RE: Chauvin Murder Trial
April 4, 2021 at 5:03 pm
(This post was last modified: April 4, 2021 at 5:07 pm by Irreligious Atheist.)
(April 4, 2021 at 4:45 pm)arewethereyet Wrote:(April 4, 2021 at 3:59 pm)Irreligious Atheist Wrote:Bet your stance on rape would change if you were the one raped.
I'm entirely ok with rapists getting off scott free. When feminists complain about the justice system because most rapists get off, I disagree, because that's the type of system you want. You'd rather guilty people get off than innocent people get locked up. I'm not stanning for police brutality any more than I stan for rape.
What stance? That you can't convict without sufficient evidence? Are you ok with innocent people being locked up, and then raped in jail? Locking people up without sufficient evidence is Taliban style justice, although they're more likely to just kill the person or cut off their hands. That's what happened to Emmett Till. There are already far too many innocent people locked up as it is, and minorities are likely to suffer the most if you make it so that you don't have to prove your case beyond a reasonable doubt. And no, I don't see why my stance would change if I were raped, and if my stance did change, that would likely be because I was being too emotional and irrational because of personal experience.
(April 4, 2021 at 5:02 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(April 4, 2021 at 4:45 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: Bet your stance on rape would change if you were the one raped.
I think the stance would also change if IA were to be falsely accused of rape (or any other crime).
The kind of justice system we feminists actually want is one in which the guilty are punished and the innocent are not.
Boru
That would be nice if the guilty were punished and the innocent were not, but you're going to need an all knowing God to make that happen. The guilty should not be punished without sufficient evidence. That leads to many innocent people being punished, and minorities are more likely to suffer because of that.