You don't get to decide what punishment is "fair", even if you are the victim.

In fact, a victim almost certainly should NOT be the person consulted on the severity of imposed punishment.

Funny that Nas and MANY here advocate cookie-cutter jail sentences for anyone convicted of rape, then turn around and cry foul at mandatory sentencing for drug and gun possession charges. Either mandatory sentencing is troublesome in a court system where each and every case is tried on its own merits, or it isn't.

Nas has NEVER advocated for mandatory minimum sentences. Once again you can answer basic questions OR continue deflecting. I think we all see what your preference is.

You don't get to decide what punishment is "fair", even if you are the victim.

In fact, a victim almost certainly should NOT be the person consulted on the severity of imposed punishment.

Funny that Nas and MANY here advocate cookie-cutter jail sentences for anyone convicted of rape, then turn around and cry foul at mandatory sentencing for drug and gun possession charges. Either mandatory sentencing is troublesome in a court system where each and every case is tried on its own merits, or it isn't.

Thanks for not answering any of my questions. Just in case you or JLN ever decide to answer them.


So registering as a sex offender is severe enough punishment for all rapists?
How many people actually know who the sex offenders in their areas are?
Is rape bad?
Is rape a crime that only the offender has to live with?
Why do people become serial rapists?
What should be the punishment for a guy like this or Bill Cosby?
Do you know anyone who has been raped?

Strawman alert!

He got 240 days for drugging and raping his sister and you say 'yeah but getting a job will be harder!'

So registering as a sex offender is severe enough punishment for all rapists?

Bump for JLN

Indeed.

So justice was done according to you.

So justice was done according to you.

6 inches you say?

Edit: FUCK

At the start of this thread the tone of your post implied he received too harsh a sentence. Now it appears as though you feel the sentence was appropriate. Which is it?

For the rest of his life, this guy will enjoy a much reduced level of freedom than you or I. That's hardly "no problem".

Indeed.

That's what I said. It takes a pretty disingenuous reading of that to come away thinking "That's hardly 'no problem'" actually means "the punishment is too harsh".

Can any among you NOT live and die by disingenuous strawmen? And you're a freaking litigator?

Look man, I'm not a bright guy. I tend to like precise language. I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'm trying to understand your position.

Clearly he believes that the sex offender registry (that most people don't look at) is sufficient punishment for all rapists. He just lacks the testicular fortitude to come out and say that.

Straw man alert!

You've been asked for your opinion (that you are always willing to share for political and social issues) and you've refused to give it. Therefore I am forced to come up with a theory about why you are afraid to answer simple questions.

For the rest of his life, this guy will enjoy a much reduced level of freedom than you or I. That's hardly "no problem".

Well, it is ambiguous.

The thread title says "no problem" in reference to the sentencing of the guy, right? In this context and use "no problem" implies that the sentencing is so light so as to be akin to no punishment at all, like you would say to someone "no problem" for a minor social or conversational infraction or misstep.

Being a registered sex offender for life is not equatable to no punishment at all, as the title implies, because for the rest of his life, the registered sex offender has a lower baseline level of "freedom" than other citizens of this country literally founded on principles of freedom.

Ok. You correctly identified that the title of the thread is inaccurate (which is debatable as Nas believes the punishment wasn't harsh enough). Anything else to contribute?

Is that a defense of rapists? The sex offender registry (that the overwhelming majority of people don't look at) is TOO harsh. Now we're getting somewhere.

I said unconstitutional, not "too harsh".

My bad. I interpreted unconstitutional to mean too harsh/cruel and unusual punishment.