Ex-Stanford Swimmer gets 6 Months in Assault of Unconscious Woman

So? Dude traumatized that woman for life. She doesn't just forget it after 3 months. Not to mention the possibility of dealing with a pregnancy / stds

It's ok to shoot someone who has a hoodie as a penalty, but not ok to send a white kid with a lot of potential to jail for more than a few months for raping someone.

 

So? His prison term isn't going to un-rape her. And if you weren't paying attention in sex ed, you don't get pregnant or STDs from fingering.

You should read the Trayvon Martin thread and see my stance on that.

Sending Brock Turner to prison for several years is highly unlikely to benefit anyone (other than those working in the prison system), but would definitely be a drain on taxpayers and increase the likelyhood that he would commit future crimes and/or depend on governmental assistance.

 

So you honestly believe that Brock Turner is receiving a just punishment for taking advantage of an unconscious woman? Or that justice should not be the justice system's first priority when leveling a sentence?

 

I never said that. You are always so angry for no reason and argues a straw man. I just think it's a bizzaro world where liberals are calling for someone's head for someone out of pure spite. Because it's normally the conservatives that always wants to lock everyone up and throw away the keys.

In my own opinion, I don't know what the sentence should be. I don't know much about US criminal laws nor have I really kept up with this whole event.

 

Wouldn't just punishment be to let some guy finger **** his intoxicated ass?

I don't think punishment should be the primary goal of the justice system. Rehabilitation & prevention are the goals. Prisons should be used for those that are a danger to society and some types of habitual offenders. I, like the judge, believe that Brock Turner is highly unlikely to commit another sexual assault. We could certainly be wrong about that.

 

Not calling for his head, I am calling for him to face the right punishment - not for spite but for justice - I am not sure why you say it's spite and there is anger. You are reading something that is not there.

I don't think people who commit victimless crimes should be locked up. But I think whent here is a victim, they should be locked up - I am not sure why you find this inconsistent.

 

I thought conservatives like throwing insane prison sentences as a "deterrence factor"? Isn't that why the US has the most avg prison time spent in the free world?

The point is not really a partisan issue, but rather if we as a people are calling to change this aspect or allow judges to overturn jury sentences based on "promising futures" or "affluenza" then we should revamp the whole ****ing thing instead of cherry picking strong and light sentences based on each party's whims in changing the laws.

 

The system works fine. If you are white, you get a hand slap do it doesn't ruin your life. If you are black, you get thrown into the slammer and have your life ruined because your life is worth less.

I mean, what's the problem?

 

It would benefit those he would potentially rape in the future... Im guessing you assume he wont do that because of how he looks. Secondly, I guess we should allow murderers to go free because by your logic it wont un-murder anyone, lol.

 

Question for you. If I am a wealthy enough individual who doesn't need to work a day in his life(Trump level rich) with little to no empathy, is a couple months jail sentence and having to state you are a sex offender in any potential job applications that you will never need because you are filthy rich a large enough deterent to rape someone?

For someone with little to no empathy and is filthy rich, I don't think so. That's why a longer sentencing is necessary especially for the privileged rich because they need to know that harsh times come with harsh crimes.

 

I'm assuming he won't because I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. Something I would give to most first-time offenders.

Murder would depend upon the facts of the case, but there is generally a much higher risk releasing someone who is willing to be so violent as to commit murder.

Yes, that would be harsh enough to prevent someone like Donald Trump from fingering a passed out girl behind a dumpster. No sane person would think it is worth it. If you were Donald Trump rich, you would just pay women for a lot more more than that. Generally speaking, most people aren't avoiding sexual assault because of fear of prison. They are doing it because they know it is wrong. If fear of prison is what is preventing you from committing serious crimes, you are a horrible human being.

 

Plenty of white people get their lives ruined as well. There is certainly a racial disparity, but the economic one is pretty great as well.

We need fewer people in prison. Far fewer.

 

Apparently rapes aren't violent, lol. Umm OK. "Hey he only raped her, its not lie she died or anything". No but some rape victims wish they were dead and some even commit suicide. But this guy gets to go off and enjoy his life. As long as he's OK I guess we can all sleep better at night knowing he MAY not rape someone again.

 

My reference to Trump was a bad example. Trump has aspirations whether it is to become president or be a world renowned businessman. So public perception is important. But what about those thousands of trsut fund babies who have literally NO aspirations besides living off the millions they inherited?

So what about an individual who is wealthy(doesn't need to ever look for a job), has no aspirations and has little to no empathy? These people exist. Do you think such a light sentence is a deterent for them?

 

Rape can be extremely violent. In this particular case, I wouldn't say it was. That isn't to say it isn't serious, but this isn't attacking someone on the streets or drugging someone. It takes a lot more for someone to violently attack someone than it does to take advantage of someone.

Do you live in fear of Brock Turner? I live in much greater fear of people I know nothing about.

I don't think heavier sentences would be a deterrent for them. We have long sentences and we aren't really doing better than the rest of the world in deterring crime. 2nd time offenders would certainly garner much harsher sentences because they clearly can not control themselves.

 

I really shouldnt have to reply to this as it speaks for itself. I dunno juicy lets let some guy do it to you, Im thinking you might change your tune, lol.

 

Except for the fact that he would be in jail and couldnt rape anyone during that time.. well atleast not anyone in prison.

 

Fixed.

 

Actually it has. At a party when I was 16.

 

Requoted for truth.

Even reporting the details doesn't necessarily mean prosecution because of the time, resources, and effort needed to get a case to trial even with convicting evidence beyond testimony.

I'm with the group that considers this more of a rich thing than a racial thing. Apparently if you're a rich youth, age 15-35, then killing or raping while drunk allows you a free mulligan.

The way it's framed, he wouldn't do it sober fully knowing that his bright future as a job creator is right in front of him. That should be a strong enough deterrent.

This discussion has mainly centered on the man moving an unconscious woman and raped her at a dumpster in full sight of walking traffic.

Who else thinks he'd leave her unconscious body where he finished off?

If that's not a humiliating experience for the woman by itself, maybe getting gang raped by other innocent drunkards tip the scales on a harsher prison sentence?

But hey he's drunk. She's unconscious. Better they both forget.