Derec

Sure it can. However, not pulling out immediately when a girl says "I have to go home" should not count as rape. Prolonged intercourse after she says things like "stop" and "get off of me" are different but virtually impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt (a standard which is out of fashion in some "liberal" jurisdictions anyway).

The only thing this law will do is encourage more false rape charges. There have been cases where men were accused of rape as a revenge for accidentally saying/moaning (whatever) a wrong name during sex. A law like this is almost tailored to their "needs".

Radical feminists, that think any sex is an act of violence against women, rejoice.

UMoC

Pyrrho

If you look again at the article, you will see that the point of the Illinois law was to settle the legal question of whether or not initial consent meant that there could be no rape:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/07/30/ra....ap/index.html

So the Illinois law was not about that particular case, but was made to clarify the answer to the question of whether or not rape is possible if initial consent is given. They wanted to avoid the expense and trouble of years of litigation to decide that particular question. Thus, my example is entirely relevant.

Pyrrho

So, you say it can be rape, but you think it should not be illegal?

The Illinois law was not about that particular case, even though it 'inspired' the law. See my comments above to Arken.

Derec

No, I say that it can be illegal but that existing laws should be sufficient.
For example you hypotetical: rape, illegal, would convict if juror.

Quote:

The Illinois law was not about that particular case, even though it 'inspired' the law.

Exactly, it was inspired by a case where non-consent was tenuous at best, where compliance was non-immediate and where there was doubt about facts of the case (he said, she said). He shopuld have been acquitted but he was convicted even without any special laws.

UMoC

fatherphil

the deterrent affect of this does not necessarily lie in the rate of convictions. all i would need to do is be faced with the allegation for my world to be turned upside-down. suffice it to say, i will not have sex with anyone unless i'm in an extremely stable relationship with them.

perhaps my fellow men will take the same set of precautions.

Pyrrho

If you had bothered to read the post to which I referred, you would have observed that the point of the new law in Illinois is to avoid years of litigation to settle the question of whether or not initial consent means that no rape can occur. As such, it is an eminently sensible law, as years of litigation to settle something that a simple act of the legislature can prevent is not in the best interests of anyone involved in rape cases, other than the lawyers who can make money off of extended cases.

notMichaelJackson

Opens "send message" window....

Just when I was starting to be proud of my home state. I'm moving to St. Louis five minutes after I get my bachelor's degree.

Ryan let's all of the murders off death row, Blagojevich signs this law, why can't we recall our governers?

njhartsh

This is a very silly argument.

Imagine that Sergey grabs a briefcase out of a guy's hand in a back alley. The guy presses charges against Sergey for theft. Sergey's defense is "He gave it to me as a birthday present."

In court, the alleged victim would testify; Sergey (if he liked) would testify; perhaps other evidence about the witnesses' credibility or the likelihood of the two competing accounts would be introduced; and the finder of fact (i.e., the judge or jury) would decide whom to believe. I doubt that the entire court system would implode as the result of such a trial.

"He said/she said" issues are very difficult to resolve, but they don't render all law "impossible to enforce." Finders of fact weigh contradictory witness testimony all the time, and the law fails to come crumbling down.

- Nathan

sergeyvladimirovich

"This is a very silly argument"

Yep, I already admitted that "hard to enforce" should not mean "make it legal".

Cretinist

LOL!