This is really ignorant

[Stand_watie]

So, ten (10), yes that's ten years in prison, is an appropriate punishment for a 17 year old boy who had his penis in a 15 year old girls mouth?

I'm sorry Honest Abe held the Union together.  I don't want you for my countryman.

No.

And I was born a yankee, so I'd still be your countryman if the south had successfully seceded.

[Perd Hapley]

I'm not on board for ten years.  I don't think I even like two years.  But some form of legal redress would be appropriate. 


And Missouri was a slave state that remained with the Union.   

[RoadKingLarry]

Prime example of why we need to institute public caning. Keep the brats in line and if Mommy or Daddy can't stand the thought of their little angle getting their backside tanned a little then they can step up and take the licks for them.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

you folks are forgetting the same jury, who got to view all the evidence (as opposed to play internet commando with the mcnews) let this lil angel slide for the rape of the girl who was on the video semi concious   so i cry no tears for him. got a 100 bucks saysd hes in the pen or a grave in 10 years or less. likely with a trail of victims behind him

[De Selby]

The problem with this case, and with these laws, is that it's absurd on its face to prosecute an activity that something like 80 percent of the population engages in, and which they are obviously biologically developed to engage in.  People are almost uniformly sexually mature by 16-they have these desires and they act on them (wrongly, in my opinion, for the most part.)

I sympathize with what fistful is saying here-it's tough to be a parent when the law won't support you in enforcing rules for the benefit of the child.

But when the activity is something widely practiced at that age, and when no acceptable punishments are likely to deter the activity, then the crime ends up mostly ignored by law enforcement, who realize they'd have to jail most of every high school in America if they were to apply the law in every known case.  Except when the unpopular and unlucky do it-then they get nailed with these mandatory minimum regimes that were designed to punish a different sort of crime.

Laws that punish something that most of us do practically beg for selective, unfair, and disproportionately harsh punishment.  And this case is a textbook example.

[Stand_watie]

Prime example of why we need to institute public caning. Keep the brats in line and if Mommy or Daddy can't stand the thought of their little angle getting their backside tanned a little then they can step up and take the licks for them.

That's a funny typo in context of the race of the young man under discussion.

[Tuco]

I was happy to sit this one out until...

it's absurd on its face to prosecute an activity that something like 80 percent of the population engages in, and which they are obviously biologically developed to engage in.  People are almost uniformly sexually mature by 16-they have these desires and they act on them (wrongly, in my opinion, for the most part.)

Laws that punish something that most of us do practically beg for selective, unfair, and disproportionately harsh punishment.  And this case is a textbook example.

biologically developed to engage in

...biologically developed...

sigh.

By that logic, tall five year olds shouldn't be stopped from driving cars, 10 year olds should be allowed to work 12 hour shifts and/or be registered for the draft.


Soakers

[De Selby]

I was happy to sit this one out until...

it's absurd on its face to prosecute an activity that something like 80 percent of the population engages in, and which they are obviously biologically developed to engage in.  People are almost uniformly sexually mature by 16-they have these desires and they act on them (wrongly, in my opinion, for the most part.)

Laws that punish something that most of us do practically beg for selective, unfair, and disproportionately harsh punishment.  And this case is a textbook example.

biologically developed to engage in

...biologically developed...

sigh.

By that logic, tall five year olds shouldn't be stopped from driving cars, 10 year olds should be allowed to work 12 hour shifts and/or be registered for the draft.


Soakers

No, that wouldn't be the same logic.  By "biologically developed", I meant-sexually mature, such that they begin to seek out opportunities to mate like all other mammals. 

Imagine if you changed your analogies to say: "By that logic, tall 16 year olds shouldn't be stopped from driving cars, and 17 year olds should be allowed to join the marines with parental consent."

When you put it that way, it does seem a bit silly that a 17 year old gets jailed for ten years for having oral sex, doesn't it?

[roo_ster]

shootingstudent pretty much wrote my position for the general case.

In the specific case, cassandrasdaddy wrote what I think is likeliest.

Tossing out race bombs in this case is a triumph of ignorance of the facts of the case.

[Perd Hapley]

Most of us engage in oral sex in high school?  Do most of us also shoplift while young?  How about drinking under-age and a number of other things?  Most of us drive at illegal speeds and occasionally roll through stop signs.  And don't forget how often people change lanes without signaling. 


