Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

Falkenstein -> Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 2:48:16 PM)

Hello everybody,

I read recently an article in the last edition of The Economist that I got from a neighbouring boat. it is called "Unjust and ineffective" and is about the punition of sexual delicts in the USA. It quite upset me. One case of a woman is particulary disgusting: having as a teenager given a blow job to another one, but younger, she got convicted for "sodomy on a minor", is livelong registred in a sex offender online register... She could be as well branded on her forehead.

I have no qualm with taking out really dangerous criminals, but this offends my most basic sence of justice.

I also wonder, could this not happen to our community too?

I will not comment here any further, I have other duties for the next days, But I really recommend to read the article: it is chilling.
It is on The Economist web site, there is an editorial and the article is under

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14164614&CFID=73550468&CFTOKEN=68009113

I wish I could wish you a good reading



Kinky regards



Henry



LillyoftheVally -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 2:52:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein
"sodomy on a minor",



Are you sure about that?



LadyPact -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 2:56:06 PM)

It's not chilling.  You are trying to sway opinion regarding those who are not of age of consent.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone under 18 is a hard limit.  Period.  No one is going to convince Me otherwise.

And, I'm fully ready to accept it when Mod Eleven comes from above and slaps Me for even commenting here.



angelikaJ -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 3:01:03 PM)

The law has been changed (oral sex in Georgia was a crime) and they now have a "Romeo and Juliet" law making consensual sex a misdemeanor. Unfortunately it wasn't retro-active.



angelikaJ -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 3:07:18 PM)

In the example cited she was 17 and he was just shy of 16.

We need a national sex registry.
I believe however there is a difference between non-consensual violent crimes and crimes against children and someone taking a leak on the side of the road.

I did object to the way the article made the young woman into being a total victim: she was given probation:
"...Not being the most organised of people, she failed to meet all the conditions, such as checking in regularly with her probation officer. For a series of technical violations, she was incarcerated for more than a year, in the county jail, the state women’s prison and a boot camp. ..."

That part was avoidable.



Acer49 -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 3:35:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LillyoftheVally


quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein
"sodomy on a minor",



Are you sure about that?

http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/sodomy/



LillyoftheVally -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 3:40:27 PM)

Ahh thank you :)

Isnt it wonderful how two countries using the same language use the same word to mean different things



Whenready -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 3:42:08 PM)

Quote: Falkenstein: ..." she got convicted for "sodomy on a minor", is livelong registred in a sex offender online register... She could be as well branded on her forehead. "

Errrr.....no. One is a little more obvious than the other I should imagine.

If the story is accurate, and I understand it correctly, the lady in question had oral sex with a minor in a classroom in the presence of the rest of the class, then went on to break her probation conditions possibly up to the age of 22.

I fail to see an injustice here. Perhaps I'm myopic.



kitastrophe33 -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 4:03:06 PM)

Yes. For me. I am an adult, therefore it is for me. In the case cited in the article, a teenage girl, goes down on a teenage boy. To me that's something entirely different. When I was 15 I had sex with my 16 year old boyfriend...would have been pretty ridiculous if either one of us had ended up registered as a sex offender for that. That's an issue for parents to deal with... Not the law.

The law can get involved when an *adult* has sex with a minor. And I realize there's that gray area of the just turned 18 year old banging his almost 18 year old girlfriend...but the law was intended to protect 16 year olds from 30 year old preditors. Not from their high school sweet hearts.



quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

It's not chilling.  You are trying to sway opinion regarding those who are not of age of consent.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone under 18 is a hard limit.  Period.  No one is going to convince Me otherwise.

And, I'm fully ready to accept it when Mod Eleven comes from above and slaps Me for even commenting here.




philosopheradept -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 4:44:30 PM)

What happened to Mrs. Whitaker is certainly unfortunate, but I agree that it's not unjust.  She pleaded guilty to the crime of having oral sex with a fifteen year old, was put on probation, and consistently failed to meet the obligations of her probation.



LadyPact -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 5:02:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kitastrophe33

Yes. For me. I am an adult, therefore it is for me. In the case cited in the article, a teenage girl, goes down on a teenage boy. To me that's something entirely different. When I was 15 I had sex with my 16 year old boyfriend...would have been pretty ridiculous if either one of us had ended up registered as a sex offender for that. That's an issue for parents to deal with... Not the law.

The law can get involved when an *adult* has sex with a minor. And I realize there's that gray area of the just turned 18 year old banging his almost 18 year old girlfriend...but the law was intended to protect 16 year olds from 30 year old preditors. Not from their high school sweet hearts.


If I'm reading correctly, however, had the young lady followed the requirements made of her at sentencing, it would have never hit her permanent record.  In other words, she could have fulfilled her obligations and nothing more would have come to it. 

What she did by choosing to engage in a sexual act in a high school was take a risk that she wouldn't have to face the consequences.  Trust Me.  Every high school student is given a written code of conduct at the beginning of every school year.  If they fail to follow that conduct, they can be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  That's exactly what happened.  By not complying, she brought the consequences on herself.



hardbodysub -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 6:20:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: philosopheradept

What happened to Mrs. Whitaker is certainly unfortunate, but I agree that it's not unjust.  She pleaded guilty to the crime of having oral sex with a fifteen year old, was put on probation, and consistently failed to meet the obligations of her probation.


How the can you ignore that fact that she was a minor also? It's ridiculous.



antipode -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 9:12:19 PM)

quote:

I have no qualm with taking out really dangerous criminals, but this offends my most basic sence of justice.


The laws are different in the United States. Since most people that live here are aware of most laws, they can simply live by them. That the US is very different from Europe we have known for a few hundred years.

As far as the Economist is concerned, that's a British publication, and they have their own views. When I first moved to the UK, I thought they had weird laws too.

Anyway, when you are done with your Economist, and you're not too busy with other things to read responses, visit the USA sometime, and talk to Real People, instead of just reading stuff.  And by the way, we will be very happy to explain some of these laws to you, if you're interested.



sweetsub1957 -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/11/2009 9:23:11 PM)

~Fast Reply~
I read the article and I could scarcely believe my eyes.  As LadyPact said earlier and I 100% agree, anyone under the age of 18 is a hard limit for me.  The article said, "the lights went off in a classroom in Georgia so that the students could watch a video. Wendy Whitaker, a 17-year-old pupil at the time, was sitting near the back. The boy next to her suggested that, since it was dark, she could...."  WOW.  I'm thinking this situation should never have happened, even though they were both minors.  Although she was the one who was actively, ummm, well you get the drift, he's the one who suggested it, so how would a person sort that out?  ~shakes my head WOW~   



HandSolo -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/12/2009 12:05:37 AM)

It's also illegal for minors to possess child pornography. That includes revealing photos of girl/boyfriends.

In this case, as others have stated, it was recognized that there was some gray area, despite the fact that her behavior was absolutely over the line (try this at your next meeting at work if they dim the lights for a projector, see what happens), and considerable leeway was extended to the accused. She so badly mis-managed the clemency offered, that she ended up a felon. Life is hard, it's harder if you're stupid.

Nobody is kicking down doors and jailing high schoolers on prom night. All the cases that make the news involve outrageous behavior.



aldompdx -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/12/2009 1:33:54 AM)

The essential question is one of fear based deterrence, or reward based reform. The U.S. system of justice is historically and fundamentally founded on instilling fear into its sheople, and literally slaughtering them. U.S. prisons primarily teach its convicts how to further engage in criminal enterprise, without getting caught again.

This is a conscious choice by the electorate. People who were sufficiently intelligent to twice elect George Bush Jr. People who are sufficiently intelligent to become nationally indebted in an amount exceeding US$33,000 per capita. People who are sufficiently intelligent to elect representatives who reduce education funding, since a child should never be smarter than their parent.

The U.S. is a free country. There is no iron curtain. People who dislike the circumstances can leave. Or, they can better educate the electorate to create change -- so that democracy does not fall -- to the likes of big insurance companies and their death panels which meter health care based upon one's value to society (i.e. earning power to purchase health insurance), which dictate who can be your doctor, and which constantly interfere in the doctor patient relationship.

Connect the dots. There is a reason that the U.S. has one of the worst health care non-systems of the industrialized world (Slovenia is rated higher), AND has archaic Christian fear based laws regulating sexuality (notwithstanding Lawrence v. Texas), AND has a deterrent fear based system of justice. If you cannot figure it out, then you know why it exists.



NihilusZero -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/12/2009 9:59:34 AM)

The purpose of such sex laws is supposed to be to protect children from predators, not to enforce sexual morality and/or mete out punishment on them for natural biological pubescent behavior. It's overtly ridiculous. Schools would be better off putting all that moral effort into curbing bullying and hazing instead.

Besides, in the US the age of consent varies from 16-18 and a number of states make exemptions or reduce the severity of the consequences when both parties are under the age of consent or within a small number of years age difference in order to avoid backwards results as the one shown above.



NihilusZero -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/12/2009 10:07:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HandSolo

She so badly mis-managed the clemency offered, that she ended up a felon.

Decrying the "clemency" is a joke on a worthless charge in the first place. And she was 17, for crying out loud. Where are the watchful eyes of any parents/guardian during that time to assist, at very least?

Incarcerated for over a year "for a series of technical violations" to an idiotic charge is a travesty of any sensible ethical/justice system.



NihilusZero -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/12/2009 10:10:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetsub1957

WOW.  I'm thinking this situation should never have happened

Wait...are we wagging our finger at risky sexual behavior? Any of us?





LadyPact -> RE: Unjust and ineffective sex laws in USA (8/12/2009 11:04:19 AM)

Honestly, I don't have the sympathetic response that this slanted article was supposed to incite.  This person made a stupid decision, followed by a series of others by not following the terms of her sentence.  At that age, I'm going to assume that she knew it probably wasn't the best idea to give someone a blow job in a classroom.  I'm also going to assume that when she signed her documents in court, the clerk told her where to pay her fine, appear for probation, and the information to complete any other stipulations. 

The article doesn't cover whether the boy was nailed (ok, bad choice of words) to the fullest extent of the law as well.  Due to his age, it probably wasn't the same charge.  He may have also been charged to the fullest extent of lewd behavior or committing a sex act in public.  It may be the case that he followed the terms of his probation and it's not "haunting" him today. 

As for where were the parents, well, I'll give 20% on that one, at best.  At the age she was at the crime, she had less than a year until her eighteenth birthday.  That made it her responsibility to keep up with the terms of her sentence, not her parents.  Even the article says this lady was "not the most organized" individual, and missed her appointments.  Anyone on probation has at least some idea that those appointments are kind of important if you'd like to stay out of jail.

Reading the whole piece, as slanted as the publication was attempting to make this law, it goes on to read of a story where this law was completely effective, such as the case of "Mike" who was 22 and having sex with a gal who was too young to drive a car.  Another example was a 27 year old who was also having sex with a girl who was barely old enough to have a learner's permit.  In those cases, the law obviously works.  To be very honest, in those cases, had it been My 15 year old daughter, jail time should have been the last of their worries.





Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125