If a new law is able to prosecute 50 actual rapists, but falsely imprisons 1, would you support it?

oneiorosgrip · 2012-12-24T17:31:29+00:00

No - I would not support it.

It is wrong to sacrifice random people for a social cause, even if that cause feels like a really good cause. And that's all you're doing when you accept the false idea that you cannot successfully handle rape in the legal system without imprisoning innocent men... sacrificing random people for a social cause.

MR_Recursive_Ion · 2012-12-24T17:11:38+00:00

2% failure rate for something that would ruin lives is not remotely accessible.

Pecanpig · 2012-12-24T17:30:35+00:00

50 correct prosecutions for every 1 wrongful prosecution has to be a better conviction rate than they have at the moment, but the loaded part comes from knowing that the system will definitely lock up one innocent person.

I think it's commonly known that the current system isn't perfect, and there will be wrongful convictions, but it's almost impossible to knowingly agree to a system that WILL wrongly convict someone, rather than trusting the courts to do what's best with the current legal framework.

Personally, I'd just rather they had a system where both parties were anonymous until a conviction was secured, rather than destroy a person's reputation before they've so much as seen a court room.

PierceHarlan · 2012-12-24T17:43:26+00:00

http://www.cotwa.info/2012/05/barbaric-it-is-worth-risk-to-punish.html

ZimbaZumba · 2012-12-24T17:47:07+00:00

That is a hypothetical that we we'll never encounter as we'd never pass a law that knowingly punishes the innocent; the thought is morally repugnant on a fundamental level. Many moral questions can be framed in an emotionally loaded way so as to effect your answer; its called the Fallacy of Loaded Question .

Suppose I now added that the one person was your brother?

liquid_j · 2012-12-24T17:47:18+00:00

If you change the (emotionally charged) term rapist, with (the more apt) criminal, you'll find that free people have already weighed in on the subject.

AgentmrmOrangemra · 2012-12-24T16:56:52+00:00

sethdar1012 · 2012-12-24T16:59:55+00:00

If that's better than or as good as the ratio for convictions for other crimes, than yes. In other words, if the law respects due process and the presumption of innocence I don't see anything wrong with it.

saoran · 2012-12-25T17:24:05+00:00

I cannot support having an innocent person go to jail for whatever reason.

Pecanpig · 2012-12-25T01:30:32+00:00

Depends. Would the ratio be solid at a 50-1 ratio? If so, then I think I would.

Not because that's a tolerable ratio, but because it's better than what we have now.

kinyutaka · 2012-12-24T18:16:16+00:00

That depends on the law itself. If it is something like allowing low-stringency DNA analysis as circumstantial evidence at trial, then yes. If it is something formalizing that whatever the woman says would be seen as truth, then no.

Due process is the key.

kaosethema · 2012-12-25T02:24:18+00:00

no. 1 life ruined is too much for me.

2012-12-25T03:35:57+00:00

As opposed to the current system which prosecutes 1 actual rapist and falsely imprisons 50? You bet'cha.

2012-12-25T06:06:52+00:00

Yes if that was the actual situation.

But this debate is predicated on the assumption the false conviction rate is 4-6%. When in reality it could be as high as 25%. Almost no studies actually, honestly try to compute false convictions. What they do is compute the number of people who are definitely innocent. This is a valuable thing to do. But then they claim the definitely innocent rate is the innocent rate.

Also one needs to make sure the law would really stay 50-1. For example a law might initially put 50-1 but as people realize it can be abused the rate might climb to 1-1 or worse.

NeutralParty · 2012-12-26T15:36:43+00:00

"It is better to risk saving a guilty man than to condemn an innocent one." Voltaire

johnsmith66 · 2012-12-31T02:09:54+00:00

No, I would not support this. A person should only be convicted if there is enough evidence to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Besides, false convictions ruin people's live and damage society.

rightsbot · 2012-12-24T16:52:20+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

C0CKPUNCHER · 2012-12-24T18:17:23+00:00

This implies those rapists don't get caught by the current laws, that there is this big pool of criminals cackling and committing crime and never getting caught.

If rapists do actually get caught, then your law would just lock up 51 innocent men.

Pecanpig · 2012-12-25T01:12:50+00:00

If a new law is able to prosecute 1 actual false accuser, but lets actual false accusers 50 go free, would you support it?

Damn right, its better than we have now.

loose-dendrite · 2012-12-25T04:03:07+00:00

No.

Sacrificing the one for the sake of the many is Utilitarian. Feminism seems to support this as long as the ones who pay the price are always men.

But the moment you infringe on the rights of the individual to a fair trial is the moment you condemn yourself should you ever be falsely accused.

2012-12-25T04:15:37+00:00

If the law also included a means of getting one's life back together after a conviction, whether wrongful or not, then yes I would support it.

The fact that a conviction follows someone for the rest of their life is the most unjust part.

loose-dendrite · 2012-12-25T06:59:59+00:00

If the utility of 50 locked-up rapists is larger than the negative utility of 1 imprisoned innocent then yes.

Keeping in mind the social damage of this accepted failure rate and that it might not be good to give the state power.

2012-12-26T04:11:52+00:00

Better that 100 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man be punished for a crime he didnt commit.

mikesteane · 2012-12-26T08:00:09+00:00

And what of the fifty men who will be acquitted, after being named, and still have their lives ruined. Being accused of a sexual offence is a punishment in itself.

AnnArchist · 2012-12-27T06:23:58+00:00

No.

Blackstone ratio.

If there was a button that randomly killed someone from your hometown and if you pressed it you would get 1,000,000 dollars.... wouldn't that still make you a murderer?

billywms · 2012-12-25T01:04:38+00:00

If it were to prosecute every rapist to ever walk the earth, but falsely imprisons 1 i would not support it.

Lawtonfogle · 2012-12-25T06:00:51+00:00

Out of every 51 cars, 50 worked perfectly but 1 blew up, killing those inside. I don't think asking if such a car should be sold would even be a question people would be willing to take seriously.

Revoran · 2012-12-24T16:59:01+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Title	If a new law is able to prosecute 50 actual rapists, but falsely imprisons 1, would you support it?
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	2
Comments	87
Date	December 24, 2012 4:51 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/15do3e/if_a_new_law_is_able_to_prosecute_50_actual/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/if-a-new-law-is-able-to-prosecute-50-actual.1005805 https://theredarchive.com/post/1005805

Comments