(Untitled)

[prophet_maid]

Comments

[trufflepig]

what exactly are you asking? what society? the society of the world, one specific country, the town where you live?

rape isn't just a 'cultural attitude' problem. it's a psychological problem. it's a sexual phenomenon.

if you want to solve the problem of rape you have to address all of the factors that lead to someone committing the crime. an arbitrary prison term isn't going to discourage a child who was taught his entire life that women are tools. a civil penalty isn't going to stop a drunk frat boy from taking advantage of an equally as drunk sorority girl.

[superexposed]

Agreed.

[prophet_maid]

I realize what I said was very problematic. I'm simply trying to get a discussion going as to a way to mitigate the factors that allow rape to occur.

I don't think the punishment thing would work either, but I'm not sure what will. Again, just an idea.

[superexposed]

From a Law and Economics perspective (which I admittedly know very little about, being a first year law student and having read very little of anything except Finnish Environmental Law), the point of a punishment is to increase the disadvantage of a crime (a combination of the probability of getting caught and the punishment associated) in relation to the advantage. The logic behind criminalising an act, then, is to frighten people into not taking the chance, by their natural riskaversiveness. From this point of view, it would seem sensible

[kammerat_blomst]

I have never heard of anyone getting as little as one yoar for sexual abuse, at least not in Norway (since you are talking about the scandinavian welfare states as one). I do agree that to little is done to protect the victims in those cases, allthough I'm sceptical to the whole individually preventive aspect of punishment.

[kammerat_blomst]

... and one more thing, as you might know, 21 one year is maximum penalty in Norway, and maximum penalty for rape (and that will also include rape of children) is also 21 years. Alas, the problem is not that the punishments for rape ARE to low, but that the judges are constantly working against the politicians here. All The politicians can to is increase maximum and minimum penalty, and almost always, the avarage punishment is around minumum.

[dancing_moon]

I think two years happened in Sweden, and everyone was pissed about it.

I also think that rehabilitation is fine and dandy, but for repeat offenders (and they are common in these kind of cases) a longer punishment is definitely warranted. To protect everyone else if nothing else

[mmb22285]

It's sort of a problem inherent in the legal system (at least in the US, but I think it's probably the case as well in most other "Western" countries). The legal system is based on the principle of "innocent until proven guilty." But in rape cases, especially those with little corroborating evidence, the assumption that the accused is innocent is tantamount to the assumption that the victim is guilty. I don't know how to fix that without undermining the whole legal system. But it really has to be addressed somehow, we can't continue to have victims being taught they "asked for it" and feeling victimized again and again by their own guilt and the shitty legal system that validates it. An overhaul of the system would probably be a good thing anyway.

[prophet_maid]

I agree. I think a decent first step towards alleviating the rape problem is making the consequences of rape greater. However, I don't trust the legal system either, and I believe I addressed that a bit in my original post. The entire supposition that rape victims brought it on themselves needs to stop, now.

[_ninabruja_]

Agreed. I would go so far as to say that if the penalty was increased, conviction rates would decrease...prosecuters would be less likely to take a case if the punishment is stricter. That makes sense in my head, at least. Additionally, as proven with the death penalty, harsher punishment does not decrease the crime- the people who are sick enough to commit these crimes are not logical enough to even consider getting caught, and punishment is not a deterrent.

It's a freaking mess.

[rocketgeek]

The reason the death penalty is not a deterrent is because it has no certainty -- the probability that any given act of murder will result in the murderer being executed is so vanishingly small as to make the penalty worthless as a deterrent.

I agree with you that more severe penalties would reduce conviction rates, especially in circumstances with little corroborating evidence; juries would be less willing to convict a person on shaky grounds if the penalty were higher.

[grey_and_purple]

The reason the death penalty is not a deterrent is because it has no certainty -- the probability that any given act of murder will result in the murderer being executed is so vanishingly small as to make the penalty worthless as a deterrent.

I disagree. As i just wrote elsewhere, harsh punishments assume that offenders are rationally choosing to commit their crimes in knowledge of the balance of risks and rewards. Relatively few murders -- in fact, relatively few violent crimes -- are committed in that kind of cold blood.

[rocketgeek]

I agree that rape is a horrible crime; however, I don't think merely ratcheting up the sentences is likely to have a large effect on the rate of rape. What is likely to have a more salutary effect is working to increase the rate at which rape are reported and prosecuted, and to increase the rate of conviction for rapists. That makes punishment for any given rape more certain, and therefore makes the sentences as they exist a more effective deterrent.