Rape and conspiracy for raping purposes.

Rape is commitiing violence on another person in order to forcefully and without consent feel sexual pleasure alone while th evictim is unable to understand defend against the rape.

If a rape was committed by one person to another, like a drunk guy to a drunk girl in highschool, the defender is able to ask the temporary mental unconscius of rapist.

But in case there were more guys to one girl it cannot be considered as a mental temporary unconscius act, as nobody sane in mind wiuld rick his dick to fuck a chick toghethr with osmeone else.

The case is evenn worse where a girl is being fucked not only by more thna one guy, but when norla looking guys are fucking the same girl toghether with some fucking ugly asshole.

IN case where the rape is being perpetrated with solid understandinf of pleasure nas sex, it is just an act pf rape by mentally stable people.

IN case where the rape is being perpetrated as a conspiravcy fo more than one, or even in company of ugly people it must be considered as an act pof mad men, hwo do not posses th einstinct pof disgust.

Let's reason about what is the line between a normla rape act and madness.

If you see something thta you like very much, like a girl for too uch time, and you are unconscius momentarily, you loose slefcontrol, and your instinct drive you to have sex without asking.

BUt even in thi skind of uncosciusness, your instincts are still working, so when you are in a drunk egoistical state, you iwll never want somebody else to share your victim, or even worse someone ugly.

SO th edifference between a regular rape, is that alcohol is letting you lose your consciusness on a level to egoism, when you only care about yourself and stop caring about others.

But when you let someone else touch your property, or even ugly, this means you have no more instingct of disgust and repultion, that menas thta the rape is neing consumed in a state of compete madness.

I have no idea what you said, but I'll try to answer your question.

Presuming that's what it was.

When you talk about the difference between rape and an act of madness, you're basically referring to the legal difference between lucidity and insanity, the ability to actually choose your actions. When you're drunk, you lose your inhibitions, but this doesn't constitute madness or insanity in any way. It is not considered a loss of lucidity, but moreso a gain in stupidity. Being in a drunken state doesn't make any difference in considering whether or not something is a "real crime." A crime is a crime, drunk or not.

Anyway, it sounds like you're drunk. Is it a fair assumption you're inquiring about something that happened shortly before you posted? Regardless, know a couple things. As I said, being drunk doesn't constitute madness. If you gangbanged a chick drunk, you must have been really drunk. And far be it from someone using GHB, alcohol is the new date rape drug. Fuck a drunk chick and she can nail you for rape is she feels like it. It sucks, yeah, but unfortunately, that drunken madness you speak of apparently makes it impossible for her to legally proclaim "Yes, take me you magnificent beast of a man! Fuck me hard and long, all through the night!"

I hope that I included at least something you wanted to know. If it does, you're welcome! If not, you should post when you're sober.

And if you were sober, there's nothing I can say to help you!

I have no idea what you said, but I'll try to answer your question.

Presuming that's what it was.

You are saying that being in an unconscius state becouse of drugs or alcohol is not equal to being in an unconscius state when sober?

You must be mentally retareded. Stop quoting other's assholes, and start thinking by youself if you can.

If a brain is unconscius is unconscius, and no civil law if incorrectly compiled is able to change the scientific obvius truth of physical laws.

You are saying that being in an unconscius state becouse of drugs or alcohol is not equal to being in an unconscius state when sober?

You must be mentally retareded. Stop quoting other's assholes, and start thinking by youself if you can.

If a brain is unconscius is unconscius, and no civil law if incorrectly compiled is able to change the scientific obvius truth of physical laws.

Scientifically speaking, yeah, mental unconsciousness is mental unconsciousness, no matter the circumstances leading up to such a state of mind. Legally, they're different. If you're sleepwalking, you're in such a state of mental unconsciousness, but not one that you willingly invoked. Being drunk however, is the sole responsibility of the drinker. If their brain goes unconscious, it's their fault for getting so drunk. Whatever they do afterward is still their legal responsibility because they willingly drank to the point of cognitive incapacitation.

That being said, you're an asshole. I came in here, attempted to decipher the post that you probably wrote in some ridiculously drunk or drug addled state, then get lampooned for not thinking for myself. I mean, what the fuck were you actually trying to say? What makes you think that I wasn't thinking for myself? Because I agree with a single facet of the legal system? Because I believe in personal responsibility? Explain, as I'm sure you are able to do in a competent and coherent manner.

Scientifically speaking, yeah, mental unconsciousness is mental unconsciousness, no matter the circumstances leading up to such a state of mind. Legally, they're different. If you're sleepwalking, you're in such a state of mental unconsciousness, but not one that you willingly invoked. Being drunk however, is the sole responsibility of the drinker. If their brain goes unconscious, it's their fault for getting so drunk. Whatever they do afterward is still their legal responsibility because they willingly drank to the point of cognitive incapacitation.

When you start thinking legally, you are automatically becoming an asshole. Try to understand why everybody hates lawyers and calls them bloodsucking motherfuckers.

Lawers do not understand shit about laws if they are correctly done or wrong, all they doing is asking money in order to remember all the allready existing laws, without explaining to their clients if they really broke the law, or if they were set up by another law making idiot who shuld be expelled from the governement for mental incapacity.

All the laws are made by people, if people who made a specific law were mentally retarded, the law is obviusly incorrect and is just a pile of junk unable to work properly.

It is so easy to make perfect laws only if you have perfectly conscius mind and are able to use logic and therefore common sense.

Any civil law starts form human mind, not just a legal formula in order ot bullshit people.

If a guy and a girl never drunked alcohol, they do not know what the hell it is and how it works really.

So it is useless to say, that most of the so called unconscius rapes happen on the first party at home when parents leave children alone for the weekend.

Any drunk guy and a drunk girl behave the same natural way, they get drunk, lose all inhibitions, try to kiss, and after the alcoho kick in and the guy following his natural instincts without any inhibitions ends up stiking his penis into her mouth, vagina, or anus. And the girls end up opening her legs, gher anus or her mouth.

You were stating an obvius thing about allready adult people who are used to drink and therefore obviusly do know what they are doing.

What I am talking about is the only case when rape happens just by inconsius state in a completely virgin minds, becouse of physical incapacity to understand what really is happening from both sides.

You do look like a senior citizen ex feminist who lost her mind and is trying to continue arguing without knowing the real scientifical facts.

Inconscius rapes started to happen and will always happen becouse of how humans are, not becouse of criminal intent.

A rape ona first party date between virgins is all foult of parents assholes and the retarded school who still ca't say properly a very obvius thing, "If you're a virgin and try to drink on your first party you will end commmitting or being raped, ergo you will find yourself fucking like idiots with no logical cause and effect.

This is not a rape, not leglly nor morally, this is a casuality between mentally retarded kids.

Some smart kids go home intact, some go home raped, it is just a matter of natural selection and evolution of human race. THis has nothing to do with law, only sociological - sexological statistics.

The kids who lose their virginity by rape on a party also usually are also divorced with kids, suffer form alcoholism and smoke or drug addiction.

You can't prevent idiots form rape, like form car incodents or any kind of bad accident, becouse they are idiots by their nature, it is impossible to prevent their disgrace by law.

Anyway I do not wnat to talk about rape, I used rape between teens only as example, to start a discussion between real crime committed with criminal intent, which is allready non existant in modern society, and real madness, or a short period state of madness.

Being in a drunken state doesn't make any difference in considering whether or not something is a "real crime." A crime is a crime, drunk or not.


Rather than reducing guilt, intoxication can serve to exacerbate the crime, as drugs are something taken voluntarily, rather than madness, which to be a legal defence must be involuntary.

But Emc3 isn't drunk, just retarded.