http://reason.com/blog/2015/09/02/teen-boy-will-be-charged-as-adult-for-ha?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=New+Campaign&utm_term=Vox+Newsletter+All
What the fuck is wrong with America? :huh:
It could be worse than photos Mart, he may of (gasp!) been touching himself in an inappropriate fashion :(
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on September 03, 2015, 02:42:06 AM
It could be worse than photos Mart, he may of (gasp!) been touching himself in an inappropriate fashion :(
That's silly, teens never do that. They always wait until they have reached the age their society has deemed acceptable for sexual activity, or until they're married if that is what their community prescribes.
Quote from: Syt on September 03, 2015, 02:44:45 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on September 03, 2015, 02:42:06 AM
It could be worse than photos Mart, he may of (gasp!) been touching himself in an inappropriate fashion :(
That's silly, teens never do that. They always wait until they have reached the age their society has deemed acceptable for sexual activity, or until they're married if that is what their community prescribes.
That blog notes that the two teens are of legal age to have sex with one another, but not sext.
As far as Marti getting outraged by this new story? Who gives a fuck.
Porn laws really need updating.
Which is surprising considering cameras have been cheap and plentiful for decades
Quote from: Tyr on September 03, 2015, 06:15:03 AM
Porn laws really need updating.
Which is surprising considering cameras have been cheap and plentiful for decades
Well presumably not in the way that the UK has updated them. ;)
At any rate, in the US, changing laws in favor of making sexually explicit things legal is not exactly a get out the vote call.
IIRC, Austrian law says that sexual photos of someone aged 14-18 (between age of consent and adulthood) are legal if they were made for private, personal use and there was no intention to distribute publicly or for profit.
(Publication/dissemination to third parties of such material remains illegal.)
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 06:23:25 AM
At any rate, in the US, changing laws in favor of making sexually explicit things legal is not exactly a get out the vote call.
Which is why there should be an entity that rules idiotic laws that damage lives to be highly unreasonable. Like a court above all other courts.
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 06:31:04 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 06:23:25 AM
At any rate, in the US, changing laws in favor of making sexually explicit things legal is not exactly a get out the vote call.
Which is why there should be an entity that rules idiotic laws that damage lives to be highly unreasonable. Like a court above all other courts.
Presumably one has to have time/financial resources to ride a court case up that high?
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 06:32:43 AM
Presumably one has to have time/financial resources to ride a court case up that high?
Hopefully someone along the way latches on to the case and provides the legal team. The problem is more that the current bench doesn't seem interested in doing anything about such clearly unjust laws.
garbon and Syt, I believe you are missing the point - the point here is not whether making and publishing nude photos of minors should be illegal - but the insanity of charging a minor as an adult for making and sending photos *of himself* - i.e. someone the law is meant to protect in the first place.
It's like charging a suicide survivor with attempted murder - the question whether murder should be illegal does not even enter the picture.
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 06:38:28 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 06:32:43 AM
Presumably one has to have time/financial resources to ride a court case up that high?
Hopefully someone along the way latches on to the case and provides the legal team. The problem is more that the current bench doesn't seem interested in doing anything about such clearly unjust laws.
There is something called prosecutorial discretion. Even if the law is drafted in a faulty way so that if read literally it would allow to charge the purported victim with a crime, prosecutor should choose not to bring charges.
Quote from: Martinus on September 03, 2015, 07:23:21 AM
garbon and Syt, I believe you are missing the point - the point here is not whether making and publishing nude photos of minors should be illegal - but the insanity of charging a minor as an adult for making and sending photos *of himself* - i.e. someone the law is meant to protect in the first place.
It's like charging a suicide survivor with attempted murder - the question whether murder should be illegal does not even enter the picture.
I don't think I missed that point at all.
Also, your analogy doesn't make any sense. Yes there were laws against suicide but most have gone away. Here, you don't want the law to go away, you just want it amended to make sense when it is applied.
Quote from: Martinus on September 03, 2015, 07:25:23 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 06:38:28 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 06:32:43 AM
Presumably one has to have time/financial resources to ride a court case up that high?
Hopefully someone along the way latches on to the case and provides the legal team. The problem is more that the current bench doesn't seem interested in doing anything about such clearly unjust laws.
There is something called prosecutorial discretion. Even if the law is drafted in a faulty way so that if read literally it would allow to charge the purported victim with a crime, prosecutor should choose not to bring charges.
Yes to a point, but where there is discretion, there is also abuse of discretion. A system that depends on constant exercise of discretion is not a robust system.
