Sweden and Denmark have highest number of sexual assaults in Europe - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Disfunctional;49489330]IIRC roughly 30-40% of all rape accusations are made on false grounds.[/QUOTE] Damn son, I'd love to see those sources!

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49491834]Laws are mostly fine, but as for my suggestion? Criminalize false accusations entirely, carries the same penalty as the crime accused. I don't imagine many of those convictions would happen, but I imagine a lot of the cry wolf bullshit would come to a screeching halt. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] Oh and take that plea bargain shit and throw it away. If I could do away with plea bargains I would, they're complete bullshit in these circumstances and are only really useful in obtaining useful information on other parties and getting people to cough up accomplices.[/QUOTE] There are already laws about lying in the court of law. It's called perjury.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49492012]There are already laws about lying in the court of law. It's called perjury.[/QUOTE]Cool. I was actually aware of this. There needs to be equal sentencing for this shit because perjury charges are a slap on the wrist compared to the complete destruction that is being falsely accused of a sex crime. I'm talking [U]equal[/U] prison time, you accuse somebody of murder and it turns out you're a malicious piece of shit trying to get somebody locked up for something they didn't do? Life in fucking prison, parole after.. what, fifteen years? Seems right to me, they're using the state as a weapon to destroy another person and it's only fair that they suffer the full penalty of such bullshit.

Im inclined to call bullshit, as this is the first time i hear of a rape epidemic in Denmark.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49492777]Cool. I was actually aware of this. There needs to be equal sentencing for this shit because perjury charges are a slap on the wrist compared to the complete destruction that is being falsely accused of a sex crime. I'm talking [U]equal[/U] prison time, you accuse somebody of murder and it turns out you're a malicious piece of shit trying to get somebody locked up for something they didn't do? Life in fucking prison, parole after.. what, fifteen years? Seems right to me, they're using the state as a weapon to destroy another person and it's only fair that they suffer the full penalty of such bullshit.[/QUOTE] The "complete destruction" against the falsely accused isn't a creation of the justice system though, it's from outside everyday average people. Honestly read what you are typing. You are saying people deserve life imprisonment or execution for lying. Your saying that if I make a post on FP accusing you of raping me I should go to prison for years. I get that this is an emotional topic but what you are asking for isn't justice, it's vengeance, an emotional appeal to re-institute Hammurabi eye for an eye laws. We already have laws that decide what happens to false accusers and laws that give those victims of slander and libel recourse if they can prove they suffered emotional or monetary damages.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49493722]The "complete destruction" against the falsely accused isn't a creation of the justice system though, it's from outside everyday average people. Honestly read what you are typing. You are saying people deserve life imprisonment or execution for lying. Your saying that if I make a post on FP accusing you of raping me I should go to prison for years. I get that this is an emotional topic but what you are asking for isn't justice, it's vengeance, an emotional appeal to re-institute Hammurabi eye for an eye laws. We already have laws that decide what happens to false accusers and laws that give those victims of slander and libel recourse if they can prove they suffered emotional or monetary damages.[/QUOTE] Maybe equal punishment is a bit harsh, but no. This isn't just lying. Accusing someone of murder or rape is potentially life destroying, even if they don't get convicted, even if it's proven that the accusations were false, that life destroying potential is still there. And sometimes it's not proven that it's a lie, and occasionally they even do end up convicted. Essentially what he's saying is, is that the sentencing for perjury should take just how destructive the false testimony actually is for the accused far more into account than it currently does.

[QUOTE=elowin;49493758]Maybe equal punishment is a bit harsh, but no. This isn't just lying. Accusing someone of murder or rape is potentially life destroying, even if they don't get convicted, even if it's proven that the accusations were false, that life destroying potential is still there. And sometimes it's not proven that it's a lie, and occasionally they even do end up convicted. Essentially what he's saying is, is that the sentencing for perjury should take just how destructive the false testimony actually is for the accused far more into account than it currently does.[/QUOTE] That life destroying potential is both A) Not consistent whatsoever, and B) As I stated an entirely outside element. Nothing within the justice system encourages it. It's a societal problem that isn't going to be solved by doling out eye for an eye punishments for lying. Which is what it is. You can say it's not "just lying" but it literally is just lying, it just has more of an impact because individuals with their own motivations and attitudes are choosing to respond to allegations of sexual assault. Scenaro: A famous sports star is accused of sexual assault. The owner of his team can choose whether they want to distance themselves from him by suspending him or they can wait until actual evidence is put forward. Some of his friends will immediately drop all contact with him and publically distance themselves while others can rally to him and publicly defend him. Not everyone falsely accused of rape suffers from the same life destroying consequences. It should also be noted that perjury only takes place when under oath. If someone jumps on Twitter and says "Raidyr raped me" that's just lying and I can't possibly expect someone to be taken to court and sentenced to 5-15 years for lying on Twitter. That's absurd.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49493796]That life destroying potential is both A) Not consistent whatsoever, and B) As I stated an entirely outside element. Nothing within the justice system encourages it. It's a societal problem that isn't going to be solved by doling out eye for an eye punishments for lying. Which is what it is. You can say it's not "just lying" but it literally is just lying, it just has more of an impact because individuals with their own motivations and attitudes are choosing to respond to allegations of sexual assault. Scenaro: A famous sports star is accused of sexual assault. The owner of his team can choose whether they want to distance themselves from him by suspending him or they can wait until actual evidence is put forward. Some of his friends will immediately drop all contact with him and publically distance themselves while others can rally to him and publicly defend him. Not everyone falsely accused of rape suffers from the same life destroying consequences. It should also be noted that perjury only takes place when under oath. If someone jumps on Twitter and says "Raidyr raped me" that's just lying and I can't possibly expect someone to be taken to court and sentenced to 5-15 years for lying on Twitter. That's absurd.[/QUOTE] Murder is also completely outside the element. It's certainly not encouraged by the justice system. I don't really understand that argument. How does the fact that the damage caused by it isn't (necessarily) actually perpetrated by the justice system make it any less of a crime? To me that sounds about as ridiculous as saying that murder shouldn't be punished because it's not caused by the justice system. And no, just going on twitter is not nearly the same as actually reporting something false or bringing ti court. I thought it went without saying we were talking about actual false accusations here.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49492777]Cool. I was actually aware of this. There needs to be equal sentencing for this shit because perjury charges are a slap on the wrist compared to the complete destruction that is being falsely accused of a sex crime. I'm talking [U]equal[/U] prison time, you accuse somebody of murder and it turns out you're a malicious piece of shit trying to get somebody locked up for something they didn't do? Life in fucking prison, parole after.. what, fifteen years? Seems right to me, they're using the state as a weapon to destroy another person and it's only fair that they suffer the full penalty of such bullshit.[/QUOTE] But the problem is, what if that stops women who have actually been sexually assaulted coming forward? After all, if there may not be enough evidence despite the fact the person actually did rape the person, and then the person could claim perjury charges against the actual victim.

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49493934]But the problem is, what if that stops women who have actually been sexually assaulted coming forward?[/QUOTE] But at the same time we need to punish disgusting liars? [I]Listen and Believe[/I] spits in the face of our criminal justice systems.

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49493934]But the problem is, what if that stops women who have actually been sexually assaulted coming forward? After all, if there may not be enough evidence despite the fact the person actually did rape the person, and then the person could claim perjury charges against the actual victim.[/QUOTE] A lack of proof is not proof that the accuser is lying, and ideally no one should be sentenced without hard proof. That's what the justice system of every civilized country is built around. Innocent until proven guilty.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49493722]The "complete destruction" against the falsely accused isn't a creation of the justice system though, it's from outside everyday average people. Honestly read what you are typing. You are saying people deserve life imprisonment or execution for lying. Your saying that if I make a post on FP accusing you[/QUOTE]Yep, gonna stop you there. I was talking about a [U]legal[/U] accusation, as in you go to the police, file charges against me, and then I'm brought before the man to answer for a crime you made up. [QUOTE=TornadoAP;49493934]But the problem is, what if that stops women who have actually been sexually assaulted coming forward? After all, if there may not be enough evidence despite the fact the person actually did rape the person, and then the person could claim perjury charges against the actual victim.[/QUOTE]Actively proving somebody made a false accusation is still subject to the same rules though, getting somebody in trouble for a lie under oath is not the same as providing evidence that the accuser is a goddamn liar. Like I said I don't expect many convictions of this to ever happen. If that stops a woman from coming forward then that's on her, I get that it's an emotional time after the fact (more than you know) but there's still a responsibility to come forward. Believe me, the guilt of never getting that asshole to stand for the crime is a heavy burden to bear once the emotional scars get easier to live with. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=elowin;49493959]A lack of proof is not proof that the accuser is lying, and ideally no one should be sentenced without hard proof. That's what the justice system of every civilized country is built around. Innocent until proven guilty.[/QUOTE]This, right here.

