Discussion about legal theory and issues that effect Red Pill Men. *Disclaimer - The information contained in the Site is general legal information, not specific legal advice*
My goal with this tribe is to help educate the layman on general legal theory and how it applies to the Red Pill Man in an increasingly feminized world. The focus will be on the contrast between theory and practice; i.e. what the law says vs. how it is actually applied. Weekly topics will initially be chosen by me, but my hope is to choose from requests/questions submitted by members. If you have any expertise in the legal realm and would like to help moderate please shoot me a PM.
4y ago Red Pill Legal
This weeks episode is going to focus on interactions with law enforcement. We will discuss how to protect yourself and your rights, how to be be respectful while still exercising your rights, and the parallels between law enforcement and your plate/LTR/Wife/etc. Get ready for a healthy dose of STFU, and more!
4y ago Red Pill Legal
So I'm now a week behind. I was invited to a surprise bachelor weekend and was unavailable to post or plan out this week's topic. I'm going finish last week's instead.
The big question is: "Do I really care if I am in a two party consent state? Is it still worth it document consent any way I can even though it may be illegal?"
My firm answer is: No, you should not care, and yes, it is still worth it. Here is why. Typically the issue only comes up in civil lawsuits where the admissibility of a piece of evidence is at issue. A legal recording is admissible, an illegal recording is not. Even if you could face criminal charges for illegally recording in a two party state, the potential penalties for being convicted are exponentially less than the penalties for rape/sexual assault. Realistically, you would only be looking at a fine, if convicted. I will gladly take a fine over the potential to be incarcerated for a period of years.
Let's say you illegally document consent in a two party state; you make a video recording of the sex and she never tells you no - but she doesn't know you made the recording. She goes to the police and you get charged with sexual assault. Any good defense attorney is going to get the rape charges dismissed and also cover your ass for illegally recording.
My belief is that you should always document consent regardless of where you are.
Read More4y ago Red Pill Legal
This week's issue is an off-shoot of last week's. We'll be discussing the legalities of documenting your conquests to insure you have documented consent as best as possible. Today's discussion is single party consent v. two party consent v. wiretapping.
The first legal issue with documenting is whether you live in a "single party consent" state or a "two party (really every party) consent" state. In the United States, all but 12 jurisdictions are single party states. This means that only one person involved in the conversation/interaction needs to consent to it being recorded. It is not illegal for me to secretly record every interaction, every day, because I am a party to the interaction and consent to it being recorded. I never have to notify the other person(s) I interact with and my recordings are admissible in court. It might be a bit creepy to record everything but I am not legally prohibited from doing it.
Two party consent states, really every party consent states, require all parties involved to give their consent before one party can legally record the interaction. The 12 two party states are: California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington. To legally record your conversations/interactions in these states all parties involved must consent to the recording. There are some exceptions. For example, in California and a few others, it is legal to record a conversation without the other person knowing if you believe it will collect evidence of a serious crime. If you record in these states without consent you could potentially face criminal or civil liability but the real question that I will dive into a bit later in the week is: Is it still worth it to secretly record in two party states even though it might be illegal?
Wiretapping is when an interaction/conversation is recorded but no party to the interaction knows it is being recorded. It is illegal in all states unless you first obtain a warrant/court order allowing you to do it.
Read More4y ago Red Pill Legal
Law enforcement, documentation, and ass-covering.
Law enforcement's job is to get enough evidence against you to establish probable cause to charge you with a crime. I was a prosecutor for the better part of a decade, and believe me, that is its sole function. The only analysis an officer undertakes is: "do I have enough to charge." If he does, you're getting cuffed and stuffed. Probable cause is easy to establish and only requires there be a reasonable basis for believing that a crime has been committed. A female alleging that you raped her, combined with her friend corroborating her story, is probably enough to get you charged with some form of rape or sexual assault. The typical fact pattern goes something like this: Random man and woman have consensual, drunken, sex. Next morning woman realizes she has a boyfriend and doesn't wan to look like a slut so she and her bestie go to police station and say she was raped last night. Bestie confirms story that she was drunk and left with a random dude then called her this morning crying. She has a rape kit done and it shows that she had sex last night. Man gets called into police station and asked "did you have sex with slutbag?" his answer should be...SILENCE. But instead he doesn't know what is going on and doesn't want to lie so he says, "yes, we had sex", and before he can say "but it was consensual", he is in cuffs and has made an admission that will be used against him in Court.
Documentation is the key to saving your ass in most, if not all, consent related cases. It is imperative that if you have sex with a random slut, or even a newer plate/gf, you document consent in some fashion. Dirty/kinky texts, voicemails, pictures, audio, or the all-important morning after text of "I had a great time last night", etc., etc., go a long way in proving you obtained consent and realistically, many forms of consent can be used as foreplay. Asking/telling a girl what you are going to do to her later and her response showing anticipation shows she is currently consenting to a future act. Her consent can be revoked at any time, but it at least shows she knew what you intended and was fine with it when disclosed. I've "played a game" with new lays where we both try to get the other to lose composure in public by texting things we will do to one another later in the night. Obviously no one is going to go as far as Dave Chappelle did with his "love contract" skit, but get creative with it. It can be both a turn on and documenting consent at the same time.
Read More4y ago Red Pill Legal
So what does consent actually look like? The modern feminist trend is for "affirmative consent" , or a "yes means yes" type of consent contemplated by California in its most recent consent legislation. Here, a female must 1) be able to give her affirmative consent, and 2) actually give her affirmative consent for it to be valid, either verbally or in writing. Why do I say female? Because even though the legislation is constitutionally valid because it is written to be gender neutral, it is always applied in a way that favors woman. Men must always obtain consent from women because men are always considered the aggressor. If a female is drunk or high she is completely incapable of giving her affirmative consent. However, the same does not hold true for a man. I have never seen a successful claim by a man, against a woman, for her failing to obtain his consent to sex while he was intoxicated.
Actual consent looks completely different from the current feminized ideal of "affirmative consent". Actual consent typically takes the form of silence combined with physical intent to engage in the act. Everyone here would agree that if a man is physically escalating toward sex and the woman is verbally silent but kissing him back, she has given her consent. Her actions show her intent and if you intend to act in a specific manner you have given your consent to those actions taking place. This is why pushing past LMR in not rape. A woman's words, which may indicate her desire to stop because she does not want to look like a slut, and her actions, which may indicate that she is ready and willing to fuck, do not align. By disregarding her token resistance she gets what she actually wants. Now is she is telling you no, puling away from you, and putting her clothes back on, by all means stop - that isn't LMR - learn to understand nuance.
Actual consent occupies a grey area that the feminine imperative despises but it is in the grey area that most men find themselves when trying to bed a woman.
Read More4y ago Red Pill Legal
Topic 1: Consent. The Federal Legal Definition of Consent comes from 10 USC 920. Art.120(g)(7): (A)The term
4y ago Red Pill Legal
Issue 1 will be an all-time TRP favorite...consent! On 10/14/19 I will dive head first into what consent looks like, what Blue Pill society thinks it looks like, how law enforcement views consent, how to get it, how to document it, and how to cover your ass - so if shit hits the fan you have less of a chance of non-consensual butt fucking in prison.