Obama refused to support rape victims

\\((|))// said:
It's always fun pointing out issues and flaws, Dix.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you've not really pointed out any issues or flaws, just casual mistakes which have already been admitted and corrected or clarified. It seems like a total waste of good crank to me, but I don't do the stuff, so what do I know? (that was a rhetorical question, btw.)
 
Dixie said:
Yeah, but you've not really pointed out any issues or flaws, just casual mistakes which have already been admitted and corrected or clarified. It seems like a total waste of good crank to me, but I don't do the stuff, so what do I know? (that was a rhetorical question, btw.)
Click to expand...

So when you hark back to 1999 in one post and and then claim you like to stay current in another, no inconsistency should be inferred?
 
\\((|))// said:
So when you hark back to 1999 in one post and and then claim you like to stay current in another, no inconsistency should be inferred?
Click to expand...

I just thought the War on Women troops might not be aware of Obama's refusal to help rape victims.

See... what's happening here is, the meth is making you lose focus on aspect, and instead, focus on the minute. This happened to a guy in Detroit one night, he was crunk-up, looking in the mirror and noticed his pores on his face, next thing you know, he had used a razor blade to remove his face from his skull. Fixed his pore problem though.

Let's hope you don't have any razor blades lying around your house.
 
So when you hark back to 1999 in one post and and then claim you like to stay current in another, no inconsistency should be inferred?

BTW, doesn't one of your fellow Alabamians decry ridiculing another poster without regard to the thread topic?
 
Dixie said:
LMAO... YES, other than the amendment which required rape victims to submit tests, and mandates the hospital must conduct these tests, and they must be submitted to law enforcement regardless of consent, the bills are identical. So the TRUTH is, Obama's bill did NOT support the rape victim, rather sought to make things impossible for the rape victim and burden them with mandates and requirements they shouldn't have to be burdened with. His bill was vetoed, the bill that passed, he refused to support... again, refusing to support rape victims.

You can call me whatever names you please, that is the truth. And it was proven with your very own links!
Click to expand...

Yea Dixie, how foolish of me to not know how things really work.

When your daughter Sue is raped by Billy Bob, the defendant's lawyer will surely put Suzy at ease and tell her: "Now, Suzy, you claim my client Billy Bob raped you. So don't worry your little head about the fact you left the hospital without being tested for rape. I promise I will not use that against you. And don't pay any attention to the scientific and legal mumbo-jumbo you will hear like chain of custody, statute of limitations and safekeeping of the evidence for use in a legal proceeding. Now, honey, you just tell your little story and we'll see what we can do to make sure Billy Bob gets his due."

Why should we burden the rape victim of any tests that could make it possible to convict a rapist, I mean, rapists are people too.

And of course, we can trust the police to do their jobs Dixie.


Most Rape Kits Never Tested in Illinois
July 7, 2010

(Chicago) - The vast majority of DNA evidence collected from rape victims in Illinois cannot be confirmed as tested, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today and based on data collected across the state.

A new law signed by Governor Pat Quinn this week makes Illinois the first state to require law enforcement officials to track and send this evidence to labs for DNA testing and could make Illinois a nationwide model, but the lack of funding for testing remains a source of concern.

The 42-page report, "'I Used to Think the Law Would Protect Me': Illinois's Failure to Test Rape Kits," collected comprehensive testing data from 127 of 264 jurisdictions in Illinois and found that only 1,474 of 7,494 sets of physical evidence, known as "rape kits," booked into evidence since 1995 could be confirmed as tested. That suggests 80 percent of rape kits may never have been examined in the state.

The report found the backlog symptomatic of an overall failure by the Illinois criminal justice system to respond adequately to sexual assault crimes. Several major jurisdictions completely ignored Human Rights Watch's record requests. Illinois's inadequate response to sexual assault is reflected in its 11 percent arrest rate for sexual assault - one of the lowest in the nation and far below the national average of 22 percent.

"Illinois's failure to test DNA evidence is not only an insult to rape victims - it puts all women at risk by leaving rapists who could be identified at large, some of whom may attack again," said Sarah Tofte, US researcher at Human Rights Watch and author of the report. "The data suggest that Illinois law enforcement just doesn't see rape as a serious crime that's worthy of time and resources."

