Germany rape law: 'No means No' law passed

>Germany rape law: 'No means No' law passed
bbc.com/news/world-europe-36726095

GERMANY
YES

Other urls found in this thread:

de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kachelmann-Prozess
zeit.de/politik/2016-07/bundestag-sexualstrafrecht-verschaerfung
youtu.be/Gp6alIALDHA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I know this girl, she likes to scream "NO, NO! STOP!" when fucking, if we were in German I would be raping her?

If she presses charges, then yes.

>don't want to have sex
>clearly express yourself by saying "no"
>the other person continues
>you had to physically resist for it to count as rape, running the risk that the rapist will retaliate
Makes sense tbqh.

>inb4 but what if she claims she said no but didn't really say
Well that's a case of false accusation then and not rape. You do what you would do if someone falsesly claimed you robbed them.

>vast majority of rapes were still going unpunished

Conundrum when you want to give refugees special treatment but maintain civilisation at the same time

the problem is the evidence would be exactly the same for both for and agaisnt there.
making either convicting rapists harder, or defending falsely accused harder.
If she had to resist then at least people in nearby houses would hear screems or w/e which is often instrumental in disproving false accusation cases.

>You do what you would do if someone falsesly claimed you robbed them.
They have to actually proove that you robbed them
How exactly are you gonna proove that she didn't say no?

In this country if you rape a girl and your mother is a good woman/you cry in the police/you are too young/good-looking/live in the same village/she gets pregnant/the weather is good, it would possibly end with marriage than jail.

I feel for you, Germans.

People always presume rape happens in a vacuum where two people are introduced to each other and then rape happens like a mathematical equation. There's always something that can tell us if the sex was consensual or not. Victims should not be expected to do anything that might endanger their safety just to be guarantee a due process. The example they used about a shitskin horde raping a woman on camera while she's screaming "Stop no please stop" not counting as rape just because she wasn't physically fighting back is a good example.

Besides in a situation where you cannot prove with consistency that a crime has been committed the one being prosecuted will walk free anyway.

It's not your job to prove that you didn't rape her you dumb fuck. It's their job to prove that you raped her.

>You do what you would do if someone falsesly claimed you robbed them.
They have to prove they have actually been robbed.
How does a girl prove she's actually been raped and not just having sex? Even the standard "forced entry" markers do quite commonly happen during consensual rough sex.

And under current laws all she has to do is say help during consensual sex and you're fucked. And this is somehow making it easier?

ok but what if it's a sexual emergency?

>How does a girl prove she's actually been raped and not just having sex?
Very good question, but irrelevant to this particular law change since it clearly concerns cases where they can already show that rape was going on but it woudln't be prosecuted because of a technicality. like the one detailed in the bbc article and

That's not justice and I'm glad the germans changed it.

>It's their job to prove that you raped her.
Except that's not how it happens in Germany.
An expert witness can say that he finds womans version of story more believable and this is the only proof needed to put you in jail and destroy your life

Doesnt matter, jurors dont make decisions on a purely rational basis. No human being does.

People are always more inclined to feel sympathy towards the girl in these scenarios. Doesn't matter whats been proved if the judge decides it should go to trial and the jurors decide you should be convicted.

If we really acted on a "Innocent until proven guilty" basis then false imprisonment simply wouldn't exist.

It's a slippery slope m8. Of course it doesn't change anything in the short term but it's showing the direction in which society is heading

>Victims should not be expected to do anything that might endanger their safety just to be guarantee a due process.
And who is the victim? The woman who was raped or the man who was falsely accused of rape?
If we knew that beforehand, no process would be necessary

if you're worried about false testimony she could just as easily lie that she tried to break free from your grasp but couldn't. this law does nothing either way to false testimony

I see all the MRAs are at it. But almost every single western country already has a similar law.

If Tyrone comes up to you and puts a gun to your head telling you if you move he'll shoot you, I'll bet most people here would drop their dacks without too much resistance.