Quote from: Martinus on September 03, 2015, 07:25:23 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 06:38:28 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 06:32:43 AM
Presumably one has to have time/financial resources to ride a court case up that high?
Hopefully someone along the way latches on to the case and provides the legal team. The problem is more that the current bench doesn't seem interested in doing anything about such clearly unjust laws.
There is something called prosecutorial discretion. Even if the law is drafted in a faulty way so that if read literally it would allow to charge the purported victim with a crime, prosecutor should choose not to bring charges.
Oh my god - so shocking that a lawyer, somewhere, might decide to move forwards with ridiculous charges!
Quote from: Martinus on September 03, 2015, 02:30:42 AM
http://reason.com/blog/2015/09/02/teen-boy-will-be-charged-as-adult-for-ha?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=New+Campaign&utm_term=Vox+Newsletter+All
What the fuck is wrong with America? :huh:
We have 50 states and many smaller jurisdictions all with their own laws. Hilarity ensues.
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 07:28:53 AM
Quote from: Martinus on September 03, 2015, 07:25:23 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 06:38:28 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 06:32:43 AM
Presumably one has to have time/financial resources to ride a court case up that high?
Hopefully someone along the way latches on to the case and provides the legal team. The problem is more that the current bench doesn't seem interested in doing anything about such clearly unjust laws.
There is something called prosecutorial discretion. Even if the law is drafted in a faulty way so that if read literally it would allow to charge the purported victim with a crime, prosecutor should choose not to bring charges.
Oh my god - so shocking that a lawyer, somewhere, might decide to move forwards with ridiculous charges!
I don't understand your response. It should be shocking that a prosecutor prosecutes a "ridiculous" charge. Especially in a country where, in their wisdom, the people have decided to elect prosecutors. But in reality that is really the problem isn't it.
Gotta agree with Marti on this one - assuming the OP article is accurate.
The worst twist: he's to be tried as an adult. In his state, over-16 = tried as an adult.
However, his alleged crime is sexual expoitation of a minor, namely himself. In his state, that crime is applicable to under - 18s.
So, for purposes of punishment he's an adult, but for purposes of his crime he's a minor: he's an adult who sexually exploited a minor - namely, himself.
In a further twist, because he's an adult charged with a sex crime, his name was released to the media and broadcast everywhere, ensuring his total humiliation even if the charges are tossed out (as they ought to be).
The whole thing is a weird, Kafka-esque nightmare - so awful it is almost funny.
Sex laws get just stupid for people ages 16-22. Doing sexual things with your peers, perfectly ordinary stuff, can technically be a felony if you are not super careful and vigilant. And being super careful and vigilant is something people aged 16-22 are known for.
This seems kind of 'school to prison' pipeline-ish stuff to me.
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 07:28:53 AM
Oh my god - so shocking that a lawyer, somewhere, might decide to move forwards with ridiculous charges!
Um, yes, yes, it is shocking. :huh: Did you just adopt this ridiculously idiotic position to spite Martinus?
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 09:21:47 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 07:28:53 AM
Oh my god - so shocking that a lawyer, somewhere, might decide to move forwards with ridiculous charges!
Um, yes, yes, it is shocking. :huh: Did you just adopt this ridiculously idiotic position to spite Martinus?
Maybe, unlike several of you, I live in the real world where it isn't unheard of that fucked up shit like this happens. :hmm:
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 09:46:46 AM
Maybe, unlike several of you, I live in the real world where it isn't unheard of that fucked up shit like this happens. :hmm:
So resignation is how one should deal with that?
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 09:47:30 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 09:46:46 AM
Maybe, unlike several of you, I live in the real world where it isn't unheard of that fucked up shit like this happens. :hmm:
So resignation is how one should deal with that?
Nah, probably best to post an internet thread about how terrible said country where such has occurred must be. That'll drive change. :)
While it is a self-evident truth that what we say here means less than jack and shit, that is a cop out garbon and you know it :lol:
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 09:46:46 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 09:21:47 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 07:28:53 AM
Oh my god - so shocking that a lawyer, somewhere, might decide to move forwards with ridiculous charges!
Um, yes, yes, it is shocking. :huh: Did you just adopt this ridiculously idiotic position to spite Martinus?
Maybe, unlike several of you, I live in the real world where it isn't unheard of that fucked up shit like this happens. :hmm:
Ok but in the real world when something goes wrong reasonable people don't attack the person who identifies the act which was wrong.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 03, 2015, 10:07:17 AM
Ok but in the real world when something goes wrong reasonable people don't attack the person who identifies the act which was wrong.
