If somebody has some sort of weird insurance that would pay for the forensic work, why would one Not submit a claim to cover the costs? I suppose the victim's family might have some personal reason(s), and those should be respected, but it's essentially a waste of taxpayer money, premiums paid, or both to just dismiss that possibility out of hand.

It's only double taxation if the victim is Required to have the insurance and/or to submit the claim, whether we're talking murder or rape. So long as they have the option to not have such insurance and to not file if they do have it, there is no problem.

__________________
Today's forecast: Government corruption.

Tomorrow's forecast: 100% chance of more 'politics as usual'

Maybe it's finally time to vote Libertarian

Do you believe that shooting victims should pay for forensic tests, too?

I mean that if someone is taxed for things such as rape kits and forensic work, then making them pay for it again is double taxation. If the police service cannot be expected to pay for such things, that should be made clear and taxes reduced accordingly.

Not at all. They are all giving nonstop coverage today of Hurricane Ike about to do severe damage to the Houston/Galveston area, which is temporarily more concerning for good reason.

__________________

The facts so far aren't too good, IMO.

Greetings and Felicitations,

So. There's nothing wrong with taking taxes out of peoples income to pay for criminal services and also to take money out of their insurance or pockets to pay for the forensic costs of being a victim of a crime.

I noticed you think people should vote libertarian and that explains a lot when it comes to this issue. It would be perfectly libertarian to cut out all government funding and insist that people pay for their own self defense. If you can't pay for bodyguards then tough cookies. If you get shot during a crime its your own fault and should have to foot the bills. If you can't then you die and tough cookies for you. If you get raped and you can't pay for the tests to collect evidence then tough cookies for you.

It seem that you would be an Objectivist with these kinds of thinking. Are you? Just curious.

Sincerely Yours,
C. David Neely

__________________

What you're omitting here is that most health insurance claims are accompanied by co-pays or deductible satisfaction. On my health plan, for instance (a very good one), I've gone the HRA route. I have to satisfy a $1000 deductible and then the plan starts paying for things for me. My company gives me $500 toward satisfying it so the net effect is that the first $500 is on them, the second $500 on me, and then insurance covers just about everything over $1000 (this is an over-simplification, but the ins and outs of my health plan aren't really relevant).

So, if my hypothetical wife on my insurance plan were raped, assuming the prices quoted here, it may cost her and me up to $500 to report the rape.

We're already paying taxes to cover such things as law enforcement and prosecution of crimes anyway. If a municipality like Palin's is going to charge victims of crimes (or, by proxy, their insurance, assuming they have it) with the cost of the investigation of the crime, why bother having a police force at all? At least give the people their money back so that they can seek recourse privately.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

I would assume to scale the importance of the issue. If the towns people were on a raping spree then I would see that it would be listed high on the priority list. But if the rate of rapes were low then it would be possible that this issue would fly below the radar.

__________________
"Chaplain Charlie will tell you about how the free world will conquer Communism with the aid of God and a few marines! God has a hard-on for marines because we kill everything we see! He plays His games, we play ours! To show our appreciation for so much power, we keep heaven packed with fresh souls! God was here before the Marine Corps! So you can give your heart to Jesus, but your ass belongs to the Corps! Do you ladies understand?"

Hey, don't tar all Libertarians with the same brush. Where exactly does it say that we all believe that there should be no police or government? That's just anarchy.

That wouldn't stop the New York Times. If there was anything here they would be on it, and they aren't. Except for comments, it's not even in the blogs.

But do keep deluding yourselves. It's amusing watching the contortions.

__________________
Andy
Cynical Optimist

That is assuming the the fee for rape kits was common knowledge

__________________
"Chaplain Charlie will tell you about how the free world will conquer Communism with the aid of God and a few marines! God has a hard-on for marines because we kill everything we see! He plays His games, we play ours! To show our appreciation for so much power, we keep heaven packed with fresh souls! God was here before the Marine Corps! So you can give your heart to Jesus, but your ass belongs to the Corps! Do you ladies understand?"

FWIW, the Libertarian party in the US has failed to gain wider-spread support because a fair cross section of its members support such extreme policy shifts as privatizing the military, the police and firemen, etc. While I would consider myself libertarian as much as anything else, I've often found the actual LP platform to be impractical on many occasions.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

I'd imagine that it would be. It's a small town, and I'd hazard a guess that at least a couple of the women who had to pay for the rape kits probably related that experience to others. I mean, there were complaints about the policy, after all, that aroused statewide discussion, so somebody was obviously talking about it.

But, yes, you're right. It would only serve as a deterrent if people who were raped knew about it.

The other side of the coin is that if potential sex offenders knew about it, they could target uninsured or poor women with relative impunity, knowing that such women were "freebies".

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

It would become common knowledge very quickly, that if you reported that someone had raped you, then you might to spend your rent and food money prosecuting them. That's a case of "justice for the rich".

You seem to be under the illusion that the MSM has investigative journalism as a high priority.

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004