Shrug. Why don’t you provide any reason at all why you think a 6 year old who agrees to have sex with someone would be fucked up for life? Why is it okay for a 12 year old but not for a 6 year old?
Well, the Internet is a lot more widespread in 2998.
Like i said, 12 is not even a teenager so it would really be pushing it in that case, theres a reason i used thirTEEN in my examples. If you don’t see a difference between a teenager and a toddler im not sure what to tell you. The main difference would be that a teenager might actual want to have sex.
Got anything besides Perverted Justice?:dubious:
I did a Google News check, and “man rapes girl met internet” (no quotes) got 3 hits, none of then what we’re talking about, and “man rapes girl lured internet” (no quotes) got no hits.
Child Molesters are usually not strangers.
In both of the cases in this thread, the guys showed up expecting to meet the girls. One came to ‘her’ apartment with a rope and condoms.
You stated that “if they agree, then it’s not rape”. And that it’s “bullshit” for adults to tell a child they’ve been raped if the child agreed to the sex. You can’t have it both ways.
He’s certainly free to try to convince the jury that he didn’t have the requisite intent. The prosecution will rely on his statements in the chatroom where he asked her if she knew how to masturbate and had pubic hair yet, and the fact that he showed up at the arranged location with condoms and rope. He can simply say it was all an act. Maybe the jury will believe him. Otherwise, this is no different from any other attempt case. It’s not a completed crime–the defendant can always claim he never planned to go through with it. Thing is, these cases usually involve compelling evidence because they’ve got proof that the guys sent and received photos, requested specific acts, and then showed up at the appointed place and time.
I’m not having it both ways, i never said child i said teenager. You know, young adults who are actually curious and interested in sex and happen to do it with each other with regularity. A six year old would have no idea what sex is, a teenager should unless they have been grossly miseducated. Comparing the two just makes you look silly. I’d also appreciate it if you stopped taking what i say out of context, i said it was bullshit to think someone who agreed to sex is going to feel raped because the law tells them too.
How many go to a Jury? 
Seems like most of the defendents plead out.
And if you plead out because the choice is between Registering and 5 years suspended sentence as opposed to 12 consectutive Life Sentences, all while being savagely raped by your fellow prisoners, then even an innocent man could cop a plea.
Lots of criminal cases result in pleas. I suspect (but have not researched) that the plea rate would be lower for sex offenses because a conviction for those does require a registration and time. I’m on my way out right now. I’ll see if I can find any reliable statistics if I get a chance later. That said, both of the cases we are talking about involved juries.
So, if a precocious 10-year old is curious about and interested in sex, it’s okay to for an adult male to bang her?
Innocent people don’t have chat logs recording their offers to “teach” little girls how to fellate them.
Are you going to keep coming up with ridiculous scenarios that have absolutely nothing to do with what i’ve said and actually answer why a teenager is ruined for life by having sex or not? im tired of your strawmen.
A child may not be ruined for life if she gets stabbed either. That doesn’t make it ok to stab her.
No, your stated reason for why it’s okay for teens to consent to sex with adults is that the teens are “interested in sex”. So, if a 10 year old girl is interested in sex, why isn’t it also okay for an adult male to bang* her*? Again, your only stated criteria is that the child is “interested”.
Do you have the same criteria for boys, by the way? Should it be legal for adult males to bugger 13 year old boys if the boy appears willing?
Would you kindly point out to me where ive said its ok? the only thing i’ve argued is that they are not fucked for life just because they have sex they later regret, so far you haven’t come up with one single reason to convince me otherwise.
They aren’t “having sex,” they’re being sexually exploited. The relationship is not equal. The “consent” is not informed.
Am I not the only one that thinks this line of reasoning is absurd? I would like to throw Angelina Jolie down on my floor and have my way with her, but it is not possible under the circumstances (since she isn’t here and I’m alone)
Does this make me guilty of raping Angelina Jolie?
I thought if (ACTION X) was not possible under the circumstances then you couldn’t be guilty of action x. How can you be guilty of something which is impossible to do?
I believe that in regard to 13-year olds being targeted by internet pedos, DigitalC already stated his belief that "if we are talking about a male i have a hard time believing it would be a negative experience at all. " :rolleyes: