im not a lawyer,but the though of a 21 year old sleepng with a 14 year old is disgusting.that should fall into the fucking common sense category.
Printable View
im not a lawyer,but the though of a 21 year old sleepng with a 14 year old is disgusting.that should fall into the fucking common sense category.
I think any sexual situation where there is a power imbalance (excluding consensual BDSM of course) is abuse regardless of consent or not.
I do too. But when is someone old enough? 17, like the law says? Should a guy go to jail for having sex with a girl who is two months shy of her 17th birthday?Quote:
Originally Posted by amsterdam
technically, a man can go to jail for having sex with a girl just one day shy of her 18th birthday.
but SHOULD he?Quote:
Originally Posted by slipknotpsycho
does it matter? he's labled as a sex offender and should be killed or infected with any number of std's to be a lab monkey, well atleast according to you people.
Actually theres a huge difference between assault and consent slipknot.....Thats why its called STATUATORY rape not just rape......it's because they're not "fully developed,mentally or physically" (which is unfortunately a biological fact despite the screamings of many teens...). Not to say adults dont make mistakes but they go to jail alot longer for those same mistakes ;).
Were talking molesters not all sex offenders, if you were sued by your secretary for slapping her ass chances are you also got charged with sexual assault you are now a sexual offender. It's called common sense. The difference between a crime of passion and a serial killer.....if you need an analogy.
Also im the one who suggested the lab , so it would be like "weirdo79" not "you people". So if you have a problem with it describe your question or counterpoint ;). Most people just described physical violence, not torture. I'm espousing torture. To me its a stronger deterrant. And, it would only be used in DNA(open and shut) cases as I clearly pointed out in my post(but I guess you were too busy skimming the posts to read em).
See we already know how to "cure" the disease the problem is keeping the freed "molestors" on their meds....Chemical Castration works wonders, I suggest just plain old physical castration , its permanent and blocks the same receptors which "turn them on". We can kill anyone's sexual desire(with men its the easiest too) and if fundings any indicator apparently the reverse is the number one issue in today's america....mmm viagra.....
I personally still advocate torture as thats what their victim goes through daily , as well it costs the taxpayer less and helps medical science.
Although im basically an immoral hateful spitefilled bastard, but thats only what my friends tell me ;). So what do I know......Perhaps some more venomous vitriol?
lolol. Psycho, I love ya man, but you're all offwhack here. We all recognize the difference between a 40 year old fingerbanging a 2 year old and a 22 year old fucking a 17 year old. If the government was going to change how they deal with sexual offenders, they'd also have to ensure that they recognize the various "degrees" of sexual offenders.Quote:
Originally Posted by slipknotpsycho
We ain't talkin' black an white. It's all grey from here.
i'm just trying to get everyone to understand what they're saying and how it could effect even the ones suggesting it. can you honestly say you'd still be for it if say, the person you love the most in the world and couldn't even take hearing they got locked in jail for 2 yrs. were convited of the crime and then they were subjected to what you propose? yes sexual assualt is a major fuckin problem right now, and i fully agree something more than what's happening now drasticly needs to be done, but what most are suggesting is just plain out barbaric and in-humane, and even if us did implement such laws, do you really think they'd take the time to specify which ones are deserving and which aren't? i don't think so, i think they'd just stick with the "under 18 and your fucked" law i've said it before in this topic and i'll say it again, maybe i'm just way more empathetic than most, but the whole idea of subjecting them to such punishment doesn't really seem logical, or sane for that matter. i can't really say much more than that about why it shouldn't be ok to do such things, since i can't (and have tried for the past 2 or 3 weeks) find an alternative to what they are recieving now. it's stastical fact that most that are "rehabillitated" aren't really that way (think it's something like 80% of them will re-offend) but that is still 20% of the people that were: incapable of making coherent discions due to any number of reasons, framed people or ones that decided they couldn't wait another few months to bang the neighbors daughter, or idiots who mad horrible choices, being subjected to such things. i just can't understand it i've put my self in the shoes of if a loved one commited such an act, and then recieved this type of punishment, and just to think how it'd feel if my brother became a forced std carrier to be tested on (like i said, i don't think they'd just stick it to dna evidence, i think they'd do it to anyone that pleades no contest, guilty or is convicted/ajudicated of such a crime)
the only proposal i could possibly think of, just wouldn't work. send them all to their own island, basicly like a giant prison, and force all to wear tracking devices to ensure they don't escape. well i guess noone here really sees it the way i do
Or that 20% could be the 20% that don't get CAUGHT a second time. Or they could die before they do it again. Or the police could be watching them too close. And perhaps 2% of em were the guys who were 19 and fucked a 17 year old, or the ones that got framed or something.
Sure, some of the proposals made here have been barbaric, but I think we'd only want to apply those to open and shut cases. AKA - Mom walks in on dad humping 4 year old, 4 year old points at dad and points to where dad touched her with weiner, dad cries in court of embarassment, etc.
There's always amsterdams proposal. 25 years mandatory, tracking device the rest of their lives. Certainly not barbaric, and certainly not too harsh. And our government even currently recognizes the severity of sexual crimes. Thats why the guy who rapes a 20 year oldl will get less time then the guy who rapes a 7 year old while simotaneously cutting her with shards of glass. And they will BOTH get more time then the 19 year old who fucks his 17 year old highschool sweetheart of 5 years.
I like the island idea though. I can see alot of reality tv show opportunities with it, ya feelin' me?
PS - If a loved one committed one of those acts, one of the really bad ones ((not like having sex with a chick a couple months under the legal age)) they lose their status as a loved one. -shrugs-