(October 16, 2014 at 8:41 pm)c172 Wrote: There are certainly varying degrees, but every single one is without excuse, and should be punished severely. I support the death penalty for certain instances of rape without death, but never mandatory except maybe upon a second conviction (and obviously as an aggravation of murder).

(October 16, 2014 at 8:51 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Except possibly A, every scenario in the OP is rape in one form or another.

Both of these replies actually state that there are different degrees of rape. But don't necessarily agree where to draw the line....

Well, yeah...two different people you just quoted.

Rape is rape, the degree is rather irrelevant. But the punishment will be determined by the several possible charges and sub-charges applicable in those scenarios!!

(October 18, 2014 at 5:27 pm)c172 Wrote: Well, yeah...two different people you just quoted.

Well in the OP I asked if there should be different types of rape, and many people have said "rape is rape whatever", so I just cited your two recent quotes to back up my argument !

Ah, OK, I didn't get that.

Most states do differentiate between rapes of various degrees, but the kind of scenarios in this thread are not how they make the distinction. The scenarios discussed in this thread or more like excuses for the perp's behavior. That kind of consideration shows up at sentencing if at all and not in distinguishing between levels of felony.

For first degree rape many states require force with a weapon; or after breaking into a house; or that includes torture or perversion. The age of the victim and whether the victim is mental retarded sometimes also push rape into the first rather than the second degree. Third degree rape usually involves force of the employment or blackmail variety rather than physical force. Sometimes statutory rape is defined as rape in the second or third degree. Sometimes whether statutory rape is 1st or 2nd degree hinges on whether the perp knew or should have known the age of the victim. It all depends on the particular state's law.

I don't think that having 1st through 3rd degree rape belittles the suffering of the victim. It simply acknowledges that bad can be worse.

(October 18, 2014 at 5:58 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Most states do differentiate between rapes of various degrees, but the kind of scenarios in this thread are not how they make the distinction. The scenarios discussed in this thread or more like excuses for the perp's behavior. That kind of consideration shows up at sentencing if at all and not in distinguishing between levels of felony.

For first degree rape many states require force with a weapon; or after breaking into a house; or that includes torture or perversion. The age of the victim and whether the victim is mental retarded sometimes also push rape into the first rather than the second degree. Third degree rape usually involves force of the employment or blackmail variety rather than physical force. Sometimes statutory rape is defined as rape in the second or third degree. Sometimes whether statutory rape is 1st or 2nd degree hinges on whether the perp knew or should have known the age of the victim. It all depends on the particular state's law.

I don't think that having 1st through 3rd degree rape belittles the suffering of the victim. It simply acknowledges that bad can be worse.

Great reply thanks.
I'm in the UK and thinking about a pro footballer who had a smitten, drunken fan in a hotel room.

It's interesting that you mention that the suffering of the victim might be important, because that suggests, potentially the sentencing is on it's head.... what if the abducted rape victim who's been raped for 20 years by her abductor, might actually enjoy some of the sex?

(don't beat me up, I'm pushing boundaries and playing devils advocate in a greatly interesting thread, I'm still on your side on the whole!)

Getting a physical reaction has nothing to do with the crime. Otherwise drug dealers shouldn't go to jail because people do enjoy the positive effects that drugs do to the body despite the negative effects that also occur.

(October 18, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Getting a physical reaction has nothing to do with the crime. Otherwise drug dealers shouldn't go to jail because people do enjoy the positive effects that drugs do to the body despite the negative effects that also occur.

so is the converse not true also?

(October 18, 2014 at 6:51 pm)lifesagift Wrote:

(October 18, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Getting a physical reaction has nothing to do with the crime. Otherwise drug dealers shouldn't go to jail because people do enjoy the positive effects that drugs do to the body despite the negative effects that also occur.

so is the converse not true also?

I'm just saying that even if it's a fact that they enjoyed part of it, there was more harm done than good. In the long run, drug addiction and repeated rape will destroy someone, even if there's a moment of bliss in there too.