National studies have shown that cases in which rape kit evidence was tested were more likely to proceed through the criminal justice system and lead to arrests. Once New York City adopted the Giuliani-era policy to test every booked rape kit, its arrest rate for rape rose from 40 percent to 70 percent. In Los Angeles, a recent decision to test every booked rape kit uncovered DNA evidence from suspects in other rape cases.
 
Looks like Bfgrn is about done Dix....you can stick the fork in him anytime and put him out of his misery....
Hes ditched the Obama vote debate and moved on to some irrelevant bullshit thats off topic.....
 
bravo said:
Looks like Bfgrn is about done Dix....you can stick the fork in him anytime and put him out of his misery....
Hes ditched the Obama vote debate and moved on to some irrelevant bullshit thats off topic.....
Click to expand...

I see you brain is still the size of a pea...
 
Bfgrn said:
Yea Dixie, how foolish of me to not know how things really work.

When your daughter Sue is raped by Billy Bob, the defendant's lawyer will surely put Suzy at ease and tell her: "Now, Suzy, you claim my client Billy Bob raped you. So don't worry your little head about the fact you left the hospital without being tested for rape. I promise I will not use that against you. And don't pay any attention to the scientific and legal mumbo-jumbo you will hear like chain of custody, statute of limitations and safekeeping of the evidence for use in a legal proceeding. Now, honey, you just tell your little story and we'll see what we can do to make sure Billy Bob gets his due."

Why should we burden the rape victim of any tests that could make it possible to convict a rapist, I mean, rapists are people too.

And of course, we can trust the police to do their jobs Dixie.


Most Rape Kits Never Tested in Illinois
July 7, 2010

(Chicago) - The vast majority of DNA evidence collected from rape victims in Illinois cannot be confirmed as tested, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today and based on data collected across the state.

A new law signed by Governor Pat Quinn this week makes Illinois the first state to require law enforcement officials to track and send this evidence to labs for DNA testing and could make Illinois a nationwide model, but the lack of funding for testing remains a source of concern.

The 42-page report, "'I Used to Think the Law Would Protect Me': Illinois's Failure to Test Rape Kits," collected comprehensive testing data from 127 of 264 jurisdictions in Illinois and found that only 1,474 of 7,494 sets of physical evidence, known as "rape kits," booked into evidence since 1995 could be confirmed as tested. That suggests 80 percent of rape kits may never have been examined in the state.

The report found the backlog symptomatic of an overall failure by the Illinois criminal justice system to respond adequately to sexual assault crimes. Several major jurisdictions completely ignored Human Rights Watch's record requests. Illinois's inadequate response to sexual assault is reflected in its 11 percent arrest rate for sexual assault - one of the lowest in the nation and far below the national average of 22 percent.

"Illinois's failure to test DNA evidence is not only an insult to rape victims - it puts all women at risk by leaving rapists who could be identified at large, some of whom may attack again," said Sarah Tofte, US researcher at Human Rights Watch and author of the report. "The data suggest that Illinois law enforcement just doesn't see rape as a serious crime that's worthy of time and resources."

National studies have shown that cases in which rape kit evidence was tested were more likely to proceed through the criminal justice system and lead to arrests. Once New York City adopted the Giuliani-era policy to test every booked rape kit, its arrest rate for rape rose from 40 percent to 70 percent. In Los Angeles, a recent decision to test every booked rape kit uncovered DNA evidence from suspects in other rape cases.
Click to expand...

So now you're going to run off to some "report" created by liberal propagandists, and ignore the OP and the two bills we were discussing?

AGAIN... for the thick headed:

SB0943 (Obama's bill that was vetoed)

Amends the Sexual Assault Survivors Emergency Treatment Act.
Requires hospitals to receive the sexual assault evidence collection kits (now the hospitals must request the kits).
Provides that the hospitals must conduct appropriate medical examinations and laboratory tests in cases of alleged sexual assaults (now the alleged sexual assault survivor must consent to the examinations and tests).
Provides that the examinations and tests must be maintained by the hospital and made available to law enforcement officials, regardless of the consent of the alleged sexual assault survivor (now the alleged sexual assault survivor must request it).

So we see, Obama's bill seeks to protect the rapist, not the rape victim. In every aspect, this amendment makes it more burdensome for the rape victim, requiring them to submit to tests and allowing the results to be shared with law enforcement without consent of the rape victim.

HB0854 (The bill Obama voted "present" on and refused to support) does not include this amendment.
It is the bill which was ultimately signed into law.

Obama refused to help rape victims. Proposed a bill to help the rapists.
 
Dixie said:
So now you're going to run off to some "report" created by liberal propagandists, and ignore the OP and the two bills we were discussing?

AGAIN... for the thick headed:

SB0943 (Obama's bill that was vetoed)

Amends the Sexual Assault Survivors Emergency Treatment Act.
Requires hospitals to receive the sexual assault evidence collection kits (now the hospitals must request the kits).
Provides that the hospitals must conduct appropriate medical examinations and laboratory tests in cases of alleged sexual assaults (now the alleged sexual assault survivor must consent to the examinations and tests).
Provides that the examinations and tests must be maintained by the hospital and made available to law enforcement officials, regardless of the consent of the alleged sexual assault survivor (now the alleged sexual assault survivor must request it).

So we see, Obama's bill seeks to protect the rapist, not the rape victim. In every aspect, this amendment makes it more burdensome for the rape victim, requiring them to submit to tests and allowing the results to be shared with law enforcement without consent of the rape victim.

HB0854 (The bill Obama voted "present" on and refused to support) does not include this amendment.
It is the bill which was ultimately signed into law.

Obama refused to help rape victims. Proposed a bill to help the rapists.
Click to expand...

OK Dixie. Please answer a few questions that require explanations.

1) How would the proposed bill "help" rapists?

2) How are rapists caught, prosecuted and convicted Dixie? Please explain what evidence is needed to take rapists off the street and how that evidence is gathered?

I'll be waiting Dixie...balls in your court...
 
1. It helps the rapist because it invades the privacy of the rape victim, dumbass.

2. Are you suggesting the legislation that passed without this amendment prevents rapists from being prosecuted?
 
Dixie said:
1. It helps the rapist because it invades the privacy of the rape victim, dumbass.

2. Are you suggesting the legislation that passed without this amendment prevents rapists from being prosecuted?
Click to expand...

I specifically asked you: How are rapists caught, prosecuted and convicted Dixie? Please explain what evidence is needed to take rapists off the street and how that evidence is gathered?

You are avoiding my questions.
 
The Dude said:
There are not enough klansman, fascist, fiscal conservatives, or pagan Christians for nut job Romney to pull it off.
Click to expand...

You know, there are plenty of various topics on the board from a lot of different posters. People sharing their opinions on a host of issues. But for some strange reason, you seem to be hung up on me personally, and running around the board groaning my posts and calling me the same names over and over. At first, I thought it was just a phase and you would get bored with it, but you've persisted with this same thing for months now, and just keep on repeating the same tired old insults and groaning every single post I make. Are you planning to devote the rest of your life to following me around calling me names and groaning my posts, or will there ever come a time when you decide to act like you have a brain cell? I recall when you used to post half-way coherent opinions, I didn't always agree, but at least it seemed like some productive use of your time. This is silly, and you are a silly idiot. How about growing the fuck up?
 
Bfgrn said:
I specifically asked you: How are rapists caught, prosecuted and convicted Dixie? Please explain what evidence is needed to take rapists off the street and how that evidence is gathered?

You are avoiding my questions.
Click to expand...

There is no need for burdening a rape victim with mandated requirements, as the legislation passed is proof of. People are prosecuted for rape everyday in Illinois, WITHOUT these provisions... how does that happen, Bfoon? ...Answer your own question!
 
Dixie said:
There is no need for burdening a rape victim with mandated requirements, as the legislation passed is proof of. People are prosecuted for rape everyday in Illinois, WITHOUT these provisions... how does that happen, Bfoon? ...Answer your own question!
Click to expand...

You are still avoiding my questions. I suspect the reason for your obfuscation is you are smart enough to KNOW how rapists are caught, prosecuted and convicted. The TRUTH is Dixie, there is no way for a rapist to be caught, prosecuted and convicted WITHOUT burdening a rape victim with requirements like invasive tests and examinations. And no rapist is prosecuted for rape everyday in Illinois, WITHOUT these provisions (invasive tests and examinations) being met.
 
Bfgrn said:
I specifically asked you: How are rapists caught, prosecuted and convicted Dixie? Please explain what evidence is needed to take rapists off the street and how that evidence is gathered?

You are avoiding my questions.
Click to expand...

The legislation in question here, is to protect rape victims from public disclosure AFTER CONVICTION!

(This would be AFTER the rapist had been prosecuted and convicted.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top