Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CyanideKitty t1_irr0h3g wrote

Reply to comment by 255001434 in Serial ‘jogger rapist’ to be released from Oregon prison by LuceeCarioca

So are you proposing we make the sentence for rape a life sentence then?

Contrary to what the media wants you to believe people can come out of jails after decades and NOT repeat their past mistakes. I guarantee you I live near multiple rapists (many men still continue or lightly force it, even if she changes her mind mid sex) , they just haven't been caught by the law (or in my case my ex would rape me when I said no. Marital rape was made illegal in 1993, I got married in 2004. I was told by multiple cops in multiple districts/cities/counties not to bother because we were married and marriage is a 24/7 consent situation. Any movement that is not immediate pulling out after she says no makes you a rapist, technically.

Really, what does knowing about a convicted rapist do vs knowing I live near a bunch of not caught rapists? Absolutely nothing in my eyes. Plus he's old as fuck who has served his time. He's done his time, he can now resume a "regular life".

−26

mjgoot t1_irr2y4z wrote

let him be your sister or daughters neighbor then.

12

CyanideKitty t1_irr68oi wrote

These people could already be getting raped by their significant other for all I know. Until/if he reoffends he has served his time, is "rehabilitated", and is free to live out his days (until he reoffends, if he does). Why should we only worry about those who have "paid their debt"? Shouldn't we fear monger the unknown rapists as well as those who have served their time? No, we shouldn't because that just pushes a living in fear of everything society even more than we already do.

Also, I'm in Milwaukee, how do I or my sister or anyone I know need to know a rapist is Oregon is released? At most that should be a COMMUNITY alert, like with pedophiles.

−14

255001434 t1_irrej9a wrote

>So are you proposing we make the sentence for rape a life sentence then?

Did you not read my comment? From the first line:

>he served his time which is why he's getting out and I didn't argue against that

My comments were simply about why this story is worthy of being news. Who are you arguing against?

He admitted to nine rapes, but was only convicted of one of them because of the statute of limitations. There's nothing we can do about that, but I'm not going to pretend this is someone who has paid for his crimes. Those eight other victims would probably have something to say about that.

You seem to think all rapes are equal and of equal threats to society, but this is a man who hunted down multiple victims after seeing them in public, including a 13 year old girl. Anyone he crossed paths with was a potential target. He is the most dangerous type of rapist there is and the type that people in his vicinity would most need to be warned against. As the article says, he isn't required to notify his neighbors, so reporting the story is one way because don't know where he will move to.

Edit: He's 63, which is not young, but he is still capable of harming someone. I would want to know if he lived near the young women in my family. Nice that you don't think it matters, since other men are "technically" rapists too. Some men are much more dangerous than others. You don't seem to get that.

9

Sovrin1 t1_irtv0nh wrote

"served his time" means nothing. society owes nothing to this predator. we'd all be better off if it stayed locked in it's cage.

4

[deleted] t1_irr8lfj wrote

[removed]

2

CyanideKitty t1_irrdzri wrote

Oh I know better but knowing better didn't put a rapist behind bars because I kept being told that. Many women raped by their spouses are told that daily.

4

JackMitcham t1_irr9ztq wrote

> No one fucking told you "marriage was a 24/7 consent situation"

I believe her. Lawyers are still making this case in court.

>and even if they did, you know better.

And how does that help arrest the rapist?

3

[deleted] t1_irraymu wrote

[removed]

1

CyanideKitty t1_irre3gv wrote

I couldn't have a case because cops refused to take a report because marriage is a 24/7 consent. This happens to many women.

3

JackMitcham t1_irrb96p wrote

>What lawyers?

Many lawyers. Trump's lawyers, for one.

>What case?

The case that one cannot rape one's spouse. I was very clear in my original post, I don't know why you're confused.

>What rapist is getting arrested?

None, that's the point.

>Her ex-husband?

I mean, yeah. She literally said she was raped. What is confusing you? Jesus Christ man, pay attention.

0

[deleted] t1_irrc6j7 wrote

[removed]

1

JackMitcham t1_irrh3eb wrote

> No idea what Trump's lawyers have to do with this conversation. > >

YOU ASKED which lawyers are making this case in court.

>she stated she was told by law enforcement many years later that it was legal.

Yeah, when she tried reporting the crime. You don't have a problem with that?

>on your idiotic comments.

Enjoy the ban, I guess.

2