Runescape in the news again...

[Blaze_9555]

(excuse me for not reading past page 4. I don't have mush time to write currently.)

 

 

 

 

 

No matter how you look at it, no matter what your personal belies are, according to The U.S.A government and most of it's inhabitants (including me) what she did was illegal and wrong. Someone said that even though it is rape, you shouldn't call it rape. I thought was one of the most unintelligent things I have heard on this site. If not rape, then what? Sexual abuse? Taking advantage? It's called rape, so call it rape.

 

 

 

It is statutory rape and it is illegal. from what I read, it sounds almost as if some of you are defending this woman. I wonder how many of you actually think that she was right or that she was wrong. I think she was wrong. She broke the law and will be punished for it.

 

 

 

We can't have double standards for rapists and rape victims because people lie. People can be forced to say they consent to having sex with rapists. That is why the rule is in place.

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: and whoever asked if it's possible for women to rape men, a large amount of rapists are females. I think around 45%, though that may not be true as I heard it on TV.

 

 

 

You know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the law.

 

 

 

I am a Criminal Justice major.

 

 

 

Let me tell you something. I have no double standard, I do not believe it should be called statutory rape. Statutory rape both people CONSENT but one was under the 'legal' age that somebody decided a long time ago was a good age.

 

 

 

Do you NOT realize, that it doesn't matter what you think people are forced to say, there would be absolutely no case if they were forced to say something, because of two things.

 

 

 

One, if there was no law, and she was actually raped, like people get raped every day, and then threatened for their life, it doesn't matter HOW old they are, its RAPE.

 

 

 

Two, if the law is in place, and they were forced to say they consented, it has no bearing on the case, but simply makes them look like they wanted it, and instead of the guy getting a REAL rape charge, they get off lighter.

 

 

 

You OBVIOUSLY don't understand the difference between Statutory Rape, and Rape...please read up on it. PLEASE.

 

 

 

If somebody is FORCED it is NOT STATUTORY RAPE regardless on the age, it is pure and simple RAPE...Statutory can be used as a fallback, but it is RAPE if it is forced and not consented.

 

 

 

That is all, funny that you called me unintelligent, while you have no clue what you are talking about.

 

 

 

AGAIN, I will tell you ONE MORE TIME, It is NOT a double standard, and people are threatened every day by REAL rapists, that FORCE themselves on people, while we are focusing on two people that BOTH WANTED to have CONSENSUAL sex.

 

 

 

I have no idea why you seem to think differently, read up on your laws.

 

 

 

 

 

I had a feeling that I would get owned for not reading up...

 

 

 

 

 

anyway, after reading your post, I can agree with you on a few things.

 

 

 

 

 

"One, if there was no law, and she was actually raped, like people get raped every day, and then threatened for their life, it doesn't matter HOW old they are, its RAPE."

 

 

 

That is true and I don't remember contradicting that statement.

 

 

 

 

 

"Two, if the law is in place, and they were forced to say they consented, it has no bearing on the case, but simply makes them look like they wanted it, and instead of the guy getting a REAL rape charge, they get off lighter."

 

 

 

now that you have so eloquently explained it to me, that probably would happen.

 

 

 

"You OBVIOUSLY don't understand the difference between Statutory Rape, and Rape...please read up on it. PLEASE.

 

 

 

If somebody is FORCED it is NOT STATUTORY RAPE regardless on the age, it is pure and simple RAPE...Statutory can be used as a fallback, but it is RAPE if it is forced and not consented."

 

 

 

I don't know what made it obvious that I don't know the difference, though I'm sure you will tell me after reading this. anyway, I did know the difference and I don't remember stating that they were one and the same.

 

 

 

"That is all, funny that you called me unintelligent, while you have no clue what you are talking about."

 

 

 

Was that you? I guess I was wrong. Sorry about that.

 

 

 

"AGAIN, I will tell you ONE MORE TIME, It is NOT a double standard, and people are threatened every day by REAL rapists, that FORCE themselves on people, while we are focusing on two people that BOTH WANTED to have CONSENSUAL sex."

 

 

 

 

 

Are you saying that the woman is not a rapist? I believe she was arrested for rape. It seems to not matter if it was consensual (which it might have been given the behavior of teenagers these days) because she was arrested. If it was consensual it still qualifies as rape in this situation. (When I say rape i mean all manners of, if for some reason I am missing out on some other forms than rape and statutory rape.)

 

 

 

Basically, what she did was illegal whether you thinks so or not. You most likely believe this. I know what she did was also illegal, or she wouldn't have been arrested because of what she did.

 

 

 

It seems to me that you have a problem not with th case at hand but the issue of whether it should be deemed as "rape". If I am right in my assumption, then you shouldn't be arguing about that to us at all. You are criminal Law major. maybe some day you will have enough authority to change the name. Until then, I'm calling it rape and statutory rape. If you don't like it, then YOU don't like it.

[willyhenriksen]

If someone were to surveil everything I do online I'd kill myself/[bleep]e every program watching me.

 

The kid did something incredibly unwise, and his mother SHOULD have done something about it. But it could've been a lot worse...