awesome guy wrote:
According to Nolan, it's the same as a DUI. He's smart and attended a Twitter thread on the subject.
Sorry. I haven't said there's a strict BAC standard.
If there isn't a BAC standard then WTH are we even talking about? You're typing gobbledygook.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
awesome guy wrote:
False. It's highly relevant. It's pathetic how eager you are to ruin a life forever over finger banging a girl at a frat party. I'm sure you'd sing another tune if it were two queers involved.
I'm not a low info, so I know that a person doesn't necessarily have to pass out in order to lose the capacity to legally consent. This kid ruined his own life when he committed multiple felonies.
it is rather relevant when she passed out but it brings up a good point. When did the alkeehawl hit her, was she taking lots of shots and it hit her hard or was she drunker than hell the whole time. It appears the guy was also very drunk so how can he comprehend wether she is giving consent or not? His capacity is also limited due to the alkeehawl so maybe she gave clear consent and he would not even know it. I agree both participants were dumb and the guy should have left her passed out next to the dumpster and then get blamed if something happened to her after that. I agree the guy screwed up, is he a rapist, no. Did two college kids screw up, yepper
Learn what consent is under the eyes of the law. One does not have to pass out in order to be incapacitated to give consent.
At what BAC level does consent disappear?
It's when you're incapacitated. Different people handle certain BAC levels differently.
I realize that. However, excluding certain genetic markers, BAC and intoxication level are certainly relatable. Saying one is incapacitated is a nebulous phrase unless their is data to support the classification.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
awesome guy wrote:
According to Nolan, it's the same as a DUI. He's smart and attended a Twitter thread on the subject.
Sorry. I haven't said there's a strict BAC standard.
If there isn't a BAC standard then WTH are we even talking about? You're typing gobbledygook.
Now, you're just playing stupid.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, I'm not. I'm looking for an answer based on data- not advocacy group nonsense.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
HokieJoe wrote:
I realize that. However, excluding certain genetic markers, BAC and intoxication level are certainly relatable. Saying one is incapacitated is a nebulous phrase unless their is data to support the classification.
Take that up with those who write and enforce the laws.
HokieJoe wrote:
I realize that. However, excluding certain genetic markers, BAC and intoxication level are certainly relatable. Saying one is incapacitated is a nebulous phrase unless their is data to support the classification.
Take that up with those who write and enforce the laws.
Assuming you're interpreting it correctly, bad laws never happen?
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
nolanvt wrote:
I'm not a low info, so I know that a person doesn't necessarily have to pass out in order to lose the capacity to legally consent. This kid ruined his own life when he committed multiple felonies.
it is rather relevant when she passed out but it brings up a good point. When did the alkeehawl hit her, was she taking lots of shots and it hit her hard or was she drunker than hell the whole time. It appears the guy was also very drunk so how can he comprehend wether she is giving consent or not? His capacity is also limited due to the alkeehawl so maybe she gave clear consent and he would not even know it. I agree both participants were dumb and the guy should have left her passed out next to the dumpster and then get blamed if something happened to her after that. I agree the guy screwed up, is he a rapist, no. Did two college kids screw up, yepper
Learn what consent is under the eyes of the law. One does not have to pass out in order to be incapacitated to give consent.
At what BAC level does consent disappear?
It's when you're incapacitated. Different people handle certain BAC levels differently.
I realize that. However, excluding certain genetic markers, BAC and intoxication level are certainly relatable. Saying one is incapacitated is a nebulous phrase unless their is data to support the classification.
Nolan is still in his previous hole and can't admit the obvious that incapacity due to alcohol consumption is well passed drunk and right next to passed out. Otherwise everyone picking up chicks at a bar is a rapist, a position PC Bro may very well have.
HokieJoe wrote:
I realize that. However, excluding certain genetic markers, BAC and intoxication level are certainly relatable. Saying one is incapacitated is a nebulous phrase unless their is data to support the classification.
Take that up with those who write and enforce the laws.
awesome guy wrote:
According to Nolan, it's the same as a DUI. He's smart and attended a Twitter thread on the subject.
Sorry. I haven't said there's a strict BAC standard.
