Well, pick an age a year or two below whatever is the age of consent for minors vs horny majors. geez.
If minors are not being scarred for life by being screwed by their peers, the fact they get some sausage action from somebody that can legally drive a car can’t be that much worse.
And for SenorBeef: Here
If nothing else productive comes of this thread, the word ballbag makes me smile every time I see it.
I totally concur.
and for making this mistake, with someone who desired sex and misrepresented themselves to get it*, with no desire or intent to sleep with a minor, no desire or intent to harm one, you think the approriate punishment is life without parole and chemical castration?
*Fully understanding long term consequences may be beyond many 15 y/o, but not the ability to get laid.
I concede that is a tad bit heavy for a first offense of that nature and under those circumstances. I said that in a fit of petulance. I would be willing to accept the kind of deferred sentence described by the law talking guys in this thread. No sex offender registration either (which I think is a counter-productive waste of time even for guys who really are dangerous predators), but a stern, “dude, you fucked up, you better keep your ass clean, and I mean CLEAN from here on out” speech from a judge would be fine with me.
A guy who has the bad luck to keep on getting deceived over and over again is going to lose my patience, though.
world turned upside down
MY GOD
SURELY THAT’S SOME SORT OF SARASM?!
To play ballbag, you need two teams of six players each: three frogmen, two grifters and a tosspot…
YOU?!?!?!?!?!
It happens. Despite my reputation for sober, unemotional analysis.
Well, with that burst of self-deprecating irony, I’m utterly mollified and will depart the thread.
Yo tambien
No moral, no message, no prophetic tract: Just a simple statement of fact. For civilization to survive, the human race has to remain civilized. Tonight’s very small exercise in logic, from the Dio Zone.
This is a reasonably acceptable position from my perspective, if not ideal–I don’t like the idea of a person with no criminal intent even getting a deferred sentence and a lecture, because being able to prove to a judge/jury that you were deceived in this matter is (in my mind) pretty solid evidence that you had no intention of sleeping with a minor. The first time, anyway.
If he’s honest, the over-and-over-again isn’t going to happen THAT often, given the rates of fake-ID use that are typical for, say, my town here. Any more than once every few years would make me think he was doing it on purpose.
Good job.
To clarify, too: An infrequent repeat pattern consistent with the typical fake ID rate would indicate to me he’s a skeezy guy who likes picking up barely legal kids, but that’s just distasteful rather than illegal.
That’s Diogenes the Cynic for you. He’ll say whatever it takes to save face and avoid admitting error, even if it means contradicting himself.
Nope.
Obviously, there are differences between these situations. For instance, drunk driving kills thousands each year, and properly-supported terrorists have demonstrated the ability to kill thousands in a few hours – ergo, one can certainly make a reasonable argument that the innocent-error defense should be more tightly constrained for people accused of illegally serving alcohol or donating to terrrorist organizations.
I blame it on what he drinks. A drink called the Dio trio.
One part Vodka. One part testosterone. One part estrogene.