Yes
No
Other
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age
What are the circumstances of the murder? Did the guy beat her and wrestler her to the ground and then hold a knife to her and tell her to stay still while he got his rocks off? Did she wrestled the knife away from him and stabbed him in the neck? If it's a scenario like that, then clearly violence force is being used against her. She is unable to escape. She's being battered with a deadly weapon, and thus it's reasonable to use deadly force in defense. Something like that is pretty clear cut if the guys' finger prints are on the knife and recipes track it back to being his procession. Defensive wounds are on the woman's body. Forensic evidence like blood spatter, shows the guy was on top of her when he was stabbed with his own knife, etc.
On the other hand, if you got too drunk at a party and slept with some dude you didn't know, then the next day when you sober up you claim you blacked out from your own alcohol abuse and didn't know what was happening, and then try to call it rape... People at the party tell you who you left with. You then stalk that guy and shoot him in the back of the head while he's in a convenience store in cold blood, then you might need to get the electric chair because that's first degree murder. You not only maliciously planned to kill another human being, but you stalked them down, you killed them when they were defenseless, you showed no remorse and tried to justify your actions. You often cook for something like that.
So what if he approached her in the street in the middle of the night when she’s walking home from work then forces himself on her by dragging her to a corner?
She then finds him a few days later and murders. I’m sure he got the right punishment
That's still premeditated murder. You can't escape that fact. The guy might be a piece of shit, but you would be to if you went around executing people without trial. If you escaped with your life, the proper procedure is to report the crime to the police and have medical staff collect evidence to be used in a court of law to convict the criminal. If that doesn't sound fair to you, then be ready to defend yourself in the moment. You'd have to check the laws in your state, but where I live rape is considered a forcible felony and you don't have a duty to retreat. If someone grabs you and drags you into an alleyway to rape you, you can give them the old dirt nap. Fill their guts with lead and tell them to go to hell. That said, don't get all trigger happy. Only use deadly force if it's the real deal because you're going to have to prove your case in court.
@Peridot25 So your argument is women support rape correct? In the USA women make up 50.5% of the population. Juries are composed of the general population. Since the population is stacked in the favor of women, based on your position that would mean women favor rape. Interesting position you're taking...
Probably not. If both crimes are proven, then it’s justifiable homicide even if it’s not self defense. I’m heavily in favor of self defense laws. So she should be able to kill an ATTEMPTED rapist without legal repercussions. It’s just much harder to prove. Some vindictive women would definitely lure men to their untimely demise out of spite. Obviously we want to mitigate that somehow, probably by jailing offenders. But an actual rape? Easy. In fact, she should get some sort of reward for taking the scum off the streets. The equivalent of a detective’s salary for every year the rapist was active seems fair.
I picked “no” but it might depend a little on the situation, for example if it is 5 years later and she plots revenge then I would prob. say “yes” because of it being cold blooded. I more mean if it’s during or immediately after the act I think “no” is the right answer. JMO!
So you’re saying she should ignore what happened to her five years ago? Shouldn’t she get revenge for herself? Or just live with the trauma of the rest of her life?
I think if it's in the moment then absolutely not. If it's later on and she makes plans to kill them then yeah she should serve some time as that becomes more premeditated murder at that point. I voted other in this case.
But why should she go to jail for killing a man she did that to?
By killing the rapist she’s protecting other women too. He harmed her so she’s retaliating
I agree it feels satisfying and may help society in that case, but it's still premeditated murder if it isn't happening at the time of the rape. She should get a reduced sentence for sure though.
Smart answer @Ez-Bri-Z_v2
If everybody decides to retaliate against someone who harmed them, there would be no human beings lett on Earth.
@Caroline91 well said
Yes but there’s not many human beings in the world who would do a major crime like rape
Opinion
30Opinion
Yes in terms of law. Revenge and two wrongs make it right isn't lawful. At the same time you can make a plee to a jury "OF PEERS." Key words here.
If you resonate and connect with peers it's possible. If you are crazy person looking for excuses in a calculated way you are likely to lose. That is the whole point of jury of peers. So take your jury duty on the chin respectfully and honorably to be the arbiter of the law. In both the wording and spirit of the law.
@Peridot25 I'm someone who says no one deserves death. In a way it becomes a fair and even trade. Rape for being killed with a 1 to 1 price. Hence not truly being criminal or a crime. Just a commercial day to day transaction honestly. That is horrible for society.
For true justice it needs to be blind. Unbiased. The criminal not made a martyr but left to rot forgotten in a cell.
@Peridot25 we can have justice or day to day common EVEN trade.
In a perfect world, the answer would be no even in non-self defense situations. But it is not a perfect world because if "this person raped me" can successfully be used as an excuse to kill someone, then murderers will use that line to get away with the murders they commit.
It is extra-judicial punishment for a crime of which the guilt has yet to be established so it is effectively theft of not only one's right to life but also their right to due process. It doesn't matter whether or not the alleged rape happened, a punishment so great that it cannot be undone has been applied and if there is no evidence that the rape happened or it was proben to not have happened, there is no making amends for the dead.
I am speaking for non-self defense cases. The death being done in self defense should not warrant a murder charge.
f she fights him in self defence then no. if she purposely targets him after the event she should get life for murder, with an increased minimum sentence for the anti vigilance. She should get longer then he would, i know you are probably from the USA where you have life without parole or the death penalty, but im thinking of the murder laws here in the UK.
If she does it while he is attacking her, it's self defense.
But it she tracks him down and kills him after the fact, it's premeditated murder.
It is murder, but he deserves it don’t you think?
And the woman who did it deserves a medal because she protects a woman now
Also, would you say the same thing if it was a child victim of sexual assault?
!00 percent agree and I am speaking from wishing I could have been more affective in the moment.
