# Why is ignorance of age not an excuse? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 7, 2010, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677 "2010-05-07T20:44:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/501 "2010-05-20T18:21:18Z")
> [@AClockworkMelon](#): > > There’s one in this very thread. I see what you did there. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Most of these underage girls aren’t cops. Being encouraged to commit a crime by a cop is a bit different than not even knowing you are committing a crime. Yes indeed. My point about entrapment was more aimed at the “enticed to commit a crime you would not have committed had you not been enticed,” while entirely leaving aside the twist that it’s potentially more accurately portrayed as “enticed to commit a crime that you would not have committed were you aware that it was a crime.” ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/502 "2010-05-20T18:23:23Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Well shoot that explains everything. My brother-in-law who has been anti-gun his entire life started cleaning guns in his living room when his daughters started dating. Stop reading right there. That’s \*\*Dio \*\*at his most honest in the whole thread. Just walk away now, while you still can. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/503 "2010-05-20T18:34:38Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Even trying to bang a 16 year old is pretty skeevy for a college dude. I’m glad he got his ass kicked. A lot of college freshman still date their high school sweetheart, and by date I mean something else. ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/504 "2010-05-20T18:40:06Z")
[quote=“Diogenes\_the\_Cynic, post:474, topic:538677”] No, they’ve said pre-teens can do it, not just “monors.” > [@](#): > > It’s spelled “minors.” > > > [@](#): > > > > The If you don’t already understand the answers to the questions, then I’m not going to be able to explain it to you. > > I’m not asking to further my own education. > > > [@](#): > > > > The short answer is that the greater the age difference, the greater the power differential and the less the equality of mental accuity and comprehension. A 40 year odl is not a menatl or emotional peer to a 14 year old. > > The words are spelled “acuity,” “old,” and “mental.” Figured you would appreciate the corrections since you were bothered enough to correct others: “It’s spelled “consensual,” and it’s not an offense for a minor to have sex with an adult.” > > The “damage” is that a child is being exploited for sex. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/505 "2010-05-20T18:42:45Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Don’t you think that mens rea should be a prerequisite for a crime that can land you in jail for a decade and label you as a sex offender for the rest of your life? Depends on the crime. If you kill somebody while driving drunk, it doesn’t matter what your intentions were. I’ve also already said that I think a public “sex offender” list is a bad idea. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/506 "2010-05-20T18:45:38Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > I see what you did there. > > Yes indeed. My point about entrapment was more aimed at the “enticed to commit a crime you would not have committed had you not been enticed,” while entirely leaving aside the twist that it’s potentially more accurately portrayed as “enticed to commit a crime that you would not have committed were you aware that it was a crime.” “Enticement,” my ass. Adults males are responsible for what they stick their own cocks in, and they know what the laws are. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/507 "2010-05-20T18:47:24Z")
I corrected a misspelling, not a typo. I corrected it because it’s an especially _common_ misspelling, and it annoys me. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/508 "2010-05-20T18:48:14Z")
_This thread will be shut down_ tout de suite _if I have to read any more of the following_: [ul] [li]Accusations that a poster is a liar or lying about his arguments or intentions.[/li][li]Accusations that a poster is stupid or cognitively impaired.[/li][li]Accusations that a poster wants to have sex with a minor.[/li][li]Just for good measure, any other kind of rules violation in here.[/li][/ul] Is that crystal clear? The following is a too-long but by no means comprehensive list of posts that are not acceptable in this thread or this forum: > [@Critical1](#): > > does anyone else expect to see a news story with Dio getting off a plane with some underage girl and excuses of how he needed help “lifting his luggage” > [@rhubarbarin](#): > > [You’re well along in the slow decline in reasoning and problem-solving that ends in dementia for some.](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7945569.stm) > > In fact, that might explain a lot about you. 😛 > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Actually, there are people who ahve tried to argue that it’s a real possibility that someone could think an 11 year old is a 21 year old, so yes, there are people literally trying to make a loophole for fucking pre-teens. > [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > I’m the cite that you’re lying. _Again_. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/509 "2010-05-20T18:52:18Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > What is the esarliest age that puberty can start? Add a couple of years to that and that is my answer. It’s been documented to happen at 7, so you’d be allowing the defense in the case of 9 year olds. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/510 "2010-05-20T18:56:46Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I know lots of adults who act like fifth graders. They lower the bar _considerably_ - ditzes can happen at _any_ age and are a severe impediement to being certain that somebody is young just because they’re a moron. > > And, define “possible”, because when people start talking about 21-year-looking-and-sounding 11 year-olds, they’re obviously talking about a vanishingly small percentage of the population. So running into one of them at the bar deliberately impersonating an adult would be kind of on the order of winning the lottery. (The _you are about to shaft yourself_ lottery!) > > So let’s look at the lottery as an analogy. On the one side there’s us, saying that a person would be _perfectly rational_ if they believed that they’re not going to get the megajackpot when they bought a lottery ticket - but we also assert it’s still _possible_. You, on the other hand, are saying that nobody can possibly ever win the lottery. Guess who’s wrong? > > Given the presumable vanishing rarity of precocious eleven-year-olds, it’s fair to ask why they’re in the discussion at all. The answer of course is that they’re here to disprove your groundless wild assertions that no reasonable person could ever be decieved by a fourteen, sixteen, seventeen, or one-day-shy-of-eighteen year old. Clearly if an eleven year old -_any_ eleven year old- can look and/or sound eighteen or twenty-one, then it disproves your claims that a high-schooler can’t pull it off. > > When you then turn around and atart arguing as if anybody thinks that fifth-graders are swarming the bars, you have completely missed the point. The specific assertion that an 11 year old can be taken to be a 21 year ol was made in this thread by **Drain Bead** , who said it had happened to her. All I did was call bullshit on it. I did not bring the scenario of 11 years olds into the thread, all I did was respond to them. Can we all agree that it’s not plausible that an 11 year old could deceive an adult male into thinking she was an adult, and having sex with her, and that any attempt by the adult to argue that he’d been deceived should be dismissed out of hand? Are there people who want to say that it should not be an _automatic_ criminal violation to fuck an 11 year old, regardless of the assailant’s tale of woe? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/511 "2010-05-20T18:57:54Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It’s been documented to happen at 7, so you’d be allowing the defense in the case of 9 year olds. Let’s point out again that allowing the defense is not a get-out-of-jail-free card - you still have to convince the jury. So unless that 9 year old _actually does_ look and act enough like 18 to convince the jury that the defendant isn’t yanking their chain, then allowing the defense changes nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/512 "2010-05-20T19:01:43Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Can we all agree that it’s not plausible that an 11 year old could deceive an adult male into thinking she was an adult, and having sex with her, and that any attempt by the adult to argue that he’d been deceived should be dismissed out of hand? The latter does not follow from the former. It is the job of the jury to make the determination that a specific fact-based defense is or is not credible. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/513 "2010-05-20T19:03:48Z")
You think it’s even theoretically possible for a 9 year old to plausibly pass as an adult? Why waste the court’s time on bullshit? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/514 "2010-05-20T19:05:01Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > The latter does not follow from the former. It is the job of the jury to make the determination that a specific fact-based defense is or is not credible. No it isn’t. Statutory rape is strict liability. You’re also avoiding the question. Do YOU think it could plausibly happen, yes or no? ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/515 "2010-05-20T19:07:07Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > “Enticement,” my ass. Adults males are responsible for what they stick their own cocks in, and they know what the laws are. This isn’t just about adult males and teen girls. The opposite, I imagine, happens significantly more often (as teen males are both more interested in drinking and more interested in sex, as well as less picky about sex partners.) ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/516 "2010-05-20T19:10:18Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The specific assertion that an 11 year old can be taken to be a 21 year ol was made in this thread by **Drain Bead** , who said it had happened to her. All I did was call bullshit on it. I did not bring the scenario of 11 years olds into the thread, all I did was respond to them. > > Can we all agree that it’s not plausible that an 11 year old could deceive an adult male into thinking she was an adult, and having sex with her, and that any attempt by the adult to argue that he’d been deceived should be dismissed out of hand? Are there people who want to say that it should not be an _automatic_ criminal violation to fuck an 11 year old, regardless of the assailant’s tale of woe? It seems to me that from my perspective that Drain Bead is at least as believable in her assertions as anyone else in the thread. While I’d set the bar incredibly high, I’m morally unwilling to cut off all lines of defense in a case where the defendant claims they had no intention of breaking the law and were deceived into it. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No it isn’t. Statutory rape is strict liability. > > You’re also avoiding the question. Do YOU think it could plausibly happen, yes or no? I don’t think it matters–I do not think it’s morally right to outright deny the defense, regardless of the implausiblity of it. ---
**Author:** ![AClockworkMelon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aclockworkmelon/32/10803_2.png) [@AClockworkMelon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AClockworkMelon)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/517 "2010-05-20T19:11:20Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > This isn’t just about adult males and teen girls. The opposite, I imagine, happens significantly more often (as teen males are both more interested in drinking and more interested in sex, as well as less picky about sex partners.) Unless the woman is a teacher or the boy is _very_ young the women are hardly ever reported. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/518 "2010-05-20T19:26:46Z")
> [@AClockworkMelon](#): > > Unless the woman is a teacher or the boy is _very_ young the women are hardly ever reported. This tends to sum up my feelings about the actual “damage” done to a teenager who is actively seeking such. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/519 "2010-05-20T19:38:31Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Depends on the crime. If you kill somebody while driving drunk, it doesn’t matter what your intentions were. Not comparable. As soon as you turn the key in the ignition while intoxicated, you know you’re committing a crime. If you have some kind of sexual contact with someone who you reasonably believe to be of an age to consent, you do not know that you are committing a crime, and, in fact, believe you are not. This is not “I don’t think I’m going to harm this teenager by having sex with them, even though they’re under the age of consent,” this is “I think I am having sex with someone who has the capacity to consent to it.” > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > “Enticement,” my ass. Adults males are responsible for what they stick their own cocks in, and they know what the laws are. There you go again, making this all about adult men having sex with underage females. It would be a lot easier to take you seriously if your own dog in this fight (your daughters) didn’t keep being so blatantly obvious. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Can we all agree that it’s not plausible that an 11 year old could deceive an adult male into thinking she was an adult, and having sex with her, and that any attempt by the adult to argue that he’d been deceived should be dismissed out of hand? Are there people who want to say that it should not be an _automatic_ criminal violation to fuck an 11 year old, regardless of the assailant’s tale of woe? If it’s so blatantly obvious that an 11-year-old could never pass for the legal age of consent, then you should have \*no objection \*to allowing someone the opportunity to make that defense at a trial, since the jury will still hold them culpable. ETA: Our legal system is not limited by what \*you \*believe is a pointless waste of time. > [@Zeriel](#): > > This isn’t just about adult males and teen girls. \*Thank \*you. ---
**Author:** ![tim-n-va](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim-n-va/32/3001_2.png) [@tim-n-va](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim-n-va)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677/520 "2010-05-20T19:38:56Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > “Enticement,” my ass. Adults males are responsible for what they stick their own cocks in, and they know what the laws are. > [@](#): > > No it isn’t. Statutory rape is strict liability. Current law is irrelevent when the discussion is what the law should be and/or allow. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-ignorance-of-age-not-an-excuse/538677.md?page=27)