Watching this, does this show violate entrapment laws?
It is a tiny but reminescent of undercover cops eggin on people to buy dope and then arresting them when they do.
I think if it were any other crime, not only would all the cases be thrown out for entrapment but NBC successfully sued so many times over it's ridiculous. And that's without even going into the cases where outright fraud was shown--earlier chats where the person claims to be over 18 but wants to pretend to be younger that they excised when they prosecuted them, for example.
But, since child rapists (and these weren't even supposed to be children--they were sexually-mature later teens that no one prior to the ultra-moralistic 20th Century would have had a problem with people having sex with) are the Big Ultimate Evil, no one wants to appear to be soft on them or coddling them. So lives were ruined so that NBC could make a buck, and our justice system happily went along with them.
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 07, 2011, 06:39:34 AM
I think if it were any other crime, not only would all the cases be thrown out for entrapment but NBC successfully sued so many times over it's ridiculous. And that's without even going into the cases where outright fraud was shown--earlier chats where the person claims to be over 18 but wants to pretend to be younger that they excised when they prosecuted them, for example.
But, since child rapists (and these weren't even supposed to be children--they were sexually-mature later teens that no one prior to the ultra-moralistic 20th Century would have had a problem with people having sex with) are the Big Ultimate Evil, no one wants to appear to be soft on them or coddling them. So lives were ruined so that NBC could make a buck, and our justice system happily went along with them.
I'm actually curious where the magic numbers of 16 (youngest age at which you may enter into a contract, including marriage, in some states), 18 (youngest age at which you may buy porn or enter into certain other contracts), and 21 (youngest age at which you may buy alcohol in most states) came from. It seems a bit arbitrary, but where the hell did they originate from?
Puritans?
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 07, 2011, 06:39:34 AM
I think if it were any other crime, not only would all the cases be thrown out for entrapment but NBC successfully sued so many times over it's ridiculous. And that's without even going into the cases where outright fraud was shown--earlier chats where the person claims to be over 18 but wants to pretend to be younger that they excised when they prosecuted them, for example.
Shane, I can't even parse this...
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 07, 2011, 06:39:34 AM
I think if it were any other crime, not only would all the cases be thrown out for entrapment but NBC successfully sued so many times over it's ridiculous.
Would another way to word this be: "I think if it were any other crime, not only would all the cases be thrown out for entrapment[,] but NBC [would be] successfully sued so many times over [this, ] it's ridiculous."?
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 07, 2011, 06:39:34 AMBut, since child rapists (and these weren't even supposed to be children--they were sexually-mature later teens that no one prior to the ultra-moralistic 20th Century would have had a problem with people having sex with) are the Big Ultimate Evil, no one wants to appear to be soft on them or coddling them. So lives were ruined so that NBC could make a buck, and our justice system happily went along with them.
Not to mention the number of people who seem to think "Pedophilia" means sex with someone who's 17 years, 364 days old, or some other type of stupid.
That's the worst thing actually.
NOBODY actually considers a person, dating a 17 year old, to be a pedophile. And yet most people don't really care that the justice system has a different opinion and trows innocent people behind bars.
Quote from: VectorM on February 16, 2011, 03:19:57 PM
That's the worst thing actually.
NOBODY actually considers a person, dating a 17 year old, to be a pedophile. And yet most people don't really care that the justice system has a different opinion and trows innocent people behind bars.
It gets even worse.
In Sociology today, we went over taboos (what they are, some examples, etc). (I know this should go in that other Sociological Insanity thread I made, but I suppose it has some relevance here too.)
I brought up murder for an example of a taboo in this society.
My prof's response? To say that, "murder is the taking of a life, so if I defend myself against a mugger who might kill me, by killing him first, that's technically murder".
I went on about how I defined it differently, as an initiation of force that takes one's life.
His response was fucking priceless..."So those guys going over there in Afghanistan killing people by initiating force are murderers?"
I said "maybe" but mostly because of the shock he would ask such an unexpected question, and because it took me a while to figure out he meant the soldiers we sent there.
When I meant, "YES!"
So it seems that people--or at least my professor--knows that war IS murder and he does acknowledge that soldiers ARE murderers. He admits it, that's the repulsive part. Yet he just shrugs it off, as OK. Because, I dunno, 'they're sacrificing for us' or some other masculine bullshit. But you want to know what he did call taboo?
But, the example he went on about?
'Child molestation.' That is, a person over 18 having sex with someone less than 18 years old. The age of the child in his example? 14--that is, sexually mature teen who no-one except people from the uber 'moralistic' 20th century would have a problem with. He even went on about how, "I would never be convinced sex from an adult to a 14 year old is acceptable behavior" himself..."Nothing will ever convince me" Spoken like a true dogmatist.
I mean, sure, even if it's sex with a pre-pubescent against his/her will (which IS wrong via UPB), there are worse things...
Even if what he said is descriptive towards society's attitudes, it only makes it worse. I mean, how on EARTH could this society (The USA) honestly think that things involving sex are worse than fucking murder?
I mean...wtf???
Ask him if it's molestation if the 14-year-old initiates the sex.
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 07, 2011, 06:39:34 AMAnd that's without even going into the cases where outright fraud was shown--earlier chats where the person claims to be over 18 but wants to pretend to be younger that they excised when they prosecuted them, for example.
I'm confused by this.
You mean there were times when the person having his life ruined would sometimes claim to be over 18 but really wasn't, but he was tried as an adult, just because he claimed to be over 18?
No, the person on the other end--the one trying to entrap him--would claim to be over 18 and then want to pretend like she's 15 or something. Then when they caught the "predator" and turned him over they would remove that part of the chat and it would look like he was trying to meet a 15-year-old for sex.
Quote from: MrBogosity on April 16, 2011, 12:01:33 AMNo, the person on the other end--the one trying to entrap him--would claim to be over 18 and then want to pretend like she's 15 or something. Then when they caught the "predator" and turned him over they would remove that part of the chat and it would look like he was trying to meet a 15-year-old for sex.
Seriously? That's pretty low of the them.
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 24, 2011, 06:40:08 AMAsk him if it's molestation if the 14-year-old initiates the sex.
Something worth asking people who support nonsense like "To Catch a Predator":
If you define child molestation as "a person over 18 having sex with someone less than 18 years old," does this mean that if a person 18 years, 0 days old who has sex with a person who's 17 years, 364 days old is a criminal?
Would you use force to stop this from happening, even if there was no force, fraud or duress involved on part of either of the two people about to have sex?
If so, how are you still the good guy here?
Quote from: Virgil0211 on February 07, 2011, 02:00:33 PM
I'm actually curious where the magic numbers of 16 (youngest age at which you may enter into a contract, including marriage, in some states), 18 (youngest age at which you may buy porn or enter into certain other contracts), and 21 (youngest age at which you may buy alcohol in most states) came from. It seems a bit arbitrary, but where the hell did they originate from?
Sorry I didn't see this sooner. The 16-18 range is another by product of the uber puritan 20th century. As late as the 1890s the legally recognized age of consent was typically 12-13. I forget why exactly 18 was finally decided upon. 21 to drink is because of MADD badgering the government.
The source of all our problems: religious and politically motivated bullshitters who like to stick their noses in other people's business.
That's what I think about the press that has spent way too much time covering this Weiner nonsense.
Well, there wasn't that much to cover, was there?
http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/epic-fail-photos-probably-bad-news-why-dont-you-take-one-of-those-seats-youre-always-offering.jpg
You could cut the non-surprise with a knife.
Well, at least this wasn't entrapment?