Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
Overcriminalization is a legitimate issue, of course, especially in the context of a strict liability victimless crime that people can unwittingly commit. But man, the way to make that case to adults is with cites to cases and actual statistics, not a cartoon.
Did you read the cartoon? It's actually pretty good, and it makes the right points about the problems with overcriminalization. It's very clearly something a particular lawyer drew to creatively express his frustrations with the criminal justice system.
I don't mean to leap to la6ki's defense here, since I think he pretty thoroughly embarrassed himself (honestly, anyone who isn't embarrassed by Rothbard should seriously reconsider their political strategy), but I think you've picked the wrong point to harp on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Case Closed
Did you read the article? He was told by the court after getting in trouble for having a relationship with her when the were 18/14 to stay away. Her father wanted him to stay away. After he got out of jail for the first time he waited a couple of months then they started meeting secretly again. He was so in love with a 15 year old girl that he risked jail time to be with her instead of moving on or waiting 3 years. I think it's reasonable to conclude that this guy just has a problem with being really attracted to under age women.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Case Closed
It's not like he did not have warnings. A year in prison for the 18/14 is a bit too much, but the article does not go into a ton of detail on that. Still pretty gross. Seniors dating freshmen is weird. The inability to stop himself from breaking a court order to stay away is extremely problematic.
I'm sorry, but these comments are so stupid they practically drool. You can't use the fact that the law criminalizes his initial conduct (or the consequences flowing therefrom) as evidence that his later conduct displays some pathological attraction to younger girls, nor can you use it to argue that he's a criminal deserving of criminal punishment. That's both misguided and (obviously) viciously circular.
Moreover, it's disingeunous in the extreme to use the
legal age of consent as some sort of categorical definition for what would or wouldn't make his behavior psychologically abnormal. The fact that that the law prohibits certain sexual encounters does not make them psychologically abnormal; and worse, it's an entirely backwards model of criminality to ascribe guilt prospectively based on what you think these acts indicate about his character. Whether or not you or anyone else find these behaviors to be "gross" or "weird" is irrelevant; it has no bearing whatsoever on the question whether this young man can mature into someone who exhibits normal, healthy patterns of attraction to appropriately aged people, a question that seems to have escaped your consideration in your ardent zeal to condemn the high school senior who had sex with his freshman girlfriend.
Evidently it's your opinion that, since this is a crime, obviously the sexual act itself was grossly deviant, and obviously the law should prohibit it, and furthermore this defendant is some sort of uncontrollable pervert who will likely end up molesting children one day. Christ.
Last edited by DrModern; 11-13-2012 at 03:07 PM.