@Caroline91. Oh he deserves severe punishment if she can get even with him later. I'm not sure about death. But there are ways to make sure he will never be able to rape again. 😁. Think iron bar; pliars; ...
I was talking about in the eyes of the law. The system frowns on vigilantism.
Kills him defending herself... probably not. Kills him when here is no longer any danger to herself? probably yes.
Yeah, but shouldn’t he be punished for what he did?
Yes, he should, but not by the victim after the fact.
that depends if he was threatening her life then she must kill him same as without rape but if not it is not "proportionate" so punish her to deter killing.
If it was in self defense, no. If she killed tracked him down and killed him of her sleep, yes.
I'm not mad at women for killing their rapist, but they have to accept the fact that they broke the law and were risking jail time. If they decide jail was worth killing him, so be it.
*killed him in his sleep
No. Jails exist to arrest harmful people to society. Killing a rapist is not harmful for society.
Absolutely not! In fact, we should normalize that. I mean, court isn’t going to do anything about it and he won’t be in jail for long. So why not take matters into our own hands? 🤷♀️
Great answer
As long as she can prove that the rape was actually attempted and is not just a cheap cover story, she should not go to jail.
That could be pretty difficult to prove and the trauma of the experience could make it impossible for her.
@Caroline91 Well... I guess I wouldn't feel traumatized if I managed to dispose of a thug trying to mug me. More like I'd feel unimaginably proud of myself... One human vermin down, and I'm the one who achieved it. Wouldn't it be similar for a woman who managed to dispose of a rapist? Anyway, a proof of the rape attempt taking place is absolutely necessary, otherwise she might just go randomly killing innocent men and claiming it was in self-defence against rape. After what Johnny Depp went through, I'm not trusting a woman's word by default anymore.
I think it is despicable that a man's life can be ruined by an accusation. Both men and women, if found to be guilty of some horrible act need to reap the consequences. Today's climate of vindictiveness over hurt or angry feelings, particularly on the part of women, is unconscionable. I fought when I needed to, but it wasn't enough to stop things. I was lucky because law enforcement actually arrived during the attack and he spent years in prison, but I would not have felt better if I had killed him. If he were attacking someone else, I would have done whatever was necessary ro stop him and no more. I don't have it in me to kill anyone if there's any other way.
@Caroline91 Then I guess we're on the same page here. As long as there is undeniable proof of one's crimes, I'm actually fine with vigilante justice, since while I don't agree with some other comments here that courts protect rapists by default (or criminals in general for the sake of it), they are known to be painfully slow and they can definitely be bought up if the criminal can afford it. Without undeniable proof, however... Lynching is not justice, it's that simple.
I'm not sure lynching is ever a good idea. Too many mistakes can be made.
During the act or immediately after the sexual attack then no.
But if she later finds him and murder him because of the rape then she should go to prison.
Why should she go prison when she just retaliated to what he did to her
Because she's not the law to be going around seeking death revenge.
It should be the courts to put to death the wicked.
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy Which they never do. Courts support rape and rapists.
If she killed him in self defense, no.
Pre-meditated murder, perhaps.
Is the rape proven? Because many women lie about it. How about if she can't prove it was rape with real evidence she gets the death penalty?
if its self defense no
if its after, i guess yes but she shouldn't be punished that severely. though it's not morally bad at all, its a public service honestly but its still a crime
That depends on several things, all of which should be handled by a trial, with evidence presented. There is no all-purpose yes or no answer.
If she killed him in self-defence defense then no. But is she killed him after, then she has commited a crime and thus lawfully should go to jail.
Yes, unless it's while it's happening, or about to happen again, in which case it's probably appropriate force to stop the rape from happening.
If the "rapist" is violently assaulting her, no. It is self defense. A molester can also be a rapist. Yes.
So, una straightforward world I’d say no, she shouldn’t go to jail. But the problem it could be made up to be able to kill someone and get away with it.
No, she shouldn't. The rapist didn't feel sorry for her when he raped her. He also didn't respect her, so why should she respect him?
no. but she could have left that to the rapist's prison mates, they will likely kill the rapist anyways
Nope. Goes both ways though. If a woman rapes a man death is the only acceptable consequence
Only if she really was raped by the guy she killed. If she lied about the rape and killed him then she deserves to be put to death.
If it's self defense than i don't think so but if she plans to kill him later than yes!
So does she not deserve to get justice or revenge?
Ofc she does, but not like this!
She's a victim not a criminal!
Yes Jail and prosecution. To women, rape is often indistinguishable from regret sex or bad sex.
Jails shouldn't exist... ergo "NO" by default.
if she is defending herself, no, she should not go to jail
No, but she should be allowed to tie him up and peg him.
Of course she should, if she killed him that's basically murder and she would land in jail for life (or have a lower sentence since she's a woman).
The people that voted no are braindead and need to do a rehab.
No, it's self defense.
Make sure its defense and no.
Murder is still illegal.
@Peridot25 No, but I don’t support murderers either.
@Peridot25 I seriously doubt anarchy is the answer.
It is up to the courts to decide.
but what if YOU were in the jury...
@strateguy632 if she really was rapedcand not just yelling RAPE because the guy cheated on her I would think the guy should be hung by the balls.
if it's self defense, no , or else, yes,
No she should be rewarded
I’m surprised how most people said she should go to jail. I mean seriously, she’s protecting other people from the predator don’t you think?
Personally, I don't think so
No she should not
Not if it is self defense
It’s justifiable self defense
nope it is not proportionate
@strateguy632 yes it is.
@strateguy632 it isn’t up to you. It is in my state. She can kill him or blow his dick off since you want proportional
Yes it's murder
@Peridot25 no... But you support murder
We support murder of rapists only.
You can also add your opinion below!