When two people engage in a relationship, they do it because they expect certain things from each other. An example would be a relationship between a woman and a man, where the woman is drawn by his money and the man simply feeds his ego by dating her.*
In that respect, all relationships are exploitative (in varying degrees) and potentialy harmful. Age has nothing to do with this fact.
*It is just an example. I am not saying that all relationships are like this
This is possibly the most ignorant post I have ever read. Do you, Tom- and everyone else here who is in favour of sex crimes registry know what crimes are “sex offenses” in your area?
In some areas- “indecent exposure” is a “sex offense”. So strippers who don’t wear their pasties- DEATH! :rolleyes: That idiot who streaked the Oscars- DEATH! :rolleyes: That babe who wears a thong bikini at the beach- DEATH! :rolleyes: A couple who has sex in public- DEATH! :rolleyes: (And in CA for many year this law was enforced stringently against gay men only, and “public” was defined to include such places as a private booth in an X-rated arcade). That poor sick guy who “flashes” women- DEATH! :rolleyes: IMHO- none but that last is even a crime , and none are even worthy of even being “registered” let alone executed.
(“314. Every person who willfully and lewdly, either: 1. Exposes
his person, or the private parts thereof, in any public place, or in
any place where there are present other persons to be offended or
annoyed thereby; or, 2. Procures, counsels, or assists any person
so to expose himself or take part in any model artist exhibition, or
to make any other exhibition of himself to public view, or the view
of any number of persons, such as is offensive to decency, or is
adapted to excite to vicious or lewd thoughts or acts,
is guilty of a misdemeanor.”)
Sodomy (until recently) was a “sex offense” in many states, and still is on the books in some. Yes, anal sex with your wife, or two men together in the privacy if their own homes- DEATH! :rolleyes:
Sex with an animal- DEATH! :rolleyes:
Sex with your cousin (“285. Persons being within the degrees of consanguinity within which
marriages are declared by law to be incestuous and void, who
intermarry with each other, or who commit fornication or adultery
with each other, are punishable by imprisonment in the state prison.”) DEATH! :rolleyes:
If you are a certain type of professional having sex with someone under your care- even if 100% consensual - that is a “sex offense” *(“289.6. (a) (1) An employee or officer of a public entity health
facility, or an employee, officer, or agent of a private person or
entity that provides a health facility or staff for a health facility
under contract with a public entity, who engages in sexual activity
with a *consenting adult ** who is confined in a health facility is
guilty of a public offense.”)- DEATH! :rolleyes:
An Obscene phone call to a minor- DEATH! :rolleyes:
Possesion of kiddie porn- DEATH! :rolleyes:
A crime that a Judge says is a sex crime (" (E) Any person ordered by any court to register pursuant to this
section for any offense not included specifically in this section if
the court finds at the time of conviction or sentencing that the
person committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for
purposes of sexual gratification. The court shall state on the
record the reasons for its findings and the reasons for requiring
registration.") DEATH! :rolleyes:
Being a Prostitute, or having sex with one- DEATH! :rolleyes:
It goes on & on. "Sex offenders’ aren’t just people who rape kids. Or even people who have consensual sex with minors. “Sex offender” can cover a wide variety of “crimes” that many of us don’t even think of as crimes, let alone one requireing registration or even DEATH as Major Tom so certainly wants. :rolleyes: :dubious: Do YOU know what is a “sex offense” in YOUR State? I bet you don’t.
Let us put the real dangerous sex offenders- (sex with kids under 14 and rapists) into a “sex offender” listing. The rest are just some other dudes personal idea of what is not moral.
No, I was specifically talking about relationships between teenagers and adults. To claim I said otherwise is dishonest.
You did say this:
Are you now saying that the relationships are only likely to be exploitative and abusive when one partner is below the magic age?
BTW, I’m still hoping to hear your answer to this: What is there that’s “wholesome and healthy” that a 20 year old would want from another 20 year old, but wouldn’t want from a 16 year old?