Under current law the victim has to either show resistance or be in a helpless position (intoxicated for exampe), for it to count as rape.
This is something that is objective and visible for both parties. Not something as subjective as "she didn't feel like it"

I don't see a problem

ahmed pls

how worried are you about going to jail on scale from 1-10?

this law has existed in other countries for decades and I've literally never felt worried about being convicted of rape BECAUSE I DON'T RAPE OR FORCEFULLY HAVE SEX UNDER BORDERLINE CIRCUMSTANCES

>And who is the victim?
The victim of what? The rape? Probably the one getting raped.

typically in doing so, both you and her would acquire some bruises at least.
Something which would help judicial process a lot.
This evidence no longer being necessary simply makes it easier for false convictions to occur

You don't need any stricter laws to convict rapefugees
You only need the political will to do so

how is audibly saying "no, I don't want to have sex" not objective and visible to both parties?
there's no degree of fighting you have to fulfill like scars or bruises, only the effort. this law doesn't change shit if somebody wants to set you up for a crime you didn't commit.

Here is how it works mongol, you have consensual sex with female, she decides to tell the police you rape her anyways, what now?

This law just makes it easier for people to get falsely accused of rape, I doubt it will do anything to help victims of rape.

I am very worried.
Every time i have sex with a girl, she could just decide she didn't like it the next day and accuse me of rape.
Every girl I sleep with can destroy my life and there is literally nothing i can do against it. Such shit shouldn't be possible in a first world country

so if a woman is reluctant at first to have sex, but then you convice her eventually, you raped her?

Not really though, pretending women can put men into jail based just on them saying so without any kind of other evidence is one of the best memes I've heard on Sup Forums in a long time. It's a perfect mix of fearmongering and ignorance of the judicial process that seems to be a hit with young guys.

I tried to look up an english translation of "oikeusturva" but there was no appropriate word for it.
>common law

because humans can lie.

>I doubt it will do anything to help victims of rape.
there was literally a case in germany last year where a woman was raped, filmed being raped, and filmed saying "no, no, stop it" but it was ruled not rape because she DID NOT FIGHT in addition to saying no
>you have consensual sex with female, she decides to tell the police you rape her anyways, what now?
same as before? if a girl wanted to falsely accuse me of rape she could just as easily say "I tried to run but he was faster". "I tried to break free but he was too strong" etc.

>If Tyrone comes up to you and puts a gun to your head telling you if you move he'll shoot you, I'll bet most people here would drop their dacks without too much resistance.
And this would count as threat/beeing in position of power and thus rape under current german law

how is this relevant? literally every law in the universe is subject to people lying. neither the former rape law nor any other law in existence is lie proof.

>The victim of what?
Of either rape or the false accusation of rape. Depends on what really happend

Well I'm not really against the change itself, as long as it's worded in a way that it can't be used as an excuse to convict a man if the victim lacks any sort of physical evidences of her rape.
I think this is the problem most people have here, verba volant, video manet. The victim *saying* she said no can't be enough to convict, it needs to be proven beyond her testimony.

It will make very easy for women on Germany to press fake rape allegations, on our actual western society if a women says you raped her, you are fucked, even if you haven't seen that woman in your whole life.

I can tell your skin color by this comment

That's why you need a contract for every time you are sleeping together.
It needs to witnessed by the judge.

Not like I ever felt it was needed here since I am turned off by many women.

>fake rape allegations
>Germany

lmao

nice way dodging the argument

Of course not.
Then again it is exceedingly unlikely that you actually managed to convince her IRL as opposed to in your mind alone, while in fact she's screaming her lungs out for help.

I don't have sex with people who clearly say "no, I don't want to have sex with you" so this is not an issue for me and it shouldn't be for you.

Literally every first world nation except for germany already has this law and we haven't seen any sort of false rape accusation epidemic like you seem to be worried about. The whole idea is absurd and the fact that you're arguing against this law is the reason we don't want your kind in Europe.

Go back to where you came from nigger.

>going out on a Friday night
>welp, better not forget to bring my consent forms with me

>germany illegalised rape
Wew.

>having sex with someone you just met
Degenerate, 2bh.

so if a man wants have sex with his gf, she doesnt want to have sex at first but then she agrees eventually, does it mean he is a rapist and should go to jail for years?

Wait isn't this a good thing?

