Yes I have EVERY thread, and I had read the posted links too.
You can't be bothered to take the time and effort? Well GFY.
If you had taken the time and effort to understand what I post, you would see exactly the point I was making about cultural drift is exactly the same as Gbaji's with the whole "date rape" phenomenon.....ppl actively changing society and its laws.
Your point about prohobition would be valid if it were a strong enough political and legal lobby, so yes.
You attacked my argument, I defended it, and still do.
Many, many new cases of rape are being taken to court, and many, many more are being thrown out.
Many, many cases are rape. Many of them aren't and if you take the time and effort, you would see a drift occurring, in the UK if no-where else, where there is a lessening of the burden of proof that the crime took place, and more burden on the alledged defendant to prove he was innocent.
This was the purpose of the OP, and mine, and in a large part gbaji.
You snipe and snipe and snipe at someone for not posting hard data, or relevant links.
You then attack me when I pull up a ream of information.
Once again, you don't like the facts? Tough. GFY.
You obviously didn't understand my point I never said anywhere that regret=rape. The point I was trying to make was that the feminist lobby "convince" a whole load of college-types who gave consent at some point in an encounter that they had been "raped". The end of my post showed that they could legally and truthfully say that consent hadn't occurred RETROACTIVELY. It isn't regret, but it is as close as dammit is to swearing. To recap:
Quote:
Eliminating any mens rea requirement would surely raise the
conviction rate toward the ninety-eight percent benchmark. By definition, if the woman testified at trial that she currently believes that she did not contemporaneously consent, the man would have to be found guilty.
This is exactly what is being called for by a powerful lobby group.
You obviously missed the entire point of my post.....you wanted law changes and stuff, and the scary stuff in point IV was about how many ppl actually said that they had stuff pointed out to them which was rape.....
At no point did I EVER declare rape=regret.....
My point is that women are using the law to cry rape when they do have regret (ie not raped, wish they had'nt been to bed with someone hence no trauma at all) this was the OP, and what others were saying.
gbaji said
Quote:
Geez. I didn't think it was that amazingly controversial of a statement to make. Seemed obvious to me that changes in our laws about rape charges would be the cause of changes in false accusation of rape. Silly me for making such a basic observation...
and I'm backing it up....
Learn to actually differetiate between different posters. Please. Regret doesn't = rape.
Regret CAN = spurious rape ALLEGATION.....that's what has been bloody argued. Ad Infinitum. Ad Nauseum.