Yes, if an officer uses their position of authority to take money that doesn’t belong to them, it is theft. If they use the threat of imprisonment to have sex with someone, that’s rape. This isn’t complicated. It doesn’t matter if the bribe was offered or solicited, the officer is either using force to have non-consensual sex or taking something that doesnt belong to them. It doesn’t matter if there was an actual quid pro quo agreement, or if the officer was planning to continue to deliver the detainee to jail. It doesn’t matter at all if the detainee is guilty, and it’s disgusting to suggest that it does so you should stop that.

How is it not force when placing someone under arrest, putting them in the back of a locked police car, and driving them to the police station for booking?

If a police officer took money in exchange for their detainee’s freedom, then yes that is absolutely robbery. There is always the implicit threat of violence and imprisonment when someone is under arrest. To refuse a police officer while in custody is to risk your own safety and life. Under those conditions, there can be no version of consent thatmitigates the crime.

Service guarantees citizenship!

Fools and their money.

Why do so many fools have so much money?

If the ancient Pakistani people never met the Olmec people, how did they know they had faces? Hmm? Nothing? Checkers mate.

Corrupt judge makes corrupt ruling. We’re going to be untangling 2016 for generations.

I remember the one where somebody killed themselves but tied the gun to a rope so it would slide down behind a wall and disappear

You don’t understand how a quick death is better than a lifetime of torture and an eventual slow death?

It’s not like there is a pack of gang-raping waterboarding guys waiting outside the cancer wards waiting to waterboard and gang rape all the cancer survivors. If there were, there might be a few who don’t fight cancer as hard.

I’ve met baby chicks. They’re adorable, and about as self-aware as a furby. I’m not saying they don’t suffer, but they don’t suffer terror or panic the way a human would. And considering the life of a factory farm chicken, they definitely suffer less.

Either way, we should end inhumane factory farming practices. If we stop torturing chickens for food, we will also stop shoveling baby chicks into a meat grinder.

That’s not an ad hominem. I’m not dismissing your argument because of who you are. I’m saying you’re being naive in your expectations of what the police can and will do. And if you actually do believe that an arresting officer who is willing to fuck a detainee will be constrained by legal limits to their power, then I really don’t know how to respond to that.

No shit.

You’re right, but the reason that hasn’t caught on is that talking to your “smart” house is stupid. You can’t possibly program every possible command or situation, and telling Alexa to dim the lights in your kitchen to 40% is slower than using a dimmer switch. Actual smart homes are automated to the point where you don’t need to talk to your room.

Oh, you sweet summer child. Never change, the world needs your optimism.

You’re right, it is a horrible way to go. It’s just not the worst.

Not peacefully, no. But instantaneous death beats a lot of the other variations of unconscionable suffering visited upon factory farm animals.

A human would be aware of what is happening, and the size difference would mean you would need a much larger machine than that to instantaneously destroy an entire person. But if you had to choose between instantaneous obliteration and a slow, torturous existence, some people might actually choose the instant death.

Considering the chicks don’t know what’s coming, it’s probably not a terrible way to go. It’s gruesome, but it’s over in an instant. Factory farming in general is a horror show, and this is one of the least inhumane ways animals are killed for profit.

Yes, in your hypothetical situation, she raped him. Rape is rape. It’s nonconsensual sex. Detainees cannot give consent to sex because there is always the inherent threat of violence and imprisonment.

It’s akin to slavery. Slaves cannot consent to sex, either.

Alexa was never supposed to make money by itself. It was supposed to do two things, collect information and lower the barrier to buying things.

They must have either collected enough data to lower the value of collecting any more, or they have realized that people got over the novelty of asking Alexa to order more dog food.

My guess is the latter, because buying anything from Amazon now requires 15 minutes of research to make sure it’s actually what you want and not at some ridiculous marked up price. I wouldn’t trust Alexa to pick the best result on the first try.

That’s not an argument in defense of rape, that’s a reason to expand the legal definition to align with the reality of the situation.

Anyone who is empowered to take away all freedom from an individual cannot have consensual sex with that individual. Whether explicit or not, there is always the threat of force when a police officer has someone in custody. It is not possible to consent to sex under those circumstances. It is always rape.

I appreciate that! TIL