Oklahoma ruling on rape was technically correct

[SuperDemocrat]

There is a case where a girl was raped but because she was unconscious it wasn't considered 'force'. I'm sure that is a technicality that was intended since when it was written they didn't have drugs that can knock a girl out like rufees (however it is spelled). They probably thought all rape was done by force which is why the worded it that way. I'm sure that isn't what was intended but that was how the law was written and the courts fumbled a little on the meaning. They did the best they could. Fortunately the legislative branch can step in and change it to something like 'without consent'.

It was correct because that was how the law was worded. Oklahoma ruling on rape was technically correct.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Got a link to the news article? I'd like to see what all was involved and happened.

 

[SwimExpert]

There is a case where a girl was raped but because she was unconscious it wasn't considered 'force'. I'm sure that is a technicality that was intended since when it was written they didn't have drugs that can knock a girl out like rufees (however it is spelled). They probably thought all rape was done by force which is why the worded it that way. I'm sure that isn't what was intended but that was how the law was written and the courts fumbled a little on the meaning. They did the best they could. Fortunately the legislative branch can step in and change it to something like 'without consent'.

It was correct because that was how the law was worded. Oklahoma ruling on rape was technically correct.

Yep. A few of my talkative FB friends have jumped all over this, and I kinda want to slap them and point out that they're making asses of themselves. It's an unfortunate lapse in the statute, as currently written. Of course, some people want to make this out as if it's part of the "war on women" and claim that the court just doesn't want to protect women from rape. It's just a flawed statute. And truthfully, it was an honest mistake from a very long time ago.

 

[The Great Goose]

How are ruffes not "force"?

We need to redefine "force" to "forced entry"

 

[SwimExpert]

How are ruffes not "force"?

We need to redefine "force" to "forced entry"

Because they are not force. The same way that blackmailing someone into having sex with you is not force.

 

[The Great Goose]

How are ruffes not "force"?

We need to redefine "force" to "forced entry"

Because they are not force. The same way that blackmailing someone into having sex with you is not force.

You didnt pay attention in physics.

 

[SwimExpert]

How are ruffes not "force"?

We need to redefine "force" to "forced entry"

Because they are not force. The same way that blackmailing someone into having sex with you is not force.

You didnt pay attention in physics.

Morons like you just get pissed off because you think you're entitled to the law being whatever you want it to be. If someone does something you don't like, you want it to be illegal, and want a court to find the person guilty. That's why morons like you always resort to emotional arguments about what allegedly is legal/illegal, right/wrong, constitutional/unconstitutional.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Rape is sex where one of the parties didn't consent to it. Let's start there.

 

[The Great Goose]

How are ruffes not "force"?

We need to redefine "force" to "forced entry"

Because they are not force. The same way that blackmailing someone into having sex with you is not force.

You didnt pay attention in physics.

Morons like you just get pissed off because you think you're entitled to the law being whatever you want it to be. If someone does something you don't like, you want it to be illegal, and want a court to find the person guilty. That's why morons like you always resort to emotional arguments about what allegedly is legal/illegal, right/wrong, constitutional/unconstitutional.

I want drugging and raping someone to be illegal.