Dr. Deth, you forgot one group of people. Locally, there was a group of women who opposed discriminatory indecency laws. They became known as “The Topfree Seven.” On two occasions, they were arrested for “sex crimes.” At one point, one of these women lived around the corner from me. Did I need the police to come by and tell me there was a “sex offender” living nearby? I do relaize, that this is a different case, because the NYS Courts upheld their appeals, but even if they hadn’t I don’t see how the information would have been of any benefit to me. Also, since then, it has become popular for women at outdoor concerts to remove their tops. Should this require registry as a “sex offender?”
This, of course assumes that the young man in question knows that the young lady is underage. There are plenty of bars that admit and serve women without carding, provided they’re pretty enough to keep a few of the over-21 men at the bar for another round or two. The statutory rape laws do not have exceptions for girls who might reasonably be mistaken for women who are of age. Once again, does a man who picks up a girl in this situation need to be registered as a “sex offender?” Why? So I know not to let my 17-year-old daughter go out drinking in bars, now that there’s a predator around?
kfl, are you aware that the age of consent in this country is 14, unless the older person is in a position of responsibility?
Why 14? Is it just “some other dude’s personal idea of what is not moral” to say sex with a 13 year old should be illegal? How about a 9 year old?
There is line-drawing that needs to be done. If you ask many a pedophile whether their victim consented to the action, a great majority of them would say “Yes”. The fact is there is a point where a person cannot consent to sex. So the line needs to be drawn to protect those who can’t. As the age of consent laws stand now, that line is drawn to over-protect rather than under-protect. And I’m just fine with that.
Arguably on point Salon.com article that includes the statistic
.
But his thread is about sex offender registration. The question is, do you have a right to know if anyone in your neighborhood has ever had sex with a 16-year-old girl, since they turned 18. What is your compelling interest in knowing this about your neighbors? What is your interest in knowing if they’ve ever been caught having sex in a parked car?
Hamlet, I disagree that the laws as written over-protect rather than underprotect; rather, I think they over-prosecute rather than underprosecute.
A story from my past:
When I was eighteen, my sixteen-year-old girlfriend broke up with me. Adding to the trauma of this my first breakup was the fact that she left me for an older woman: she broke up with me to date a 22-year-old college student she’d met in the local college’s lesbian association.
I couldn’t stand that woman, of course: I thought she was mean and stupid and insane. However, I recognize that this was exactly the right decision for her: I was unable, for both obvious and not-so-obvious reasons, to be who she needed in a relationship. The older woman was exactly who she needed, and they were together for about five or so years before parting ways.
I’m pretty sure that her and my relationship was legal under North Carolina laws, and I’m pretty sure that their relationship wasn’t legal. I could have reported it and had the older woman sent to prison, ruined her life–and probably ruined my ex-girlfriend’s life at the same time.
Those of you defending these laws: should I have reported that relationship? Why or why not?
Personally, I find the idea totally abhorrent; it didn’t occur to me at the time, and I would’ve been ill if it had. I wasn’t exactly the best boyfriend (and I was definitely not the best girlfriend) in the world, but I wasn’t evil.
Daniel
Sex offender registration was not enacted merely to let people know who in their neighbor is a sex offender, but also to allow the police and other law enforcement operations to keep tabs on released sexual offenders. For both of those reasons, I have no problem with sex offender registration.
So, in your view, the purpose of criminal legislation is to give police and prosecutors something to do? I beg to differ. Age of consent laws are enacted to protect children, not to give prosecutors something to do. In extreme cases (which, seems to me, always end up, “a 16 year old friend of a friend went to prison for sleeping with a 15 year old” variety), the statute may be used incorrectly. But that is true for any law, and getting rid of age of consent laws would cause a great deal more harm than any possible good that could come of it.
Why? Why do the Police need to “keep tabs on”: Strippers who didn’t wear their pasties, streakers, gays having sex in the privacy of their own home, married couples having anal sex, cousins getting married, the babe on the beach with a too revealing swimsuit, or as Saoirse pointed out- “women who opposed discriminatory indecency laws”? Just becuase somebody passed a homophobic law- why do “the police and other law enforcement operations” need “to keep tabs on released sexual offenders”- when the “sexual offense” was having sex in the privacy of their own home? :dubious:
Those are two separate issues. One, whether we should have sexual offender registration. And two, who should be considered a sexual offender for the purposes of sex offender registration. I was arging the first one, that sexual offender registration is a good thing. You and saorise are arguing the second. Against whom, I’m not sure. Personally, I don’t believe every “sexual” offense should require registration. I’d probably draw the line at felony v. misdemeanor. Felony offenses: rape, sexual assault of a minor, and predatory criminal sexual abuse, and the like should require registration. Misdemeanor offenses, such as the going topless, Romeo and Juliet violations, and public indecency should not require registation.
Like most crime related issues, sexual offender registration started out as a great idea. Sexual offenders released from prison were required to register with the local police department. And then, unfortunately, politicians got their hands on it and started to require that any offense even remotely “sexual” needed to be included. I agree they’ve taken it too far. But it isn’t necessary to scrap registration altogether. Limit it to felonies and allow offenders the opportunity to challenge their inclusion on the list sounds like a good start in reforming. But reforming does not require complete destruction.
Unfortunately, there are bluenoses that want to stuff THEIR morality down our craw- and right now they have a majority in Congress and one of their own is Presidant, and another is AG. 
The solution is to keep dangerous sexual predators in prison until they are no longer dangerous (this often means for life) and to drop the useless and morally questionable “sex offender registry”. It’s a tool that has never done any good, cost us millions & millions, worries folk to death, and makes harmless people- who just enjoy a slightly different kind of sex other than the “missionary- in the dark- and only for procreation” crowd- into lifetime hunted criminals- who can go back to prison for forgetting to file a change of address. :rolleyes:
The number of “dangerous” “sex offenders” is something like 10% of the total registered. As long as there is a "registry’, there will be neo-puritans who want to add "sinners’ to that list.
The list is morally wrong, useless, and Un-American.
A question:
If I fuck a 17-year-old in the State of Euphoria where the AOC is 16, no problem. If I fuck a 17-year-old in the State of Denial where the AOC is 18 (and I get caught), I get a sex offender registry to follow me around for the rest of my life.
Considering that the acts are the same, is there really much public interest value in broadcasting far and wide that I fucked a 17-year-old specifically in Denial, as opposed to Euphoria?
What if I move to Euphoria, where the matter isn’t a crime? Do I still have to register as a sex offender, and is there any public interest value in broadcasting that I committed a crime that isn’t a crime where I now live?
I thought it was a “Romeo-And-Juliet” type thing, where 14 is the AOC if your partner is under 18?
Sure, there is the potential for abuse and exploitation in any relationship. But if it is an adult being exploited, they are better able to defend themselves and they have a better chance of ending the relationship before their life is ruined.
In our society, the teen years are for getting an education to prepare for an ever-tightening job market. What happens in that time can determine how you retire, and having a baby, or becoming addicted to drugs, or any of the myriad things that grownups do to teenagers to mess them up, can screw you for life.
If Johnny Stickyfingers is gonna knock someone up, I’d much rather have it be Susie Gottadegree than Lolly Underage. Because guess who is going to have a better chance of staying off welfare.
As for your answer: how about a sexual and romantic relationship?
You don’t think a 20 year old would want a sexual and romantic relationship from a 16 year old?
No, but there is a R&J thing if the complainant is 12-14, the defendant is 12-16, and there is less than two years between them. Check out the Criminal Code, sections 150.1 – 153.
Which brings us back to my prior questions to you about “THEIR” morality, which, incidentally, I never got a response to. Why do you seem to think the law against having sex with a 14 year old is based on a morality THEY are trying to stuff down your craw, whereas a law against having sex with a 13 year old isn’t? You really can’t have it both ways, despite the sound-bite quality of your post.
Cite for the “useless” part. Personally, I think it’s all but impossible to prove whether sex offender registration has stopped any child from being molested, but if you have better information, I’d love to here it.
Again, a cite on the "never done any good, please. And I think it is the sex offenders who “worry folks to death” and the registration is a response to that, not vice versa as you seem to imply. And as for the inclusion of “harmless” sex offenders, I think I dealt with that before.