think we all clearly know what non consensual sex is (I hope anyways). Is there any difference in the amount of actual "non consensual sex" that has happened from the day before the law was passed to the day after the law was passed? NO (generally).

BUT by changing the LEGAL definition, more people are engaging in non consensual sex today than the day before the law was passed. If two people are heavily intoxicated they, by this law cannot consent to sex. Therefore when they inevitably do have sex, they have just committed a crime (even though we all know they didn't).

And yet you don't see any potential for abuse?

They didn't change the legal definition, they just more clearly defined it. Having sex with someone who is incapacitated has always been illegal, as it is not consensual is they cannot give consent. It's no different than saying that because a man can overpower a woman that it is consensual because she didn't stop them. Nothing has changed.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 4028
By Blazed1979 2014-10-03 12:40:47
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Ok let me try it this way,

I think we all clearly know what non consensual sex is (I hope anyways). Is there any difference in the amount of actual "non consensual sex" that has happened from the day before the law was passed to the day after the law was passed? NO (generally).

BUT by changing the LEGAL definition, more people are engaging in non consensual sex today than the day before the law was passed. If two people are heavily intoxicated they, by this law cannot consent to sex. Therefore when they inevitably do have sex, they have just committed a crime (even though we all know they didn't).

And yet you don't see any potential for abuse?

They didn't change the legal definition, they just more clearly defined it. Having sex with someone who is incapacitated has always been illegal, as it is not consensual is they cannot give consent. It's no different than saying that because a man can overpower a woman that it is consensual because she didn't stop them. Nothing has changed.
I read the OP a few days back, not going to read it again, I'm busy looking at pics of Nude celebs - but I seem to recall the proposed law being very vague.

Not everyone reacts to alcohol the same. We can all attest to this. Also its shy of being accurate enough to protect the rights of males. What if she says "I wanna go out drinking till im trashed and then have sex with you" gets incapacitated and the next day regrets it and said she never gave consent?

Its too vague.
First Page 2 3 ... 27 28 29 ... 35 36 37