Guilty of rape if the woman is drunk?

[thraashman]

No I didn't do this. I herad somewhere that in California that it is a law that if a man has sex with a woman who has had more than 4 drinks that he is guilty of rape even if it's consenual. And that if the man is drunk and the woman is sober there is no crime. My question is can anyone here verify if this is true or false and can you provide proof.

 

[ziptie]

making plans for the night?

 

[Orsorum]

I think this is most definitely a valid concern; one of the many reasons I carry a voice recorder with me anywhere I go.

 

[DOSfan]

While I have no proof or links, I believe there is precident for this.

And as far as I know, it is federal - not just California.

But I may be spreading lies.....

 

[Heisenberg]

Originally posted by: Orsorum
I think this is most definitely a valid concern; one of the many reasons I carry a voice recorder with me anywhere I go.

Man I hope you're kidding. Otherwise the world is a sad, sad place.

 

[Shockwave]

Its pretty much rape if the woman wants to charge it. Its crap, but women can file charges on any account, even if they sign in blood they wanna ride your brains out then later decide to press charges.

 

[her209]

What if there are 2 guys? :Q

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Heisenberg

Originally posted by: Orsorum
I think this is most definitely a valid concern; one of the many reasons I carry a voice recorder with me anywhere I go.

Man I hope you're kidding. Otherwise the world is a sad, sad place.

I use it for recording lectures, .

 

[Orsorum]

(a) Rape of a person who is the spouse of the perpetrator is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished under any of the following circumstances:
(1) Where it is accomplished against a person's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person or another.
(2) Where a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known, by the accused.
(3) Where a person is at the time unconscious of the nature of the act, and this is known to the accused. As used in this paragraph, "unconscious of the nature of the act" means incapable of resisting because the victim meets one of the following conditions:
(A) Was unconscious or asleep.
(B) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant that the act occurred.
(C) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator's fraud in fact.

Source

If someone can post a link to the exact legislation or judicial precedent, I'd like to see it. However, I doubt they would enact such a precise measurement (unless it related to BAC).

 

[cheapgoose]

sex w/ drunk girl = rape

 

[ReiAyanami]

sex with kobe is... unless you're his wife

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: cheapgoose
sex w/ drunk girl = rape

What about a woman having sex with a drunk guy?

 

[notfred]

This is all bullshit. Having sex with someone who has been drinking does NOT make it rape. It makes it MUCH easier for a woman to press rape charges and probably get a conviction, should she want to. However there are plenty of drunk (and semi-drunk) women having sex every night and enjoying every minute of it, and never even considering that they could probably convict the guy of rape if they wanted to be huge bitches.

You really think that if a man and his wife share a bottle of wine and then go have sex that California (or federal) law says that he raped her? Fvck no, but that's what the original post says. There is no such law, it's a bunch of BS rumors that people have been passing around for awhile now. Even in Orsorum's link it only applies if she's incapable of resisting. I consider being able to say "no" resisting, and if she's incapable of saying that, well then yeah it's probably rape cause she's damn near passed out. If she IS capable of saying "no", and she does but you have sex with her anyway, then that's definitely rape. However, just cause she had a couple beers does NOT mean that sex with her is rape.

 

[TommyVercetti]

Let's say it's not a drunk girl, she is perfectly fine. She decides to be a b!tch and press charges because she hates the guy. She lies that she said no, but the guy didn't listen. How exactly is she going to prove that she actually said no?

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
Let's say it's not a drunk girl, she is perfectly fine. She decides to be a b!tch and press charges because she hates the guy. She lies that she said no, but the guy didn't listen. How exactly is she going to prove that she actually said no?

Her word against his, if there are witnesses that say they went into the room, and so forth.

Link

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
Let's say it's not a drunk girl, she is perfectly fine. She decides to be a b!tch and press charges because she hates the guy. She lies that she said no, but the guy didn't listen. How exactly is she going to prove that she actually said no?

Her word against his, if there are witnesses that say they went into the room, and so forth.

Link

And here we run into the flaw in that logic..

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
Let's say it's not a drunk girl, she is perfectly fine. She decides to be a b!tch and press charges because she hates the guy. She lies that she said no, but the guy didn't listen. How exactly is she going to prove that she actually said no?

Her word against his, if there are witnesses that say they went into the room, and so forth.

Link

And here we run into the flaw in that logic..

It would be interesting to see if there have been any rape convictions without any physical evidence or witnesses.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: her209
What if there are 2 guys? :Q

You would only be guilty of rear ending someone

Ausm

 

[GregGreen]

I know in Pa you can't give consent if you aren't in the right state of mind (their fancy way of saying drunk or under the influence or just fvckin crazy)

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: Heisenberg

Originally posted by: Orsorum
I think this is most definitely a valid concern; one of the many reasons I carry a voice recorder with me anywhere I go.

Man I hope you're kidding. Otherwise the world is a sad, sad place.

I use it for recording lectures, .

I was gonna say, when was your last use of THAT little trinket? Lectures make more sense.

 

[PatboyX]

rape laws are vague for a reason.

 

[Regs]

It's another one of those laws that forces morals on a man. To please the feminist party. That's all. I don't engage in any sexually activity when the girl is drunk because I would think it was in-moral. Should it be a law and count as rape? Fawk no.

 

[isaacmacdonald]

Originally posted by: GregGreen
I know in Pa you can't give consent if you aren't in the right state of mind (their fancy way of saying drunk or under the influence or just fvckin crazy)

what if both parties are drunk? Can they press charges against each other?

I'm curious because you'd think this would be an equal protection issue.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

I agree, this is rape. I think it goes both ways though - if a man is drunk and a woman picks him up and has sex with him, this is also rape. Of course, what man would complain about a woman having sex with him while he's drunk unless she a) gives him an STD b) tries to use him for anything else/becomes attached or c) is butt ugly

 

[thraashman]

I was just asking because I heard that somewhere and then one time on Loveline Dr Drew was talking about it and saying how it's a law in California and that it's after a set number of drinks and only a crime for the man. But i could find no record of this specific law so I wasn't sure. It would seem like complete BS, but I was looking for proof one way or the other.