|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Jun 30, 2011 15:38:40 GMT
That's what she said!
Or rather, that's what she would have said, if she hadn't turned out to be an FBI Agent.
I started playing on a senior football team a couple weeks ago. One of the dudes didn't show up for training last night. It turns out he's been arrested for trying to set up a meeting online with a 14 year old girl for a "sexual encounter."
A 14 year old who turned out to be an undercover FBI Agent.
As someone who now has two daughters I'd just like to say Hnnnnnrrrrrrrrrruurrrgh.
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Jun 30, 2011 15:43:58 GMT
Hound the bugger out of town.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Jun 30, 2011 15:48:50 GMT
Over here doing anything like that comes with a sentence of GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL.
He'll be on at least two or three different felony charges, will be added to "the list" and even if he pleads out and avoids jail time, (I have no idea if that's possible), he'll have to visit every house within a certain radius of his home and inform them that he's a registered offender.
He'll also have to do this if he moves to a new area.
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Jun 30, 2011 16:43:54 GMT
What I am disappointed, that a country that had Lynch mobs by the thousandhas descended to this. :checkit:
Seriously, you just don't know who someone really is when it comes down to it. Did you know him well or this an acquaintence from a new venture?
I remember my shock when I joined a team and 5 games after joining one of teh players went down fro 3 years for burglary and another was put away away 2 months later, for 6 months for GBH. The GBH one didn't really surprise me the person concerned was a nutter, the otherone did as he seemed a decent family man.
They were bad enough but sheesh going for underage school girls is just not on.
|
|
|
Post by floplexter on Jun 30, 2011 20:31:38 GMT
Did I miss Jedi 2 or am I just reeeeallly slow on the uptake?
My memory is fucked to hell.
Oh, yes, and grr, down with this sort of thing, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Jun 30, 2011 20:55:51 GMT
Jedi two (Ashlin Cerys) appeared on March 29 Pops. You may have been fighting snakes in the Amazon. Or ordering books off Amazon. Whichever.
|
|
|
Post by floplexter on Jun 30, 2011 21:28:30 GMT
Ah, yes, I was jungle bound. My catchup reading is wholly dependent on length of thread divided by ennui times the square root of busy-ness over latent laziness and all subtracted from the number of posts coffs has made about limes.
Erm
Well done! Yay and thus yayness upon thee and the yachtsmaiden. Cerys rings a bell. Maybe I did know. So yay! once more.
Ooh, they grow up so fast.
(This links directly with the wifely one going off to collect the Pops at the END of her first year away from home at school. Yea, verily it hath been fucking hard work, emotionally and financially and forsooth were it not lightly traumatic all round. At least the Lex has one more year at primary, while we sell all the furniture to make sure she can get too.)
Not sure why I broke into medieval speak. It feels slightly plagiarisitc since reading Stan Lee on Twitter, but I am fairly sure I started it before he did. Old buffoon.
Him, not me.
Well, both. But him mainly.
Yay thrice.
Pretty sure John Tiko started that one.
|
|
|
Post by Sonic on Jul 1, 2011 1:06:14 GMT
Nice work there Pops And I agree with the sentiment everyone is expressing in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Jul 1, 2011 8:28:59 GMT
I whole-heartedly endorse this product and/or service.
|
|
|
Post by spanky on Jul 1, 2011 8:34:21 GMT
I couldn't even swim when I was 14 and yet there's a girl already working for the FBI at that age?
|
|
|
Post by elth on Jul 1, 2011 10:05:33 GMT
He's just 2,000 years past his time. Were he a Roman, he'd be thought of as having an odd late developer fetish...
Apparently the age of consent in Hawaii is 13.
And of course if she's been 17, it'd be legal in most Western countries.
Still. Thinking of the children and all that. What age is reasonable to expect personal responsibility?
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Jul 1, 2011 10:33:36 GMT
I'm not sure if it is still the case but in Spain 12 was a legal age to marry not so long ago, as long as both sets of parents agreed.