[QUOTE=elowin;49493830]Murder is also completely outside the element. It's certainly not encouraged by the justice system. I don't really understand that argument. How does the fact that the damage caused by it isn't (necessarily) actually perpetrated by the justice system make it any less of a crime? To me that sounds about as ridiculous as saying that murder shouldn't be punished because it's not caused by the justice system.[/QUOTE] You ignored the bulk of my post, that the consequences of false accusations are entirely subjective and in some cases don't even apply. How are we going to decide on whats a fair punishment for lying under oath based on the damages someone suffers from the lie? If you don't think perjury carries a high enough punishment then whatever, it's entirely arbitrary and there is no point arguing about it. Maybe it should carry a maximum sentence of more than 5 years, I dunno. I just think it's ridiculous to tie it to the sentence that someone would receive if they were guilty of what they were being accused of. Lying about someone raping you or murdering someone is bad but it obviously isn't as bad as actually raping someone or killing someone. This should be obvious. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49494003]Yep, gonna stop you there. I was talking about a [U]legal[/U] accusation, as in you go to the police, file charges against me, and then I'm brought before the man to answer for a crime you made up.[/QUOTE] Okay so you aren't worried about people being falsely accused of sexual assault in the public square or outside of court (ie, through a university administration for example) and the resulting fallout, if any? [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49494003]Actively proving somebody made a false accusation is still subject to the same rules though, getting somebody in trouble for a lie under oath is not the same as providing evidence that the accuser is a goddamn liar.[/QUOTE] Seems like a very thin line to me. Maybe that's why perjury shouldn't carry life sentences? [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49494003]Like I said I don't expect many convictions of this to ever happen. If that stops a woman from coming forward then that's on her, I get that it's an emotional time after the fact (more than you know) but there's still a responsibility to come forward. Believe me, the guilt of never getting that asshole to stand for the crime is a heavy burden to bear once the emotional scars get easier to live with.[/QUOTE] It's kinda fucked up that you acknowledge that people could report even less rapes and then wave it away with some pop psychology about emotional scars and heavy burdens. [QUOTE=Rangergxi;49493950]But at the same time we need to punish disgusting liars? [I]Listen and Believe[/I] spits in the face of our criminal justice systems.[/QUOTE] [I]Holy shit[/I] no one said we should listen and believe. Can you go 5 seconds without making a ridiculous snipe at an argument that absolutely no one is making?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49494155]You ignored the bulk of my post, that the consequences of false accusations are entirely subjective and in some cases don't even apply. How are we going to decide on whats a fair punishment for lying under oath based on the damages someone suffers from the lie? If you don't think perjury carries a high enough punishment then whatever, it's entirely arbitrary and there is no point arguing about it. Maybe it should carry a maximum sentence of more than 5 years, I dunno. I just think it's ridiculous to tie it to the sentence that someone would receive if they were guilty of what they were being accused of. Lying about someone raping you or murdering someone is bad but it obviously isn't as bad as actually raping someone or killing someone. This should be obvious. [/QUOTE] You're right, I did pretty much ignore it. Because it's not technically wrong, it really is rather subjective. Thing is, that's why we have a judge who decides the exact sentence for each case, instead of just having a standard sentence for each crime. Because every crime is different, even if it's the same kind of crime. False accusations are no different in this regard.

