Home › Forums › WSB Reader Recommendations › Palin made rape victims pay
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 3, 2008 at 10:57 pm #588259
flipjackParticipanthttps://pol.moveon.org/donate/pp.html?id=14176-7573654-qB.xf7x&t=4
Did you know that when Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Women who were raped had to pay $1200 out of their own pockets for the exams used to prosecute their attackers?
October 4, 2008 at 12:47 am #642221
GenHillOneParticipantYes, flipjack, she also opposes abortion for victims of rape and incest (and before anyone questions moveon.org link, this information is available from multiple sources). The rape kits are just another example of her poor decision making skills. yeah, she’s a candidate for women alright…
October 4, 2008 at 6:23 pm #642222
bcollinsMemberI don’t support Palin, but I have a question on this topic. I want to be certain that it is understood that I truly want to gain the perspective of others…I am not trying to bash or be a hater.
Question: If someone claims to be raped (in the eyes of the law)…why should the government be expected to pay for a medical procedure? If the same person was assaulted (not sexually assaulted) is there a different standard?
Truly want to know.
October 4, 2008 at 7:56 pm #642223
FranciParticipantI don’t know the specifics of this, but I do know that there are special funds set up in communities for crime victims.. is it possible that she did not allow those funds to be used for rape kits?
October 4, 2008 at 8:21 pm #642224
TheHouseMemberIn answer to BColiins, you are correct that the government should not be expected to pay for a medical procedure but in the majority of communities a rape exam is covered by the city or police department as a courtesy.
It should be noted that not all police jurisdictions pay for them and it also should be noted that I attempted to find something proving that Palin had anything to do with the decision to charge rape victims and could not. That doesn’t take away from the fact that the city charged them, I just couldn’t find any concrete proof that she supported it.
http://townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2008/09/11/the_palin_rape_kit_myth
October 4, 2008 at 8:25 pm #642225
mellaw6565MemberBCollins – victims in crimes in most places are cared for at taxpayer expense because as a society they are victims and we do not economically penalize victims. If a criminal is found and prosecuted, then usually they have to pay back the funds expended by the government as part of their punishment.
For example, if someone in your family is murdered in your house, the government usually sends teams in to clean up the blood, etc…. as part of the community service. Some home insurance covers it too.
And last, if you understood how violent of a crime rape is, and you were the victim, would you want to have to pay for the actions of a violent criminal? Isn’t that being traumatized and victimized twice?
October 4, 2008 at 8:27 pm #642226
mellaw6565MemberI agree though that I have not seen evidence that it was Palin that ordered women to pay for their own rape kits or whether that was something more local.
I have heard her say that a “life is a life” and that it should remain so even if the life was caused by a traumatic event such as rape. Yeah, like a rape victim wants to look at a child that reminds them of probably the most violent and traumatic episode of their life? Nice Sarah.
October 4, 2008 at 9:13 pm #642227
bcollinsMemberhonest question mellaw…ease up
October 4, 2008 at 9:30 pm #642228
AnonymousInactiveIt was my understanding that this was a practice that Palin inherited. Don’t know if she changed the policy or supported it, but in any case, seemed to be a budget issue at it’s inception. I would have looked somewhere else to cut corners myself (like the hockey rink), as no one wants to appear unsympathetic to victims.
October 4, 2008 at 11:36 pm #642229
JimmyGMemberThe “government” doesn’t pay to clean up murder scenes, at least not in the greater King County area.
The cost of a rape kit/exam isn’t billed to the victim because the purpose of the kit and exam is to find and preserve evidence of a crime.
Just like the cops don’t charge for fingerprinting your house after a burglary or to collect evidence at a homicide.
The fact that Wasilla charges victims for their rape kits shows the town as a whole doesn’t care about prosecuting the crime of rape.
October 5, 2008 at 12:43 am #642230
BonnieParticipantJimmyG, I was going to post that too. I don’t believe the govt. pays to clean up murder scenes. I saw something on the news once about a company who cleans up and it is the family who has to pay. Not the state.
October 5, 2008 at 2:12 am #642231
bcollinsMemberJimmy and Bonnie…thx. That makes sense. I appreciate the response.
October 5, 2008 at 2:28 am #642232
JoBParticipanther record on disabilities isn’t so great either.
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2008/09/empty_promises_to_desperate_fa.html
October 5, 2008 at 11:16 pm #642233
mellaw6565MemberActually, if you are poor, then the state/local agency pays for the cleanup out of the victim’s fund.
October 6, 2008 at 1:28 am #642234
JimmyGMemberI don’t know what source you’re looking at mellaw since according to the WA state crime victim’s compensation program (CVCP) website:
“Crimes and Costs Not Covered
– Identity theft
-Personal property crimes
-Crime scene clean-up”
October 6, 2008 at 4:45 am #642235
BonnieParticipantThank you JoB for posting the article. it was very informative. As a Mother to a Special Needs child these are the things I NEED TO KNOW.
October 6, 2008 at 4:16 pm #642236
JoBParticipantBTW…
a rape kit is not a medical procedure any more than a DNA kit or a blood draw or a breathalyzer test are medical tests when used for the sole purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime.
a rape kit is used to collect evidence at a crime scene…
and is in addition to the medical care that a rape victim may or may not receive… which they pay for themselves.
October 6, 2008 at 4:58 pm #642237
mellaw6565MemberJimmy – they pay for it in other states. Too bad WA is not progressive enough to do it for those that don’t have insurance to cover.
October 7, 2008 at 10:39 pm #642238
lizruMemberNot a fan of Palin’s, but factcheck.org, Annenberg’s political fact checking website says this is only “kind of” true. Take a look:
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_sarah_palin_make_rape_victims_pay.html
October 7, 2008 at 11:02 pm #642239
JoBParticipant“Eric Croft, a former Alaska state representative who sponsored the 2000 legislation, told CNN that “I find it hard to believe that for six months a small town, a police chief, would lead the fight against a statewide piece of legislation receiving unanimous support and the mayor not know about it.”
I haven’t cared enough to stay on top of the whole palin soap opera.. so i may be wrong..
but wasn’t Fallon the Chief of Police after she replaced the original chief of police
who was an advocate for women who were victims of violence…
or was that another story not truly interesting unless relayed by SNL?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.