It doesn't mean it's moral or ethical.
In the UK 16 is the legal age of consent, but most of them still have the mentality of children.
Let's face it the law is there to protect people who think they are adults but really aren't, they are at a vulnerable age and the idea of someone older who should know better preying on such children is abhorant.
History doesn't come into it or we'd still be sending 7 year olds up bloody chimmnies to clean them for fooks sake.
I know the equivalent happens in far eastern countries but it doesn't make it right.
|
|
|
Post by floplexter on Jul 1, 2011 10:45:17 GMT
Aye.
And the state of the nation's health these days, most seven year olds wouldn't fit up a chimney.
|
|
|
Post by elth on Jul 1, 2011 11:37:11 GMT
The point is, Coffers, that things like "age of consent" are cultural constructs, not anything to do with morality.
Kids should be making mistakes at 16. Or 14. Builds character. Maybe 16 year olds wouldn't be such morons if they weren't so overprotected.
Preying on a 4 year old is abhorrent. Preying on a 14 year old is just really, really sad.
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Jul 1, 2011 14:02:04 GMT
You and I just don't see eye to eye on this, yes I understand cultural differences but allowing children aged 14 within that culture to make such a big damned mistake is just not on.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Jul 1, 2011 14:18:29 GMT
Kids should be making mistakes at 16. Or 14. Builds character. Maybe 16 year olds wouldn't be such morons if they weren't so overprotected. If by "making mistakes" you mean chatted up by a paedophile, then yeah, I'll just tell my Jack it's OK. And then when he meets this person without his parents knowing about it, gets the fright of his life and then asks me for support, I'll take into account what you've said and say "It's character building, now harden the fook up."
|
|
|
Post by floplexter on Jul 1, 2011 14:43:29 GMT
The world is a very different place when your first wean pops its head into it, elth. When I hear parents-to-be giving it all the "the child will just fit into our lives, we won't change the way we live" I have to try hard not to either a) giggle, b) shake my head sadly or c) both.
Sadly, it always always sounds patronising when someone like me says that to anyone else about to embark on that particular path. You can't not sound patronising when trying to talk parenting.
In fact, straight into the conversational rulebook, talking about other people's children to them leaps above religion, politics and even dressing up like 18th Century weavers for sexual kicks in terms of taboo-ness.
True dat.
|
|
|
Post by elth on Jul 1, 2011 15:32:35 GMT
You and I just don't see eye to eye on this, yes I understand cultural differences but allowing children aged 14 within that culture to make such a big damned mistake is just not on. Sexual behaviour is perfectly normal for 14 year olds. They're mostly well into puberty by that age. Yes, they're going to make mistakes as they grow to understand their own desires, but the fetishisation of sexuality is a huge part of why "Western culture" is so rotten, in my opinion. Kids should be making mistakes at 16. Or 14. Builds character. Maybe 16 year olds wouldn't be such morons if they weren't so overprotected. If by "making mistakes" you mean chatted up by a paedophile, then yeah, I'll just tell my Jack it's OK. And then when he meets this person without his parents knowing about it, gets the fright of his life and then asks me for support, I'll take into account what you've said and say "It's character building, now harden the fook up." Being attracted to 14 year olds isn't paedophilia, Moo. Paedophilies are attracted to pre-pubescent children, not sexually mature ones. I have absolutely no doubt that you'll be far too good a parent for any of your children to ever be tempted by meeting a complete stranger off the internet, let alone one looking for a teen-adult sexual relationship. That's a sign of a seriously dysfunctional child, in my opinion. But that doesn't make 14 year olds shagging wrong, or even a mistake causing long term psychological damage...maybe not a mistake at all, depending on the circumstances of the situation and the parties' involved. The world is a very different place when your first wean pops its head into it, elth. When I hear parents-to-be giving it all the "the child will just fit into our lives, we won't change the way we live" I have to try hard not to either a) giggle, b) shake my head sadly or c) both. Well, that's clearly nonsense. Anyone whose child doesn't utterly change their lives probably isn't a fit parent. I try only to talk in generalisations when discussing the raising of children. Anyone who's a good parent will believe passionately that their way of raising children is the right way; trying to convince them otherwise will at best be ignored and at worst be offensive. But I don't think parents have an exclusive right to discussing the hypotheticals of good parenting, and I certainly don't think parents are the only ones with valid opinions on the morality of teen sexuality. That's a subject for anyone who's been a teen, frankly.