>while in fact she's screaming her lungs out for help
This already counts as resistance according to the current German law.

everyone except the posters with german flags seems to think so

Not him, but I understand his worries.
Google the Kachelmann case.
There's only a short german Wikipedia entry
de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kachelmann-Prozess
But basically, there was Jörg Kachelmann a relatively popular meteorologist who was falsely accused of rape and he lost some of his jobs and his reputation is damaged.
>muh shitskin maym
The old laws worked fine, maybe you're just a white knight though.

it destroys the little hope Sup Forumslocks have to get laid, so no, it's a bad thing.

Migrants who commit sex crimes can now be more easily punished, is this not what was wanted for ages?

I never said false accusations aren't a problem. What I'm saying is if somebody is going out of their way to lie to get you to jail there's no reason they couldn't lie more. Lying about saying "no" takes no less effort than lying about him physically overpowering you. This law has literally zero influence on false accusations.
>maybe you're just a white knight
>people who dislike rapists are white knights

Just saying "no pls" once during sex is not enough to count as resisting sex.

And seriously, everyone who is not an autistic virgin has at least once continued to touch a woman saying "no" and it ended great. Women saying "no, stop" is standard foreplay.

Isn't the whole point of the law that in fact it doesn't unless the girl actually tries to physically oppose her rapist with her body, as opposed to voice alone?

>Women saying "no, stop" is standard foreplay.

Yes but don't let the facts get in the way of your outrage over something irrelevant.

actually it does
In Kachelmanns case, her story about how the violence happend didn't add up.
Also, according to experts, the bruises that she got looked like self-inflicted
It is way easier to make up a story when you just have to lie "i said no"

tbf a little bit of "teehee stop that i'm trying to make dinner" is pretty hot.

according to to the old law, it counts as rape if the victim either shows resistance or is threatend/in a position of weakness.
"screaming her lungs out for help" would count as showing resistance

Its complete shit from a legal perspective.
You may think "No means No" is something good but in this case its more like "Even when you didnt threaten me or use violence and I said yes or nothing and actually meant No even though I didnt show it its still No and now youre a rapist"
What is now important is how the woman feels not what the man actually does or notices.

Example 1: If youre a male muslim and a woman tries to shake your hand and insist on it that could be a sexual act (for the muslim) and therfor a possible sexual harassment.

Example 2: You go to a bar and have sex with a girl. The girl was, what you werent able to notice, shaken because she just lost her boyfriend who just looked like you. Possible rape due to psychological problems on her part.

nice shitpost and fantasy

>tee-hee, no, stop, no
It's called being shy, Pekka, although it's getting increasingly rarer as younger girls aren't being brought up sexually repressed anymore. It's an ex-bloc thing, you wouldn't understand.

As a law student your imaginary cases cause me great pain.

>in germany
>rape is not guilty
ok i`m let`s going germany

yeah but by the time your cock enters them there isn't any doubt of consent even if they were acting too busy or whatever to begin with. it's not like they say "no, stop it" as the last thing before you thrust into them.

we both already live in a "no means no" country and have you ever seen this as an issue? have you had sex where you thought "I'm not sure if she wants this"? because I haven't.

Bring yer sister with you.

So basically
>Hans and beta boys will be more easily targeted for le "rape"
>real rapists like Ahmed and Matuidi will keep fucking around unpunished

Can someone explain me what happens if a girl decided to say "no" in the middle of having sex dye to various reasons. Should a man immediately stop, pull his cock out and leave? Should the be some negotiations maybe on whether she will change her mind? And what if she does change her mind and say "ok" again ?

>Critics believe Germany has long lagged behind other developed nations when it comes to its rape laws
Of course, rape laws are racist

Here a possible case:
A has no means of getting home from the bar and would have to sleep in the streets. B approaches him and says that the A could come and sleep with her. A doesnt want to sleep in the streets so he goes home with her.
Whether B was able to know As situation is (possibly) not even important, just that A would have had a negative outcome if he hadnt slept with B.
Assume: B was able to know about As situation and A was actually willing to sleep with B because she is good looking, etc.
If he decided on the next day that it was rape B would still go to prison because she has no way of showing As consent. Maybe.