If there isn't a BAC standard then WTH are we even talking about? You're typing gobbledygook.
Now, you're just playing stupid.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, I'm not. I'm looking for an answer based on data- not advocacy group nonsense.
Yep, the legal definition for intoxication is a BAC of 0.08 (in general).
But, tolerance to alcohol affects "capacity". There is no way to measure incapacity, but I would think that someone who is passed out has been incapacitated for a while, and it's different for different people.
Good sparring, gents. I don't think you all are really rape apologists, but appreciate the debating reps nonetheless. We're all on the same page that the Stanford student committed multiple felonies. To believe otherwise given the evidence, the two guys' eyewitness testimony, etc. would make you look foolish.
nolanvt wrote:Good sparring, gents. I don't think you all are really rape apologists, but appreciate the debating reps nonetheless. We're all on the same page that the Stanford student committed multiple felonies. To believe otherwise given the evidence, the two guys' eyewitness testimony, etc. would make you look foolish.
More like we pummeled a troll. You couldn't look more foolish here if you tried. Thanks for the comedy again Bozo.
nolanvt wrote:I'm curious for those with sons, how will you advise them when they get of age on how to handle girls and how you will educate them on what consent actually is?
What would you tell your sons?
Never have sex with a woman who's been drinking alcohol? Have you ever had sex with a woman (or man, for the PC bros) who was under the influence of alcohol? I assume not.
How about, if a woman is passed out, don't finger her? That's a good start.
Rape prevention tip #11 for guys: if you see a woman is drunk out of her mind and has no clue what she's doing, don't rape them.
if drunken sex was not going on on campuses nationwide....... there would be a ton less sex happening. So you never hooked up with someone at VT went you were one or both drinking.... really?
I did a few times, by todays standards I guess I am a sexual offender, i better go register
No sense in reading this guys. Rape culture blah blah blah. Bottom line, the guy was convicted of a crime. The UVA frat was convicted of a crime by the majority of the public without any evidence. We don't and have never lived in a rape culture. Most people convict guys before a trial even starts.
nolanvt wrote:Good sparring, gents. I don't think you all are really rape apologists, but appreciate the debating reps nonetheless. We're all on the same page that the Stanford student committed multiple felonies. To believe otherwise given the evidence, the two guys' eyewitness testimony, etc. would make you look foolish.
I think they both got drunk off their asses and he went to far for sure, multiple felonies, no. Being inappropriate sure thus the lighter sentence, he is still going to be a sex offender his whole life tho and by todays standards that means that prob. 75% of the US male population are sex offenders currently is the only point.
nolanvt wrote:I'm curious for those with sons, how will you advise them when they get of age on how to handle girls and how you will educate them on what consent actually is?
What would you tell your sons?
Never have sex with a woman who's been drinking alcohol? Have you ever had sex with a woman (or man, for the PC bros) who was under the influence of alcohol? I assume not.
How about, if a woman is passed out, don't finger her? That's a good start.
Rape prevention tip #11 for guys: if you see a woman is drunk out of her mind and has no clue what she's doing, don't rape them.
if drunken sex was not going on on campuses nationwide....... there would be a ton less sex happening. So you never hooked up with someone at VT went you were one or both drinking.... really?
I did a few times, by todays standards I guess I am a sexual offender, i better go register
If you were both drunk, you were the only one responsible. So I guess you are now an outcast among us. Someone call the cops.
No sense in reading this guys. Rape culture blah blah blah. Bottom line, the guy was convicted of a crime. The UVA frat was convicted of a crime by the majority of the public without any evidence. We don't and have never lived in a rape culture. Most people convict guys before a trial even starts.
The difference between the UVA thing and this is that the rapist was convicted in his trial through evidence. Had the two Swedes not stopped the attack, this entitled monster would've gotten away with it.
nolanvt wrote:Good sparring, gents. I don't think you all are really rape apologists, but appreciate the debating reps nonetheless. We're all on the same page that the Stanford student committed multiple felonies. To believe otherwise given the evidence, the two guys' eyewitness testimony, etc. would make you look foolish.
