Grave Injustice, Ten years for consentual sex.
- Thread starter madanthonywayne
- Start date
Bells
Staff member
The law was changed after Wilson's case, due to the ridiculous nature of it. His case was the reason the law was changed. After all, if they are changing the law because injustice was served under it, you would think they would allow it so that Wilson, who was the main reason the law was changed, could at least benefit from it.
And laws have been altered because of one case. This is but one instance of it. And I would think this case is compelling enough to warrant a change.
From what I can see, the appeal was to have his sentence overturned.
He was a kid when he commited his "crime". And yes, I would pardon someone serving time who had commited no crime, or had commited a crime under a law judged so ridiculous it had since been repealed.
I'd be willing to bet that most of the population should be in jail were this "law" in effect throughout the nation. Anyone who had a girlfriend younger than he when he passed that majic threshold into the age of consent should be locked up!
I'd be willing to bet that most of the population should be in jail were this "law" in effect throughout the nation. Anyone who had a girlfriend younger than he when he passed that majic threshold into the age of consent should be locked up!
I havent had a girlfriend. never had been even kissed on a chick.
So its ok. lock them up.
Dude, you're spending too much time on the internet. How old are you? Still in high school I presume? Ask some chicks out, take 'em to a movie, get busy, man. You're not getting any younger.
Im in university, 2nd year. 20 years old. "40 year old virgin" movie...is reality for me.
You've got twenty years to go. You're in college. Go to some parties. A lot of freshman girls are looking to get a little wild, to express their freedom from their parents. You can help them with that. Just use a condom, and stay away from 15 year olds in Georgia!
You dont understand I cannot do that, because my life believes are set on ethics and having premarital sex will ruin my soul and my strength to stay with the woman I choose to marry. I also dont drink and dont smoke because I want to live long...for a specific purpose...but anyways that is my system of ethics I follow. Because I have studied the relationships and the continuation of marriage...and have long concluded that premarital sex (with another woman...who is not a future wife) depletes chances of stable relationship.
In other words...I will take my time...for 5 years and more and see which women have strong will and determination to succeed in life...and I will try than. I will not touch a woman even if she opens to me, because I have not chosen her and she has not chosen me for love (which I define other than sex).
So it strengthens your faith in the justice system? ...that individuals in law enforcement and the judicial system can arbitrarily apply the law to some people, yet let others off without any punishment? You applaud the UNEQUAL application of the law?
It must make you just happy as hell when some police officers give speeding tickets to blacks, yet let whites off without a ticket or even a warning! You're happy that cops can give speeding tickets to ugly people, yet let the pretty blonde woman off with just a wink and a smile? You see nothing wrong with that? And such actions by our justice system strengthens your faith in the system?? Hmm, are you sure about that, James?
Baron Max
Read the above statement carefully, Bells. You're making the claim that he is not a paedophile, yet by the very definition and the law, he IS a paedophile! And worse, your own subsequent statements contradicts your initial claim of innocence!
If it's the law, then it's the law! And if someone violates that law, and they're found guilty in court, then they're guilty! Just your seeming outrage changes nothing.
According to the law in Georgia, the boy was and is a paedophile!
Baron Max
I just don't think it's my place to say. I also don't think it's anyone else's place unless they happen to be residents of Georgia!
I think, perhaps, that there are much larger "injustices" in the world than this one little, dinky deal in Georgia. And I'm sure you'd agree. But should we invade and conquer and force them to conform to OUR ideals of "justice"?
When do we butt out and let other societies determine their own destinies? When do we decide that it ain't none of our business? Would we want others in the world to come here to the USA and tell us what to do and how to do it?
And just who better to do that than that "society"? The residents of Georgia have made those laws and defined the punishments ....if they think they're unjust, then they should change them. Not you or me or anyone else.
That's up to the members of that society.
I'm curious, however, by your cute, little scenario. Let's eliminate your ages-thingie of "nine and seven year olds" and explore a little further. At what age should we tell our kids not to diddle each other? If it was your little girl, would you want someone diddling with her at, say, 12 or 13? What if she liked being diddled with? What if the man diddling her was, say, three years older then her? Five years older?
See? Society creates the laws and rules that they wish to be governed by. A society doesn't wander around the world seeking input on what they should do or not do! The residents of Georgia made that law for a reason ...if the law should no longer apply, then they should change it. But you and I should have no say in it.
Baron Max
But if that's the way the people of the society want it, then how can you call it "fucked up"? Shouldn't the members of a society make the laws and rules that they wish to follow? If not, who should decide for them?
Baron Max
Someone who's not so fucked up.
Frankly if it was my teenage daughter being diddled by a 40/50/60 year old, castration would be too good for him.
I see nothing morally objectionable about consensually engaging in sexual intercourse with a woman after puberty.
When its my daughter I make the rules.
Do you have any children?
Only if I disagree with Big Brother. In this particular case, I don't.