[QUOTE=elowin;49493830]Murder is also completely outside the element. It's certainly not encouraged by the justice system. I don't really understand that argument. How does the fact that the damage caused by it isn't (necessarily) actually perpetrated by the justice system make it any less of a crime? To me that sounds about as ridiculous as saying that murder shouldn't be punished because it's not caused by the justice system. And no, just going on twitter is not nearly the same as actually reporting something false or bringing ti court. I thought it went without saying we were talking about actual false accusations here.[/QUOTE] I worded the post badly. I'll try to word it better to communicate what I mean. Murder and it's consequences are easily quantifiable. Homicide with malicious aforethought that results in someones life being taken from them. The punishments for it are entirely arbitrary but you can make decent arguments for life imprisonment and capital punishment, which is why they are by far the most common sentences in the west. Perjury is similarly quantifiable. It's lying under oath. You said it "isn't just lying" because lying under oath, say by saying you were raped by someone when you really weren't, could destroy someones life, even if it's false. This is completely 100% true. It could. It also couldn't. It's entirely possible (and I'd argue probable) that people can emerge from from trials built on false pretenses without losing anything but their time. If they do lose something outside the courts in terms of monetary damages there is legal recourse through libel and slander suits. They can even file a suit against the jurisdiction that failed to prosecute them. I'm saying the legal structure already exists to counter false accusations under oath. Should they be strengthened? You could argue that. Maybe perjury should carry a 10 year sentence instead of 5. Maybe libel and slander lawsuits should be easier to conduct. Theres a decent enough argument for these things. What you guys are asking for is for the legal system to punish victims of false accusations based on an entirely subjective level of "life destruction" that might not even have occurred through the course of the case. It's entirely possible that someone accused of rape kept their job, stayed in school, had a supportive group of friends and family to rally with.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49494155]Okay so you aren't worried about people being falsely accused of sexual assault in the public square or outside of court (ie, through a university administration for example) and the resulting fallout, if any?[/QUOTE]I am but to easily fix that I'd essentially have to have a console window for reality and use it to delete all instances of human stupidity, you simply cannot legislate that away. You can try to negate it, but that's all legal punishments are, aren't they? An incentive not to do something, some legal consequence for a certain action society deems to be sufficiently bad enough to warrant a punishment. [QUOTE=Raidyr;49494155]Seems like a very thin line to me. Maybe that's why perjury shouldn't carry life sentences?[/QUOTE]Except it isn't perjury though? If you faked your own death and framed somebody for murdering you and they were executed you have effectively used the state as a weapon to kill another person. I realize such a scenario is quite unlikely, but the analogy holds true for lesser crimes. Maybe perjury itself needs to have a heftier sentence, maybe there needs to be a specifically new entry on the books for falsely accusing somebody of a felony or capital crime, but either way I'm saying something more significant than what we have needs to be there. [QUOTE=Raidyr;49494155]It's kinda fucked up that you acknowledge that people could report even less rapes and then wave it away with some pop psychology about emotional scars and heavy burdens.[/QUOTE]It's fucked up to say that rape is a emotionally traumatic experience but that doesn't excuse letting a rapist run free to repeat the same crime? I really don't follow your thought process here, drunken claymation bear.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;49491855]Damn son, I'd love to see those sources![/QUOTE] He probably got those numbers from the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Kanin_.281994.29"]Eugene Kanin study[/URL], a pretty shoddy piece of research that has been throughly debunked and criticized by most credible criminologists. Well-done research has consistently shown that false accusations are very uncommon, about 2 - 10% in many places. Dudes love to call out SJWs about LISTEN AND BELIEVE, but have no problem doing it themselves when things just make "sense" to them.

Or perhaps that little bear in your avatar has polio, and if that's the case I apologize for being insensitive. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] fucking THANKS AXELORD

If the argument is that perjury doesn't carry a harsh enough sentence then like I said, there is no point in arguing because we probably won't agree on the magic number. I just don't see the logical reason in sentencing someone the same you would a rapist or a murderer because they lied under oath. Lying under oath should receive roughly the same punishments regardless of what the actual lie was. I think we all agree that people who lie in court deserve to be punished and the concept of innocent until proven guilty applies to everyone

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49494342]Lying under oath should receive roughly the same punishments regardless of what the actual lie was. [/QUOTE] So someone lying about whether or not they fulfilled a contract should receive the same punishment as a someone lying in order to have an innocent person convicted of murder? That's utterly stupid, punishment should be measured by severity not definition.

[QUOTE=Thlis;49494480]So someone lying about whether or not they fulfilled a contract should receive the same punishment as a someone lying in order to have an innocent person convicted of murder? That's utterly stupid, punishment should be measured by severity not definition.[/QUOTE] Yes because you are lying in court. You can't presume anything about the severity of either case because the person testifying against you lied. It's irrelevant at that point. As current law in the US stands (and varies state by state), the punishment for perjury can range from one to five years based on how much it interfered with the proceedings. If someone's entire prosection is based on one person who ends up lying they are probably going to get the maximum sentence.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49494556]Yes because you are lying in court. You can't presume anything about the severity of either case because the person testifying against you lied. It's irrelevant at that point.[/QUOTE] I fail to comprehend how you can not see the difference between the implicit severity of lying in a business case and lying in a homicide case.

