To: Prime Choice
She was three months away from turning sixteen then it woul have been legal. I think ten years for teen sex is a bit harsh.
9 posted on
03/01/2004 1:17:07 PM PST by
cyborg
To: cyborg
She was three months away from turning sixteen then it woul have been legal. I think ten years for teen sex is a bit harsh. I'm sure the father of this girl sees it that way, too. (/sarcasm)
12 posted on
03/01/2004 1:22:01 PM PST by
Prime Choice
(I'm pro-choice. I just think the "choice" should be made *before* having sex.)
To: cyborg
What's this all about??
109 posted on
03/02/2004 8:20:15 AM PST by
KantianBurke
(Principles, not blind loyalty)
To: cyborg
" I think ten years for teen sex is a bit harsh."
You are correct, however, the charge is 'child molestation', a crime that deserves every bit of ten years, if not more. The real point is that mandatory sentencing and zero tolerance are simply societal abdications of responsibility. An 18 yr old male and a 15 yr old female may be consensual, and not the same as an 18 yr old male and a 12 yr old girl, which would be child molestation. It seems now we can't deal with these cases individuality as to do so would surely be racist, or at the least, insensitive or offensive. (note sarcasm in last sentence)
145 posted on
03/02/2004 10:19:40 AM PST by
bk1000
(error 404- failed to get tag line)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson