Well, yes and no. The intent is what makes the difference. If a person is indulging in autoerotic asphyxiation their intent is to produce the erection. If someone is murdered by strangulation, the strangulation may produce an erection, but it is unlikely that this was the person being strangled's intent. The physical effect of the strangulation is the same in both cases, but the intentions of the acting parties in the two situations are very different. This is probably why all homicides by stangulation are not classified as "autoerotic strangulations" simply based on whether or not the deceased had an erection. An autoerotic strangulation, whether committed by the deceased or another party is generally intended to produce the erection, while with the strangulation of an individual in order to kill that person, if an erection is produced, it is merely a byproduct of the murder (which was the original intent of the acting party). Keep in mind, Identguy, that there are two components to sexual arousal, one is physical and the other mental. The person participating in autoerotic asphyxiation is obtaining an erection using both .... he is trying to get an erection and doing it through this method, and the physical release of hormones is helping his mind along with the process. This is not true of our poor murder victim .... his erection (unless he was a real sicko who got a mental sexual charge out of being murdered) would only consist of the physical component.

Could be worse, could be raining.