I think they both got drunk off their asses and he went to far for sure, multiple felonies, no. Being inappropriate sure thus the lighter sentence, he is still going to be a sex offender his whole life tho and by todays standards that means that prob. 75% of the US male population are sex offenders currently is the only point.
75% of the male population hasn't assaulted with the intent to rape an unconscious woman. If you have done such a thing, you are a rapist (I hope you haven't).
nolanvt wrote:Good sparring, gents. I don't think you all are really rape apologists, but appreciate the debating reps nonetheless. We're all on the same page that the Stanford student committed multiple felonies. To believe otherwise given the evidence, the two guys' eyewitness testimony, etc. would make you look foolish.
I think they both got drunk off their asses and he went to far for sure, multiple felonies, no. Being inappropriate sure thus the lighter sentence, he is still going to be a sex offender his whole life tho and by todays standards that means that prob. 75% of the US male population are sex offenders currently is the only point.
Just think, had he been a woman, he would have gotten a drunk in public.
No sense in reading this guys. Rape culture blah blah blah. Bottom line, the guy was convicted of a crime. The UVA frat was convicted of a crime by the majority of the public without any evidence. We don't and have never lived in a rape culture. Most people convict guys before a trial even starts.
The difference between the UVA thing and this is that the rapist was convicted in his trial through evidence. Had the two Swedes not stopped the attack, this entitled monster would've gotten away with it.
He was drunk off his ass. You act like he was totally sober and had fed alcohol to her all night long. The girl made the decision to drink the alcohol that she drank. There is no evidence that he fed her alcohol with the intent to rape her. He dry humped and fingered her while drunk off his ass.
nolanvt wrote:Good sparring, gents. I don't think you all are really rape apologists, but appreciate the debating reps nonetheless. We're all on the same page that the Stanford student committed multiple felonies. To believe otherwise given the evidence, the two guys' eyewitness testimony, etc. would make you look foolish.
I think they both got drunk off their asses and he went to far for sure, multiple felonies, no. Being inappropriate sure thus the lighter sentence, he is still going to be a sex offender his whole life tho and by todays standards that means that prob. 75% of the US male population are sex offenders currently is the only point.
75% of the male population hasn't assaulted with the intent to rape an unconscious woman. If you have done such a thing, you are a rapist (I hope you haven't).
His intent was to rape an unconscious woman? How do you know. It was her decision to drink all of that alcohol. For all we know, she passed out while he was finger banging her and he didn't recognize that she had because he was also drunk off his ass.
nolanvt wrote:Good sparring, gents. I don't think you all are really rape apologists, but appreciate the debating reps nonetheless. We're all on the same page that the Stanford student committed multiple felonies. To believe otherwise given the evidence, the two guys' eyewitness testimony, etc. would make you look foolish.
I think they both got drunk off their asses and he went to far for sure, multiple felonies, no. Being inappropriate sure thus the lighter sentence, he is still going to be a sex offender his whole life tho and by todays standards that means that prob. 75% of the US male population are sex offenders currently is the only point.
75% of the male population hasn't assaulted with the intent to rape an unconscious woman. If you have done such a thing, you are a rapist (I hope you haven't).
you should check out the internet thingie, drunken sex is not a new thing and people hooking up randomly has increased in the past 30 years. Yes, I had drunken sex and one night stands during my time at VT, since I was from the burg actually before I got to VT (a secret, at BBurg HS we used to go to college parties), the ladies were more fun then our HS classmates sometimes. So yes if drunken sex (we don't know when the girl at Stanford passed out) is sexual assault then 75% of the US male population are sex offenders
No sense in reading this guys. Rape culture blah blah blah. Bottom line, the guy was convicted of a crime. The UVA frat was convicted of a crime by the majority of the public without any evidence. We don't and have never lived in a rape culture. Most people convict guys before a trial even starts.
The difference between the UVA thing and this is that the rapist was convicted in his trial through evidence. Had the two Swedes not stopped the attack, this entitled monster would've gotten away with it.
He was drunk off his ass. You act like he was totally sober and had fed alcohol to her all night long. The girl made the decision to drink the alcohol that she drank. There is no evidence that he fed her alcohol with the intent to rape her. He dry humped and fingered her while drunk off his ass.
If you get drunk and murder someone, you still murdered them.
