Thread: US soldiers committing more sex crimes

Originally Posted by Mushroom

OK, now kindly give us the comparison of a similar civilian sexual assault rate.

Nope. This is about soldiers.

Do your own research if you want to know about civilians.

Originally Posted by Mushroom

There are just under 1.5 million US military personnel. 2,811 from a group of almost 1.5 million is probably pretty close to that of the regular civilian population.

I'll take your word for it. Do you have a point?

Originally Posted by Mushroom

Give us statistics please, don't try to avoid answering.

Nope. I'm not interested in answering. This thread is about soldiers (not sure how you missed that).

Originally Posted by Uncle Meat

Nope. This is about soldiers.

Do your own research if you want to know about civilians.



I'll take your word for it. Do you have a point?



Nope. I'm not interested in answering. This thread is about soldiers (not sure how you missed that).

I looked it up. 213,000 violent sex crimes in the US for 307 million population, comes to 69 per 100,000.

For the military, 2811 per 1.5 million is 187 per 100,000, about 2.7 times the total population rate.

The military with its stricter monitoring is probably more accurate but the civilian number is probably low, a lot of sex crimes are not reported.

Comparing to the general population isnt accurate anyway. Its apples to oranges. More accurate is to compare military back from combat with high stress jobs, maybe police in high crime areas, but even that won't compare well I think to a tour in most areas of Iraq or Afghan.

I say given what soldiers go through its a testament to their training and character that its as low as 2,811. My guess is that it was a much bigger problem for the Vietnam vets given the "welcome home" many of them received.

Originally Posted by Uncle Meat

Nope. This is about soldiers.

Do your own research if you want to know about civilians.



I'll take your word for it. Do you have a point?



Nope. I'm not interested in answering. This thread is about soldiers (not sure how you missed that).

The onous is on you. You posted a statistic and implied that Soldiers are more likely to commit sexual assault. Just giving us a gross number without any context is completely worthless. Compare your numbers to the civilain population (same age range) and lets compare. The OP is intellectually dishonest.

Originally Posted by DaveInFL

I looked it up. 213,000 violent sex crimes in the US for 307 million population, comes to 69 per 100,000.

For the military, 2811 per 1.5 million is 187 per 100,000, about 2.7 times the total population rate.

The military with its stricter monitoring is probably more accurate but the civilian number is probably low, a lot of sex crimes are not reported.

Comparing to the general population isnt accurate anyway. Its apples to oranges. More accurate is to compare military back from combat with high stress jobs, maybe police in high crime areas, but even that won't compare well I think to a tour in most areas of Iraq or Afghan.

I say given what soldiers go through its a testament to their training and character that its as low as 2,811. My guess is that it was a much bigger problem for the Vietnam vets given the "welcome home" many of them received.

Also consider that the military population consists mostly of healthy males aged 18-42 (skewed mostly to males 18-25); The demographic that is MOST likely to commit sexual crimes. The gross national number is deflated by elderly people, women, children, and the disabled.

You also have to consider the army has increased in size by 20% since 2006. The propagandized figure the OP wishes to catch your attention with is 80%. This number does not take in to account all the factors that have contributed to this higher number, such as more training, more reporting and stricter enforcement of the UCMJ. Add to this, a larger force, and you will get higher numbers.

Originally Posted by Uncle Meat

Nope. This is about soldiers.

No, this is about your wanting to attack soldiers, and not look at anything else but attacking soldiers.

Originally Posted by IgnoranceisBliss

The onous is on you. You posted a statistic and implied that Soldiers are more likely to commit sexual assault.

I neither implied nor stated any such thing.

Let's just stick to the facts, shall we?

Originally Posted by Uncle Meat

I neither implied nor stated any such thing.

Let's just stick to the facts, shall we?

Facts out of context cannot lead to any kind of assertion. You posted facts out of context then implied an assertion.

Returning veterans want to be around others who understand what they've gone through. Part of the issue is the sense of isolation transitioning back to civilian life. 1.5 million out of a nation of 310 million have borne the brunt of the decade old conflicts...that's a small percentage and it seems the microscope is always on us.
Add to this a poor economy and the resulting stressors lead to aberrant behavior. None of this, of course, excuses criminal behavior...but for civilians to point the finger and indict the whole rather than the few actually involved in these anti-social behaviors...I don't believe that to be above board.

It appears that a woman serving in Iraq is more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than shot by the enemy. THERE'S a sorry statistic.

" ...Rape within the US military has become so widespread that it is estimated that a female soldier in Iraq is more likely to be attacked by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire. So great is the issue that a group of veterans are suing the Pentagon to force reform. The lawsuit, which includes three men and 25 women (the suit initially involved 17 plaintiffs but grew to 2 who claim to have been subjected to sexual assaults while serving in the armed forces, blames former defence secretaries Donald Rumsfeld and Robert Gates for a culture of punishment against the women and men who report sex crimes and a failure to prosecute the offenders... "

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...pe-us-military