Why I have no fucking idea and everythings full of "possibly" and "maybe"? Because we law guys have no fucking idea what the law means excpet that its shit and should be suspended because unclear criminal laws are unconstitutional.
t. law student

she doesn't even have to say no
even if she is perfectly silent, but if you are able to recognize that she is unwilling, then its rape

If she blinks twice rapidly, you're already a criminal and it's too late to stop.

Words cannot stop ficki ficki

If a woman says to stop more than twice then yes.

>, but if you are able to recognize that she is unwilling, then its rape
That is LITERALLY rape. You KNOW she doesn't want to get fucked, and you're fucking her!

>you
No. Thats even more ridiculous. The law doesnt say anything about the culprits ability to realize this.
Its also possible that the objective, ex-post view is decisive. Or the ability "of most people". Or the ability of a normal human. Or..
We have no fucking idea m8.

women are sick

it almost disgust me to stick my penis in one.

>You KNOW she doesn't want to get fucked, and you're fucking her!
Lets say she uses the Somali signal for not wanting to sleep with a white man: A repetitive "Yes!"
You sleep with her while she doesnt put up any further resistance or anything else that would make you believe she doesnt want to have sex with you.

A court and a council of Somali experts later decide that her "Yes" screams were clearly showing her lack of willingness to sleep with you. Youre now a rapist. Have fun in prison.

>Lets say she uses the Somali signal for not wanting to sleep with a white man: A repetitive "Yes!"
This is not a thing.

>A court and a council of Somali experts later decide that her "Yes" screams were clearly showing her lack of willingness to sleep with you. Youre now a rapist. Have fun in prison.
You know how trials work, right?....

> if a girl decided to say "no" in the middle of having sex dye to various reasons. Should a man immediately stop, pull his cock
how is this a question? what other reaction would you have than to stop and ask "what's wrong" or whatever? just keep going while she says no because she said "yes" once? what the fuck is wrong with you?

Another reason why you shouldn't fall for the "women" meme

> she has no way of showing As consent. Maybe.
>even if she is perfectly silent, but if you are able to recognize that she is unwilling, then its rape

where were you when Sup Forums got filled by migrant shills posting their outlandish logic defying fantasies trying to make a rape law a bad thing?

zeit.de/politik/2016-07/bundestag-sexualstrafrecht-verschaerfung
>Als Vergewaltigung gilt künftig, wenn sich der Täter über den "erkennbaren Willen" des Opfers hinwegsetzt
>As rape is considered in future when the offender ignores the "recognizable will" of the victim

hyvä postaus kiitos tästä

>"I don't feel like doing this anymore"
>Do you want me to stop?
>"Please"
youtu.be/Gp6alIALDHA

i dont speak your meme language

Guys, you always complain about Arabs raping your women, here's your reply.

Only way I could see this blowing up is with lawyers claiming that durka durkas don't know what "no" or "nein" mean

Se sano että kiitti vaan vitusti

>OMG THE REFUGEES ARE RAPING OUR WHITE WOMEN
>FUCKING LEFTIST FEMINAZI KEKS WITH THEIR ANTI RAPE LAWS LOLZ RAPE SHOULD BE LEGAL HURR HURR HURR HURR

The laws we had in place were more than enough to target arab rape.
Instead, the new laws will implement the feminist definition of "rape"

It wasn't enough apparently, if you would read the article.

look, sweden has a far stricter feminist rape laws than germany, and yet rapefugees are running rampant there.
It happens because there is no political will to persecute rapefugees

>current year
>STILL chasing 3DPD

literally what the fuck is wrong with that law you fucktard

>People should be told that having sex with random sleeping people is rape.

This is what happens when you import Shitskins and Turks.If you were importing bright and intelligent Bulgarian men the only thing German women would scream will be ''Oh,Yes!Give me more,Yes!''.

Now thanks to your shit politicians i had to decline a nice job offer in Germany since i don't want to get stabbed/shot or exploded by some muslim subhuman.

>inb4 it did not happen

Holy shit, goverment no longer blocking BBC website.

Vast majority of rapes also come from people you know. - friends, acquaintances, boyfriends.

For Germans, refugees are complete strangers.