|
|
|
Post by floplexter on Jul 1, 2011 15:56:55 GMT
I wasn't talking about teen sexuality, but hey ho, I think this proves my point wholeheartedly. The raising of kids is a subject more fucked up than religion or politics for polarisation.
And I'm not talking about it, so nyah.
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Jul 1, 2011 16:27:42 GMT
Hmmmm..........
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Jul 1, 2011 16:27:59 GMT
Or should it be :humb:
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Jul 1, 2011 16:37:03 GMT
Eh. My first post wasn't supposed to be a torch and pitchforks thing. More that I was skeeved out that someone who, on first blush, seemed a perfectly nice dude that I would invite to my 4th July barbecue actually turned out to be interested in illegal relationships. If the FBI agent had said she were 13 would he still have gone? What about 12? I have no clue.
Obviously the age of "16" is an arbitrary line made worse by being a line drawn many decades ago when kids were entirely different. It's not a line that's going to fit everyone - some people above 16 will be wholly unready for sexual relations, while some beneath it would be fine. That's the way arbitrary lines work. I didn't wait until I was 16 and that's never done me any harm...
elth mentions Hawaii and I actually quite like their system - the age of consent is 16, but they have a "close enough" leeway built in. 14 and 15 year olds can also legally have sexual relations but only with people who are no more than five years older. (Look! Another arbitrary line!)
Of course this dude's considerably above even that five year limit. He's on our seniors team, so at best his age starts with a 4, but he isn't 4. Or 4-teen. And unfortunately for him in this state the line is drawn... here... and "she" was on the wrong side of it. I presume that when the FBI does this sort of thing they're also very explicit (hoho) about that sort of thing to make sure they have a watertight case, so he's in a bit of bother. I read in the paper that he has been charged with criminal attempt to impair the morals of a minor, criminal attempt to entice a minor and attempted second-degree sexual assault.
Of course, the correct place to have discussion about the value and "correctness" of these lines is with your elected officials and lawmakers, or, say, on internet forums... if it reaches the point where you're stood in front of a judge going "well, my personal opinion is I should be able to put my winky in a 14 year old", that's not going to go well.
|
|
|
Post by elth on Jul 1, 2011 16:45:40 GMT
I have no problem, for what it's worth, with him being prosecuted for what he allegedly did. The law is what it is and whether it's contrary to human nature or not, it's still the law.
I wonder what societies' hangups about inter-generational relationships will be when we're all living into the thousands.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Jul 1, 2011 18:40:49 GMT
Being attracted to 14 year olds isn't paedophilia, Moo. Paedophilies are attracted to pre-pubescent children, not sexually mature ones. Ok, if you're splitting hairs, hebephilia, a word I have had to look up. Still, with the arbitrary lines, as Stu puts it, is it any worse or better for a 40+ year old man to be doing it? If there's no difference then why try and argue about it? I have no problem, for what it's worth, with him being prosecuted for what he allegedly did. The law is what it is and whether it's contrary to human nature or not, it's still the law. Oh, well I'm pleased about that. Pick a response: 1. And that's a great way to make light of it. 2. notsureifserious.jpg
|
|
|
Post by Sonic on Jul 2, 2011 2:39:25 GMT
I'm with Stu and the where did this come from from the first post. And with the rest of that too.
|
|