Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Do women different treatment in our legal system?; Sentencing Bias for women
Topic Started: Dec 31 2007, 09:25 PM (682 Views)
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
Jag
Jan 1 2008, 10:37 PM
Minuet
Jan 1 2008, 10:20 PM
RTW
Jan 1 2008, 08:19 PM
Quote:
 
attempted murder. Not murder, attempted murder.

I don't think people should get a break for being a poor shot or otherwise incompetent. There shouldn't be a difference in sentencing.

Perhaps there should be some sentencing break for targeting a politician or judge though. :evilfire:

The subject under discussion is whether women are treated differently in the legal system. Your opinion on whether or not sentences in general are appropriate should be taken to a new thread if you wish to discuss that.

In this case I would definitely say that being female did nothing to do shorten the length of the sentence. I base that on the only available comparable case in which the MALE perp was given a stay in a psychiatric hospital instead of a prison sentence.

And honestly, consiidering some of the sentences given for violent rapes I really wonder why anyone would question the shorter sentences in the case of statutory rape where often the victim is a willing participant - like in the case that Franko cited with his friend. I'm not saying that statutory rape should be condoned. I am saying that violent rape deserves longer sentences then statutory rape and based on that I don't think the females are getting off as easy as you all seem to think.

Be careful with that though Min, the laundry list of definitions of words like statuatory and violent used to discriminate the crime come with all kinds of interpretations opinions and xtra word police baggage like intent.
This may be why the Justice Blind would be nice.

IThis reminds me of the debate over what is called a Hate crime and the Thought Police emerging. Neat fodder for a Tom Cruise movie maybe but we really don't need to distinguish nor understand the perp and see his plight.
Law. :huh: Law broken. :o No questions. Go directly to trial. :2cents:

There is a legal difference between "statutory rape" and "sexual assault". They are two different crimes with different sentences attached to them.

Do you have statistics on how long men who have engaged in statuatory rape have been held in prision? I think you need to provide statistics before declaring that women are treated differently. Don't compare to sexual assault - you must compare the same crime which is statuatory rape.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 09:56 AM
And if you had the reading skills to read an entire sentence instead of pulling your usual shit of only quoting half a sentence you would see that I was quite on topic.  :rolleyes:

Posted Image
I quoted the relevant part of your post. I even removed your name to avoid this as I know how much it bothers you when I reply to you. Yet here we are. :banghead:

The main idea of my post was relevant to what I quoted. Did I quote a portion of your post that off-topic?

Anyhoo, now instead of my two sentences that you consider off topic, we have FOUR additional posts. Can you keep it at four? My money says no.

You're not a moderator anymore, and no matter how much you think otherwise, you're not my, nor any other member's, mother. You need to learn to let things go. ;)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
RTW
Jan 2 2008, 03:32 PM
Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 09:56 AM
And if you had the reading skills to read an entire sentence instead of pulling your usual shit of only quoting half a sentence you would see that I was quite on topic.  :rolleyes:

Posted Image
I quoted the relevant part of your post. I even removed your name to avoid this as I know how much it bothers you when I reply to you. Yet here we are. :banghead:

The main idea of my post was relevant to what I quoted. Did I quote a portion of your post that off-topic?

Anyhoo, now instead of my two sentences that you consider off topic, we have FOUR additional posts. Can you keep it at four? My money says no.

You're not a moderator anymore, and no matter how much you think otherwise, you're not my, nor any other member's, mother. You need to learn to let things go. ;)

You don't get it - do you?

You quoted a part of the sentence in order to make it relevant to what YOU wanted to say. But in the process you took it completely out of context to what I was saying. My original comment was not a tangent - but after you took the half sentence and tangented it you have the unmitigated gall to say that I tangented first.

And then you wonder why we can't get along. :no:

Buddy, next time don't quote me at all either in context or out of context. I cannot even fathom why you think removing my name changes anything. You have a screw loose if you think that makes it all ok.

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
I don't get it? That's a hoot...

Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 02:57 PM
You quoted a part of the sentence in order to make it relevant to what YOU wanted to say. But in the process you took it completely out of context to what I was saying.
Yep. Kind of explains why I took your name off it, doesn't it? Glad we can agree on this.

Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 02:57 PM
My original comment was not a tangent - but after you took the half sentence and tangented it you have the unmitigated gall to say that I tangented first.
Wow - you're really hot about that heinous accusation aren't you?

Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 02:57 PM
And then you wonder why we can't get along.  :no:
Yep, your inability to let anything go pretty much explains it. Had anyone else made that comment this back and forth would never have happened. No matter how wide a berth I give you, you find something to snipe about.

Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 02:57 PM
Buddy, next time don't quote me at all either in context or out of context. I cannot even fathom why you think removing my name changes anything. You have a screw loose if you think that makes it all ok.
Geez, in all my time at Sister Trek no one else ever seemed to have a problem with quoting the part of a post relevant to the intended response. Maybe it IS just you.... :shrug:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
RTW
Jan 2 2008, 06:51 PM
I don't get it? That's a hoot...

Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 02:57 PM
You quoted a part of the sentence in order to make it relevant to what YOU wanted to say. But in the process you took it completely out of context to what I was saying.
Yep. Kind of explains why I took your name off it, doesn't it? Glad we can agree on this.




Didn't you recieve a warning recently when you quoted someone out of context? And I am not getting your point about taking my name off of it. Is that supposed to change the fact that it was me that you quoted? :shrug:

Quote:
 
Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 02:57 PM
My original comment was not a tangent - but after you took the half sentence and tangented it you have the unmitigated gall to say that I tangented first.
Wow - you're really hot about that heinous accusation aren't you?


My ORIGINAL statement

Quote:
 
As for this case - as Franko pointed out 32 years for attempted murder. Not murder, attempted murder. Had she shot at anyone but the President of the US she would have been out years ago. She was not treated differently then a man in this case. She was treated differently because of her intended victim and it did not work in her favour.


Oh gee - look at the highlighted statement. I was on topic. How about that. But your response to my request that you stay on topic was the following lie.

RTW
 
Thanks mom. I'm sorry for expanding on your tangent.


And of course instead of apologizing for your mistake you continue to make an a$$ of yourself.

Quote:
 
Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 02:57 PM
And then you wonder why we can't get along.  :no:
Yep, your inability to let anything go pretty much explains it. Had anyone else made that comment this back and forth would never have happened. No matter how wide a berth I give you, you find something to snipe about.


Here is the comment that started this.

Quote:
 
The subject under discussion is whether women are treated differently in the legal system. Your opinion on whether or not sentences in general are appropriate should be taken to a new thread if you wish to discuss that.


It was POLITELY worded and suggested that you start a new topic. It is YOU who is taking this personally and is unable to let go of the past. Had anyone else made the request that you stay on topic and start a new thread for your tangent I doubt that you would be reacting in such a childish and petulant manner

Quote:
 
Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 02:57 PM
Buddy, next time don't quote me at all either in context or out of context. I cannot even fathom why you think removing my name changes anything. You have a screw loose if you think that makes it all ok.
Geez, in all my time at Sister Trek no one else ever seemed to have a problem with quoting the part of a post relevant to the intended response. Maybe it IS just you.... :shrug:


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

You really think no one else has never had a problem with your manner of posting :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Too bad I don't have the reading skills to read all that. link Kind of a nice crutch to use as a time saver in a situation like this.

Would you be happy if I removed the quotes and just added similar wording to my statement?

How about,

"I don't think people should get a break for attempted murder versus murder. Being a poor shot or otherwise incompetent shouldn't make a difference in sentencing."
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
I would still ask what that has to do with the question of how WOMEN are supposedly treated differently in the legal system.

Your question has validity - it just has nothing to do with the topic.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Franko
Member Avatar
Shower Moderator


Moderator Comment


Can we drop this argument please ? Now you've both derailed this thread, and i don't think it was necessary.


I'll be deleting any further sparring after this comment.


Continue
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
Absolutely. I actually saw my sister flirt with a cop to get out of a ticket. I'll never forgive her. :lol:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Sgt. Jaggs
Member Avatar
How about a Voyager Movie
Minuet
Jan 2 2008, 12:02 PM
Jag
Jan 1 2008, 10:37 PM
Minuet
Jan 1 2008, 10:20 PM
RTW
Jan 1 2008, 08:19 PM
Quote:
 
attempted murder. Not murder, attempted murder.

I don't think people should get a break for being a poor shot or otherwise incompetent. There shouldn't be a difference in sentencing.

Perhaps there should be some sentencing break for targeting a politician or judge though. :evilfire:

The subject under discussion is whether women are treated differently in the legal system. Your opinion on whether or not sentences in general are appropriate should be taken to a new thread if you wish to discuss that.

In this case I would definitely say that being female did nothing to do shorten the length of the sentence. I base that on the only available comparable case in which the MALE perp was given a stay in a psychiatric hospital instead of a prison sentence.

And honestly, consiidering some of the sentences given for violent rapes I really wonder why anyone would question the shorter sentences in the case of statutory rape where often the victim is a willing participant - like in the case that Franko cited with his friend. I'm not saying that statutory rape should be condoned. I am saying that violent rape deserves longer sentences then statutory rape and based on that I don't think the females are getting off as easy as you all seem to think.

Be careful with that though Min, the laundry list of definitions of words like statuatory and violent used to discriminate the crime come with all kinds of interpretations opinions and xtra word police baggage like intent.
This may be why the Justice Blind would be nice.

IThis reminds me of the debate over what is called a Hate crime and the Thought Police emerging. Neat fodder for a Tom Cruise movie maybe but we really don't need to distinguish nor understand the perp and see his plight.
Law. :huh: Law broken. :o No questions. Go directly to trial. :2cents:

There is a legal difference between "statutory rape" and "sexual assault". They are two different crimes with different sentences attached to them.

Do you have statistics on how long men who have engaged in statuatory rape have been held in prision? I think you need to provide statistics before declaring that women are treated differently. Don't compare to sexual assault - you must compare the same crime which is statuatory rape.

Min

You are right on with your distinction. My only intent in the topic is how I seem to percieve the topic generally, knee-jerk reaction.

Like when you smell something and you have an idea what it is within 5 seconds before you try to prove the facts to yourself or anyone else.

I may have lumpted two topics togethor on this one too. :manual:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
Jag - I was thinking about this a bit more and got to thinking how often men get away with statuatory rape without consequence. In particular I remember a story similar to the one Franko related. In my case one of my female classmates had an affair with a male teacher. That teacher should probably have been drummed out of the profession, at the very least. But instead when she reached the age of 18 he left his wife and married the student......

No penalty at all in that case.

There are cases where women get lesser sentences then men - but then the same is true of some men getting lesser sentences then other men, or women, for the same crime. I think that one must look at all circumstances in those cases to ask why. In part it very well could be better manipulation of the juries. But I honestly don't think there is a gender based trend.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Minuet
Jan 3 2008, 10:03 AM
Jag - I was thinking about this a bit more and got to thinking how often men get away with statuatory rape without consequence. In particular I remember a story similar to the one Franko related. In my case one of my female classmates had an affair with a male teacher. That teacher should probably have been drummed out of the profession, at the very least. But instead when she reached the age of 18 he left his wife and married the student......

That’s not an example of a man getting a lesser sentence. One has to be accused and then prosecuted before a sentence is given. In this case it seems this guy was nether accused or prosecuted, their for sentencing is not even an issue.


On the subject, one need only look at family court and divorce court to see that woman are treated differently by the legal system.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
Really - then why do the stats show that women consistently come out from divorce POORER then men.

I think that you are having one of Jag's knee jerk reactions due to a few cases where men get the short end of the stick. Believe me - women usually end up with greater family responsibilities and less money after a divorce.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Minuet
Jan 3 2008, 02:40 PM
Really - then why do the stats show that women consistently come out from divorce POORER then men.

I think that you are having one of Jag's knee jerk reactions due to a few cases where men get the short end of the stick. Believe me - women usually end up with greater family responsibilities and less money after a divorce.


What stats?

What do you mean by "greater family responsibilities"? that they get to have more time with their children? I don’t see that as a bad thing.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
I know that many men take on the responsiblility of joint custody. But many men also skip out and refuse to pay any child support.

I don't think the divorce courts favour women. I think bad things happen to individual men and women because thier spouses are scum.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus