Megan's Law is unconstitutional

[Strike For The South]

After a sex offender has served his time (IE his debt to the citizens) The government has no right to track his movements thereafter. If you want to make sure they wont offend again harsher punishments are the only legal way to assure this.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I competely agree. Lock them up for life, and there's no need to track them.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I competely agree. Lock them up for life, and there's no need to track them.

Sure, lets do it.

[FactionHeir]

Locking them up costs so much, why not just execute since they don't really contribute to society (devil's advocate)

[rory_20_uk]

All adults and indeed children should be able to differentiate between desires and actions. I find people that find children sexually attractive, but then again I based my desires on what someone looks like, not their chronological age. So, where does statutory rape end and paedophilia begin? A 19 year old sleeping with a 17 year old he picked up at a night club that's over 18 only is one extreme, but what if the guy was 30, or 50? And what if it wasn't a nightclub, but a pub or a shopping centre? To further muddy the waters, in extremis I've seen 14 year olds more sexually developed than 18 year olds.

Paedophiles usually find individuals with no sexual development attractive. OK. But in this lifetime something better kept to yourself. Those that act on it should be punished.

But after serving sentence they should be as free to have a normal life as murderers, drink drivers, arsonists or any other piece of scum that gets released from jail. If they do it again then I'd advocate chemical castration.

[Husar]

So little 6 year-old Billy stumbles and falls onto the boobs of the kindergarten teacher who was sitting next to him, she sues him, he's a sex offender and gets shot, sounds good.

Yes, it has a point somewhere, keep looking.

[FactionHeir]

So little 6 year-old Billy stumbles and falls onto the boobs of the kindergarten teacher who was sitting next to him, she sues him, he's a sex offender and gets shot, sounds good.

Yes, it has a point somewhere, keep looking.

You mean whereby you exchange Billy for Megan and the teacher being a guy?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

So little 6 year-old Billy stumbles and falls onto the boobs of the kindergarten teacher who was sitting next to him, she sues him, he's a sex offender and gets shot, sounds good.

Yes, it has a point somewhere, keep looking.

No. There's a certain level where it must be considered reasonable to become a sex offender - grope a bunch of kids, you're a sex offender. Trip and fall on a child - you're not (unless you do it a bunch of times as an excuse). We need to be reasonable - and lock the real sex offenders up for life.

[ICantSpellDawg]

No. There's a certain level where it must be considered reasonable to become a sex offender - grope a bunch of kids, you're a sex offender. Trip and fall on a child - you're not (unless you do it a bunch of times as an excuse). We need to be reasonable - and lock the real sex offenders up for life.

Since we are making believe, who not just change the laws on child abuse? If the kid says he/she wanted it and so did the adult, why shouldn't they be able to do what they'd like? I don't want to hear any old arguments or potential consequences - lets just change the laws and presto - no more child molesting criminals.

[Strike For The South]

Since we are making believe, who not just change the laws on child abuse? If the kid says he/she wanted it and so did the adult, why shouldn't they be able to do what they'd like? I don't want to hear any old arguments or potential consequences - lets just change the laws and presto - no more child molesting criminals.

because a 6 year old cant give consent

[ICantSpellDawg]

because a 6 year old cant give consent

They can say yes. Oh, you mean consent as it is legally understood? Lets just change that as it is clearly out of line with natural consent. When a kid says yes to candy, I'm pretty sure that they want the candy.

[Strike For The South]

They can say yes. Oh, you mean consent as it is legally understood? Lets just change that as it is clearly out of line with natural consent. When a kid says yes to candy, I'm pretty sure that they want the candy.

Saying yes to candy and being abused by an adult are different things and none of this has to do with the legality of tracking pedos once their out.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Since we are making believe, who not just change the laws on child abuse? If the kid says he/she wanted it and so did the adult, why shouldn't they be able to do what they'd like? I don't want to hear any old arguments or potential consequences - lets just change the laws and presto - no more child molesting criminals.

Well, if a six year old trips and falls into his teacher's breasts, it's not reasonable to label him a sex offender. It's also not reasonable to label an 18 year old male who has consensual sex with a 16 year old female a sex offender.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Saying yes to candy and being abused by an adult are different things and none of this has to do with the legality of tracking pedos once their out.

How do you know that there is abuse? Just because 2 people are drastically different in age doesn't mean that they can't love one another, right? What about "soul mates"? The concept of a lower age limit to marriage is pretty new concept and I'm not so sure that it is rationally founded.

Also - why can't kids work in a serious factory job? A number of automaton ape people who probably arn't as bright as an 8 year old can do it - why not a kid with a good head on their shoulders if they'd like to? The concept of childhood is a Victorian fabrication anyway.

[KukriKhan]

Take it easy SFTS. As Redleg would say (if he were here now): 'TSMcG is utilizing the false Reductio ad Absurdum debate tactic to refute your premise.'

[Strike For The South]

How do you know that there is abuse? Just because 2 people are drastically different in age doesn't mean that they can't love one another, right? What about "soul mates"? The concept of a lower age limit to marriage is pretty new concept and I'm not so sure that it is rationally founded.

Also - why can't kids work in a serious factory job? A number of automaton ape people who probably arn't as bright as an 8 year old can do it - why not a kid with a good head on their shoulders if they'd like to? The concept of childhood is a Victorian fabrication anyway.

What does this have to do with Meagan's law?

[Crazed Rabbit]

After a sex offender has served his time (IE his debt to the citizens) The government has no right to track his movements thereafter. If you want to make sure they wont offend again harsher punishments are the only legal way to assure this.

I cannot agree with you here Strike. If they are allowed out of prison before they die, they should be tracked. They've squandered the right not to be tracked by abusing children.

It goes without saying this applies to real sex offenders, not streakers or other nonsense.

CR

[CrossLOPER]

Everyone with bodies should be locked up.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Why quarrel over this? Surely we can settle on a compromise here?

I suggest locking 'em up for life and tracking them in their cells. Or not tracking them and just locking them up. Whatever makes you bleedin' heart paedophile lovers happy.


Where's Dave when you need him? I'm sure he can express my feelings on this subject much more eloquently.

[Strike For The South]

Why quarrel over this? Surely we can settle on a compromise here?

I suggest locking 'em up for life and tracking them in their cells. Or not tracking them and just locking them up. Whatever makes you bleedin' heart paedophile lovers happy.


Where's Dave when you need him? I'm sure he can express my feelings on this subject much more eloquently.

Its not a matter of liking the pedos its a matter of constitutional law and the government in citizens bidness. The last people you want to defend are usually the first people you need to

[Ronin]

I cannot agree with you here Strike. If they are allowed out of prison before they die, they should be tracked. They've squandered the right not to be tracked by abusing children.

It goes without saying this applies to real sex offenders, not streakers or other nonsense.

CR

then if they are still a danger keep them locked up....I´m all for locking these kinds of people up and throwing away the key....and hard labor too.

but if they are released logic follows that they are no longer a threat.....so they should not be tracked.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Just execute serious sex offenders such as Mr. Glitter. Then take everything they owned and put it towards reconstructing their vicitms lives.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Its not a matter of liking the pedos its a matter of constitutional law and the government in citizens bidness. The last people you want to defend are usually the first people you need to

Now don't you go all educated and reasonable on me, you uppity freshman college boy.

We Texans - Texan at heart, that is - know just how to deal with child raping scum.

[Strike For The South]

Now don't you go all educated and reasonable on me, you uppity freshman college boy.

We Texans - Texan at heart, that is - know just how to deal with child raping scum.

I love being a Texan. dont you?

[Louis VI the Fat]

It's the best. A level of grandeur I've aspired to all my life.

[AlexanderSextus]

i for one, think we need to make the idea of statutory rape more conditional.

For example, if a 30 year old guy forces a 15 year old girl to have sex with him, that is STATUTORY RAPE.

but if a 19 year old guy and a 15 year old girl are in a relationship, and are having sex, why should the 19 year old go to jail???? I mean, if the girl wants to have sex with him, isnt it her body and her choice????

If she gets pregnant that's HER fault, she should've said no.

I really dont buy the idea that a girl under 16 is not smart enough to decide for herself if she wants to have sex with someone. Yeah, it might be true for some girls, but its not necessarily true across the board.

I think that it should only be statutory rape if the girl is 5 years younger or more. The "Age of consent" thing is .

even little kids know whether or not they want something...that is to say, not that little kids should have sex, no. but that there shouldnt be an "age where you are smart enough to consent" some people are smarter than others.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I think that it should only be statutory rape if the girl is 5 years younger or more. The "Age of consent" thing is .

If the girl or the guy is five years younger or more, and the youngest one was below the age of consent. Otherwise I'm sure many married couples would consistently be committing rape.

You'd have to look at the situation as well. If the girl lies to the guy about her age, for example, it shouldn't be rape.

[Papewaio]

Lock everyone up. Case solved.

[AlexanderSextus]

You'd have to look at the situation as well. If the girl lies to the guy about her age, for example, it shouldn't be rape.

See thats what i'm talking about.

Actually, my cousin went out with a 15 year old girl when he was 18. Luckily, her parents liked him and he never got in trouble. My point is that there was nothing wrong with what they were doing... she was on birth control, never got pregnant, so what harm was done? see what i'm saying?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

See thats what i'm talking about.

Actually, my cousin went out with a 15 year old girl when he was 18. Luckily, her parents liked him and he never got in trouble. My point is that there was nothing wrong with what they were doing... she was on birth control, never got pregnant, so what harm was done? see what i'm saying?

I agree with that, yes.