[QUOTE=axelord157;49494277]He probably got those numbers from the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Kanin_.281994.29"]Eugene Kanin study[/URL], a pretty shoddy piece of research that has been throughly debunked and criticized by most credible criminologists. Well-done research has consistently shown that false accusations are very uncommon, about 2 - 10% in many places. Dudes love to call out SJWs about LISTEN AND BELIEVE, but have no problem doing it themselves when things just make "sense" to them.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Kanin, Lisak writes, took his data from a police department which used investigation procedures (polygraphs) that are discouraged by the U.S. Justice Department and denounced by the International Association of Chiefs of Police. [/QUOTE] Not really useful to use polygraphs.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49494342]Lying under oath should receive roughly the same punishments regardless of what the actual lie was.[/QUOTE] I inherently disagree with this, I think severity of punishment should absolutely be tied to severity of intent or harm.

[QUOTE=Thlis;49494565]I fail to comprehend how you can not see the difference between the implicit severity of lying in a business case and lying in a homicide case.[/QUOTE] Because I haven't been shown a difference in explicit severity. Implicit severity means nothing. We can say "oh shit that guy coulda got the electric chair if that witness was telling the truth" but it's impossible to know for sure. This is why punishment is based on how integral the persons testimony is to the case. If you have 13 witnesses called to the stand that corroborate the prosecution and one of them lied then they will get a less severe punishment than if an entire case is built on one person who essentially created the legal proceedings out of nothing. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=soulharvester;49494595]I inherently disagree with this, I think severity of punishment should absolutely be tied to severity of intent or harm.[/QUOTE] And I inherently disagree with the severity of the punishment being based on a hypothetical.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49494599]Because I haven't been shown a difference in explicit severity. Implicit severity means nothing. We can say "oh shit that guy coulda got the electric chair if that witness was telling the truth" but it's impossible to know for sure. This is why punishment is based on how integral the persons testimony is to the case. If you have 13 witnesses called to the stand that corroborate the prosecution and one of them lied then they will get a less severe punishment than if an entire case is built on one person who essentially created the legal proceedings out of nothing.[/QUOTE] How do you not understand this? You lying in a murder case should not receive the same punishment as You lying in a minor case with a contractor Lying in court is explicitly an act to disrupt the case from being conducted factually, if you are lying in a more severe case then you are trying to disrupt a more severe case further depending on how big your lie was. But according to you "nah give em a year, doesn't really matter what they were lying about"

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49494599]And I inherently disagree with the severity of the punishment being based on a hypothetical.[/QUOTE] Why? Hypothetical punishment based on a hypothetical, in court room cases they would obviously be more specific, but I don't see how classifying lying about providing a certain standard of quality service in a civil dispute should be classed similarly to trying to maliciously send someone to jail using the law as a weapon.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49494599]And I inherently disagree with the severity of the punishment being based on a hypothetical.[/QUOTE] But it's not really a hypothetical. The counts being brought against the defendant are laid out before the trial even begins. I think perjury should, somehow, be tied to the possible consequences of your actions, just like every other crime. If I'm negligent at work and it puts your car in danger of being destroyed, I might get fined a bit. If I'm negligent at work and it puts your life in danger, I would get a bigger punishment.

[QUOTE=Thlis;49494630]How do you not understand this? You lying in a murder case should not receive the same punishment as You lying in a minor case with a contractor[/QUOTE] You keep repeating this as if it's going to convince me without actually putting in the effort of creating an effective argument. I'm fully willing to be convinced that I'm wrong and that current perjury law as it exists in basically the western hemisphere needs changing but I'm not going to change my mind by reading the same scenario for the third time. [QUOTE=soulharvester;49494636]Why? Hypothetical punishment based on a hypothetical, in court room cases they would obviously be more specific, but I don't see how classifying lying about providing a certain standard of quality service in a civil dispute should be classed similarly to trying to maliciously send someone to jail using the law as a weapon.[/QUOTE] You are going to have to explain the civil dispute in more detail because going from this post it seems like two different scenarios, the first one being essentially false advertising and the latter being perjury. You can dress it up in any language you wish to make it sound particularly insidious but at the end of the day you are still lying. If you think 5 years isn't good enough for someone lying about someone else being a murderer while under oath in the court of law then again, it doesn't matter if I agree or disagree.

Lying about rape harms innocent people, including [B]actual rape victims[/B].