If you're talking about Marty, that's not all he did.
No outrages ever occur in non-America countries.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 03, 2015, 10:12:59 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 03, 2015, 10:07:17 AM
Ok but in the real world when something goes wrong reasonable people don't attack the person who identifies the act which was wrong.
If you're talking about Marty, that's not all he did.
But that is what he was attacked for doing. :contract:
Quote from: Valmy on September 03, 2015, 09:52:50 AM
While it is a self-evident truth that what we say here means less than jack and shit, that is a cop out garbon and you know it :lol:
Well I think one has to pick one's battles unless one wants to be outraged all the time. ;)
God damn America.
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 10:28:02 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 03, 2015, 09:52:50 AM
While it is a self-evident truth that what we say here means less than jack and shit, that is a cop out garbon and you know it :lol:
Well I think one has to pick one's battles unless one wants to be outraged all the time. ;)
And you choose to get outraged that someone raised this issue? :lol:
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 03, 2015, 10:07:17 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 09:46:46 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 09:21:47 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 07:28:53 AM
Oh my god - so shocking that a lawyer, somewhere, might decide to move forwards with ridiculous charges!
Um, yes, yes, it is shocking. :huh: Did you just adopt this ridiculously idiotic position to spite Martinus?
Maybe, unlike several of you, I live in the real world where it isn't unheard of that fucked up shit like this happens. :hmm:
Ok but in the real world when something goes wrong reasonable people don't attack the person who identifies the act which was wrong.
I can easily prove that to be false. Just look at the reaction that's been had in response to the most recent wave of people caring about black lives/issues.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 03, 2015, 10:40:02 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 10:28:02 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 03, 2015, 09:52:50 AM
While it is a self-evident truth that what we say here means less than jack and shit, that is a cop out garbon and you know it :lol:
Well I think one has to pick one's battles unless one wants to be outraged all the time. ;)
And you choose to get outraged that someone raised this issue? :lol:
This isn't me outraged. :lol:
True. Just wondering why you decided to pick this particular fight when your mantra is that one needs to be careful about what fight to pick.
I don't think it is much of a 'fight' to tell Marti that I don't give a shit what he is outraged about. YMMV.
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 11:22:22 AM
I don't think it is much of a 'fight' to tell Marti that I don't give a shit what he is outraged about. YMMV.
You sure have a lot of shit on offer when you don't give a shit.
I think there this is something to be validly outraged about. Making a legal distinction between adult and minor and then just ignoring that distinction whenever a prosecutor feels like it is unjust.
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 11:22:22 AM
I don't think it is much of a 'fight' to tell Marti that I don't give a shit what he is outraged about. YMMV.
You seem to be making a point that it is a waste of time for others to "give a shit".
Quote from: DGuller on September 03, 2015, 11:26:15 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 11:22:22 AM
I don't think it is much of a 'fight' to tell Marti that I don't give a shit what he is outraged about. YMMV.
You sure have a lot of shit on offer when you don't give a shit.
ty?
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 03, 2015, 11:31:53 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 11:22:22 AM
I don't think it is much of a 'fight' to tell Marti that I don't give a shit what he is outraged about. YMMV.
For someone who doesn't "give a shit" you are sure making a point that it is a waste of time for others shouldn't either.
Sorry, English plz?
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 11:32:24 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 03, 2015, 11:31:53 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 03, 2015, 11:22:22 AM
I don't think it is much of a 'fight' to tell Marti that I don't give a shit what he is outraged about. YMMV.
For someone who doesn't "give a shit" you are sure making a point that it is a waste of time for others shouldn't either.
Sorry, English plz?
Yeah, sorry. Your point seems to be more that others should not give a shit and you are going all drama queen on people who do.
No, I don't think that was my point.
Yes Martinus - between our 50 states and countless counties and subdivisions there is plenty of foolishness to go around in the good 'ole USA.
Then again, the EU has Hungary.
Glass houses and all that.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 03, 2015, 11:46:13 AM
Then again, the EU has Hungary.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shlomohsherman.com%2Ftoons%2Fuforgot%2Fforgot2.jpg&hash=0781566254976dfd209fc1c4f95180a610a3fa2e)
Yesterday I read about a case which is pretty much the same in the uk. Kid getting charged with making child porn where if he had been a few years see he would have been seen as the victim under revenge porn laws :bleeding: