Military sex assault conviction rate
- Thread starter Hoid
- Start date
How many assault are not prosecuted. 17 seems like a pretty small number compared to the number of people involved.
why single out the military? Statistics show sexual coercion is a widespread epidemic in our present society affecting all sexes. It may or may not be higher within the ranks of the military; but given higher rates of PTSD in the military, even if it did turn out to be higher than average, though still not excusable, could be more understandable. Again, let's not confuse excusable with understandable.
The Military probably has the lowest rate. Hollyweid is probably batting pretty close to 1,000, and as far as conviction rates go the RCC is close to batting 1,000 as far as no charges being laid on known sex abusers.
So you would rather sexual assault conviction rates outside the military not be mentioned as it would be equal to trolling the thread?? That about sum it up?? (btw the silent treatment just allows me to challenge every word you say without any argument, that going to work out better for me than it will for you. I thought that should be pointed out to you. Act like a troll long enough and you become one, perhaps that is the thread you should start.
He has a whole herd of them, all dead horses that are beaten each and every day.
In the US at least, this could be a reason for the possibly lower rate:
https://militarylawcenter.com/practice-area/adultery-in-the-military/
If a person accuses another of sexually assault, there is no need to prove that he coerced anyone into it, only that no one coerced him into it. See Tekbones, it might just work.
It would block a loop-hole and there would (eventually) be a person who could be charged that originally came up with the idea. I doubt the brass would want that implemented but the 'grunts' sure would.
We used to have some states that made fornication a crime. There's a reason we stopped.
You also seem to have some trouble grasping the difference between fornication and adultery.
I use fornication as an umbrella term to include adultery. But even if we limit ourselves to adultery, it still makes it more difficult for a married person to rape another person and then get away with it since, even if we can't prove rape, we can still find him guilty of adultery and that serves as an effective deterrent. There then is no more need to prove that the accused coerced the alleged victim, only that the alleged victim did not coerce the accused.
Interestingly, you criticized my semantics without opposing the US military law; what are your thoughts on that law.
As for such laws in some US states, there are still in the books but just not usually enforced. from what I've read, they're usually applied in plea bargains and such.
So what are your thoughts on the US military law making adultery a criminal offence?
Yes, and you either pretend that the UCMJ concurs or don't understand that it doesn't.
Fact is, the military forbids adultery for "good order and discipline," i.e., it's not good for morale or unit cohesion to be boffing a fellow soldier's wife while he's in the field.
But you either can't comprehend any of this, or you're just grasping at straws to try to justify your hatred of sex.
I very much enjoy sex. I just don't like it when rapists hide behind the fact that rape is so bloody difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
I remember reading a study showing that a child victim of sexual, physical, or emotional abuse is far more likely than a child who has not been victimized to become victimized as an adult. If I had to guess the reason for this, I'd speculate that it has to do with the fact that childhood abuse might make the person more fearful, passive, or otherwise less able to resist coercion as an adult. But that's just my speculation.
Regardless though, if studies show this,then policies that better protect adults from sexual coercion will tend to protect those adults who'd already been abused as children the most.
I do know that adults can make false rape accusations. I do not deny that. At the same time though, a person who sleeps with another who then makes a criminal complaint against him should still receive some kind of punishment just for being stupid enough to agree to sex with someone like that. A fine for fornication would serve as an effective deterrent against rape due to its being easier to prove. As for guilt beyond reasonable doubt, at least he'd be found guilty of something for which he's actually guilty of and would pay a fine for it.
Right, so you want to make all sex a crime to prevent rape. Kinda like banning all guns to prevent gun murders.
Why don't we ban all alcohol to prevent drunk driving?