“.....And what part of victimless did you not comprehend. Pedophilia and rape most certainly have direct, nameable, specifically identifiable victims.”
*****************************************************************
Sorry Orangedog you’ll have to re-read my post—I very clearly qualified what I meant by victimless. I said “victimless—as determined by you—crimes”.
So I, in the same manner you did for yourself, have set you (Orangedog) up as the “high arbiter” of what is, and what is not, a “victimless crime”. So Orangedog, as “high arbiter” you can ordain at will what is and what is not a victimless crime.
I’m happy that you (at least for the time being) do not currently designate pedophilia and STATUTORY rape as victimless crimes.
In any case, we certainly need more folks such as yourself. Folks who proudly proclaim that they’ll disregard the juror’s oath they will take swearing that they will render a true verdict according to the law.
If you can't produce a victim, a living, breathing victim (or corpse, if appropriate) than you have no crime. It's pretty simple, actually.
I’m happy that you (at least for the time being) do not currently designate pedophilia and STATUTORY rape as victimless crimes.
I'm fairly certain you know I didn't say that. If you had a hard time reading, you can scroll up and read it again. If not, well, then you're intentionally misstating the truth (I'm trying really hard to not use the L word here).
In any case, we certainly need more folks such as yourself. Folks who proudly proclaim that they’ll disregard the juror’s oath they will take swearing that they will render a true verdict according to the law.
It is the right of a juror to judge the law as well as the accused. If it wasn't then there is no point in having a jury trial since the judge could just order the jury to return the verdict he wants. One of the reasons we got rid of prohibition is courts were having a hard time finding juries who would convict for violating the laws banning alcohol.