What am I missing? 

[oldcop1971]

So, where do you draw the line?  Or is there a line in your world.  If he sticks his penis in your eight year old daughter/granddaughter's mouth, that's ok with you?  The DA is obligated by law to prosecute violations of the law.  The boy was in violation of the law, as it existed at the time.  The GA legislature apparantly thought the law was too strict, as they had changed it after the violation.  RACE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!
 We could point to CA law as being unconstitutional and/or ignorant in certain areas (gun laws, microstamping, etc)  But, we do not slam you as a "fruit or nut" from CA.  We try to have a debate, or discussion.  However, when faced with facts, you seem more inclined to insult and belittle.  While I have spent 35 years defending your right to free speech, I do not find any kinship with you and your prejudice for those of us from the "heart of Dixie"
oc71

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

the lil angel is on mnbc now  hes smart?!  you gotta be kidding me  and moms the same. holy smoke! whoever let them on tv? no wonder they convicted him if he testified. the best line was when he stammered about not taking advantage of anyone and how he thinks the schools need to teach about these laws.  priceless stuff from the guy on video doing the semi concious girl.  io really would love to know how the jury let him skate on that one. i wanna change my bet  hes gonna last 5 years or less.  back in prison or dead

[Paddy]

No crime was committed by these children.  One did not victimize the other. She was not 8 years old, she was 15.  He was not an adult, he was 17. There was parity between them. The crime was committed by the Douglas County police and court system when they conspired to arrest, prosecute and imprison the boy.  That goes beyond ignorant, that is  a malicious abuse of power. 

Should there have been consequences for both of them?  Absolutely, but this doesn't rise to the level of a crime requiring imprisonment.

[Tuco]

No crime was committed by these children. 

Evidently, there was.  No, I cannot quote the section and paragraph of Georgia state law, but there was evidently a law on the books that was broken,  allowing the prosecution.

Should there have been consequences for both of them?  Absolutely, but this doesn't rise to the level of a crime requiring imprisonment.

THAT, I can agree on.

However, shootinstudent's idea that a 17 year old should be allowed to penetrate any moist hole he pleases because he is able to join the marine corps with parental consent still flies in the face of logic.

When you put it that way, it does seem a bit silly that a 17 year old gets jailed for ten years for having oral sex, doesn't it?

This 17 year old has been shown to have a history of sexual misdeeds. i.e. semi conscious video.  I haven't followed that link and am taking that evidence by (type) word of  (screen) mouth.

Yes, he should  be prosecuted for engaging in oral sex with one who is (by the definition of the law) A MINOR AND UNABLE TO CONSENT.  Ten years?  I guess that's where the judges judgement comes into play.  And the Georgian societal norms are not the same as Kaliforina's. 

Example... You can't come to this county and buy a beer on Sunday.  The grocery stores have acetate curtains they pull over the liquor and wine.  HOWEVER, you can go into a restaurant and order a Jack and Coke, or a shot of Jagermeister, or a glass of Redeye, leave the bottle.  Makes no sense to me, and I think it's stupid, but if someone from New York comes here and starts telling us what to do because of what he thinks is right and proper, he will be met with resistance.

Wish I could type fast enough to keep up with this thread....


Soakers.

[Manedwolf]

The same thing just happened here, actually.

17-year-old kid had sex with a 15-year-old girl.

What happened was the girl's father went and kicked the #$%! out of the 17-year-old. 

[Boomhauer]

What happened was the girl's father went and kicked the #$%! out of the 17-year-old

That is what the proper response is...

[De Selby]

Two Cold Soakers,

However, shootinstudent's idea that a 17 year old should be allowed to penetrate any moist hole he pleases because he is able to join the marine corps with parental consent still flies in the face of logic.

Strangely, reading my posts I see no such claim.

What I do see is pointing out that laws which severely penalize common behavior end up being applied sporadically and usually with manifest unfairness.  I don't see how that amounts to saying "all sex between 17 year olds and anyone else is okay." 

You tried to compare this sex act between two teenagers to sex between a teen and an 8 year old; My response was to note that a more appropriate comparison was drawing lines that allow 16 year olds to drive a car and 17 year olds to join the marines.  Somehow they're mature enough to do that, but if someone one year younger performs oral sex, that's a crime that in your opinion could justify imposing a 10 year criminal penalty on the 17 year old recipient?

fistful,

Most of us engage in oral sex in high school?  Do most of us also shoplift while young?  How about drinking under-age and a number of other things?  Most of us drive at illegal speeds and occasionally roll through stop signs.  And don't forget how often people change lanes without signaling. 

This is a very good comparison.  Can you imagine what traffic court would be like if you could get 10 years in prison and have to register in a database of the most vile offenders in your state?  Realizing that everyone speeds, you simply would not see the penalty handed down except in odd and extreme cases. 

Or how about if underage drinking were labelled a felony in every case, and came with a possible ten year sentence? The enforcement would look just like it does now for underage sex-the conduct would go on, and rarely would anyone be charged with a serious crime as a result.  When it happened, there would be national outcry over some kid getting 10 years in prison for doing the same thing that half of his classmates were doing anyway.

Everyone doing something isn't a reason to legalize it, but it is a good reason not to have extreme penalties, especially when it's a practice (sex between people who are sexually mature, but under 18) that most of the human race has been engaging in and approving of for as long as we know.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

you guys really wanna defend this guy? you see his interviews? you wanna defend a guy who videos himself with a semiconcious underage girl? funny that.why?

[De Selby]

you guys really wanna defend this guy? you see his interviews? you wanna defend a guy who videos himself with a semiconcious underage girl? funny that.why?

Maybe for the same reason the Georgia Supreme Court decided that he shouldn't be in jail? Because the facts don't actually support the case for treating what happened as so serious a crime?

[Tuco]

Two Cold Soakers,
You tried to compare this sex act between two teenagers to sex between a teen and an 8 year old

Nope, never did it.  You obviously have mistaken me for someone else. 

But if you want to keep it up, you are the only one so far to advocate that getting head from a fifteen year old is common behavior.

This isn't about oral sex.  It's about oral sex with fifteen year old girls.

I'm trying to understand you, ss.  Are you advocating a sliding scale, based on the age of the recipient?
Or are you insinuating something else here?

edit, grammer, etc...

[De Selby]

Two Cold,

I was referring to this piece of your post to me:

...biologically developed...

sigh.

By that logic, tall five year olds shouldn't be stopped from driving cars, 10 year olds should be allowed to work 12 hour shifts and/or be registered for the draft.

I took that to mean that you were comparing sex between two post-pubescent people to letting a five year old drive a car, or a 10 year old be victimized into harsh working conditions or impressed into service.  You gave examples of victimizing children; sex between two teenagers is not an instance of children being victimized.  I offered the examples of teenagers being given the responsibility to drive and the responsibility to defend their countries to highlight the case-teenagers aren't children in the same sense as a five year old, not even close.  And sexual relations between them aren't victimization in the same way that forcing a 10 year old to serve in the army would be.

As for this:

By the way, you are the only one so far to advocate the getting a little face from a fifteen year old is common behavior.

Recognizing the fact of teenage sexuality does not advocate it-there are plenty of statistics available that demonstrate the fact that it is happening.

I'm trying to understand you, ss.  Are you advocating a sliding scale, based on the age of the recipient?
Or are you insinuating something else here?

I'm advocating not throwing 17 year olds in prison for engaging in a sexual practice that fully half of their peers engage in, and which is not by any sane definition of the phrase "aggravated child molestation."  Throwing someone in prison for a decade and forcing him to register as a sex offender is an appropriate punishment for a sexual predator who victimizes children; a high school football player who has sex with a classmate at a party isn't the same sort of deviant, not even in the same ballpark, is what I am saying.

[Tuco]

Thanks, ss, for the clarification.

Peace, Soakers

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

guy got lucky and skated on the serious charge. karma is a dog though watch and see how his lil fairy tale ends

[De Selby]

Thanks, ss, for the clarification.

Peace, Soakers

Np-and I see where you're coming from about not imposing moral standards from without.  I don't think it's wrong to discourage what this 17 year old did, even with criminal penalties-but to me the level of punishment and condemnation should be more like what's used on minors who drink, and less like what's used to punish adults who victimize children.

[Boomhauer]

you guys really wanna defend this guy? you see his interviews? you wanna defend a guy who videos himself with a semiconcious underage girl? funny that.why?

I don't. Far as I am concerned, this Wilson is a piece of worthless trash. And there are a lot more leaches of all races like him out there.