Call me crazy, but in addition to punitive measures, it might really help to have intelligent sex education for teenagers. That'd be a GREAT start, compared to all this abstinence-only dumbness.
I mean, what's the far harsher outcome? A 18 year old man being locked up for statuary rape? Or a 15 year old with child? Seems like the latter is far, far more of an enduring burden. If policy is going to intervene, I'd rather see it do more about preventing the latter.
Call me crazy, but in addition to punitive measures, it might really help to have intelligent sex education for teenagers. That'd be a GREAT start, compared to all this abstinence-only dumbness.
I mean, what's the far harsher outcome? A 18 year old man being locked up for statuary rape? Or a 15 year old with child? Seems like the latter is far, far more of an enduring burden. If policy is going to intervene, I'd rather see it do more about preventing the latter.
Concentrating on your first suggestion would help combat both problems.
Call me crazy, but in addition to punitive measures, it might really help to have intelligent sex education for teenagers. That'd be a GREAT start, compared to all this abstinence-only dumbness.
I mean, what's the far harsher outcome? A 18 year old man being locked up for statuary rape? Or a 15 year old with child? Seems like the latter is far, far more of an enduring burden. If policy is going to intervene, I'd rather see it do more about preventing the latter.
Sure...I'd take the lesser of two evils too....
But one thing is for sure....either way the CHILD is the loser.
How many of those 16 year old mothers do you think would do it differently if given the chance.
This question is irrelevant to the topic at hand. How many of those mothers would want their respective children's fathers in jail for consensual sex?
I agree with KVH, imposing an exact age of consent is absolutely ludicrous.
For every 100,000 teen-aged mothers there MIGHT be one dude in jail for consensual sex.
Its simply that, the young man that is the focus of this thread, is an example of extremely sympathetic facts. People like Keith hold this up as an example of how unfair the system is and its hard not to agree. What they dont show you, is the hundreds of 30 year old child sex predators who know exactly what they're doing, because then you realize why the law is the way it is in the first place and has been for about 300 years.
How many of those 16 year old mothers do you think would do it differently if given the chance.
This question is irrelevant to the topic at hand. How many of those mothers would want their respective children's fathers in jail for consensual sex?
I agree with KVH, imposing an exact age of consent is absolutely ludicrous.
For every 100,000 teen-aged mothers there MIGHT be one dude in jail for consensual sex.
So how many of those 100,000 teen-aged mothers were impregnated by someone over the age of consent?
Contrary to the common perception that teenage sex and pregnancy typically stem from two teenagers getting caught up in the heat of the moment, new research reveals that many teenage girls are being sexually exploited and impregnated by adult men.
In fact, a study prublished in the American Journal of Public Health [4/1996] found that adult men fathered two-thirds of the infants born to school-aged mothers in California in 1993. On average, these men were 4.2 years older than the senior-high mothers and 6.7 years older than the junior-high mothers.1
Likewise, a review of CA's 1990 vital statistics found that men older than high school age sired 77 percent of all births to high school-aged girls (ages 16-18) and 51 percent of births to junior high school-aged girls (15 and younger).
Men over age 25 fathered twice as many teenage births as did boys under age 18, and men over age 20 fathered five times more births to junior high school-aged girls than did junior high school-aged boys. 2
Call me crazy, but in addition to punitive measures, it might really help to have intelligent sex education for teenagers. That'd be a GREAT start, compared to all this abstinence-only dumbness.
I mean, what's the far harsher outcome? A 18 year old man being locked up for statuary rape? Or a 15 year old with child? Seems like the latter is far, far more of an enduring burden. If policy is going to intervene, I'd rather see it do more about preventing the latter.
Sure...I'd take the lesser of two evils too....
But one thing is for sure....either way the CHILD is the loser.
there needs to be some regulation on the books that makes people think twice about taking advantage of a girl's inexperience and youth. Throwing out the age of consent concept entirely is ridiculous.
there needs to be some regulation on the books that makes people think twice about taking advantage of a girl's inexperience and youth. Throwing out the age of consent concept entirely is ridiculous.
Rock, I agree but can we agree that, perhaps, compulsory sentencing is not such a great look? I think judicial discretion has its place, especially in these cases.
there needs to be some regulation on the books that makes people think twice about taking advantage of a girl's inexperience and youth. Throwing out the age of consent concept entirely is ridiculous.
Rock, I agree but can we agree that, perhaps, compulsory sentencing is not such a great look? I think judicial discretion has its place, especially in these cases.
judicial discretion = corruption and inconsistency.
I think the discretion here should be on the part of the prosecutor, who obviously fucked up, and continues to.
there needs to be some regulation on the books that makes people think twice about taking advantage of a girl's inexperience and youth. Throwing out the age of consent concept entirely is ridiculous.
Rock, I agree but can we agree that, perhaps, compulsory sentencing is not such a great look? I think judicial discretion has its place, especially in these cases.
there needs to be some regulation on the books that makes people think twice about taking advantage of a girl's inexperience and youth. Throwing out the age of consent concept entirely is ridiculous.
Rock, I agree but can we agree that, perhaps, compulsory sentencing is not such a great look? I think judicial discretion has its place, especially in these cases.
Call me crazy, but in addition to punitive measures, it might really help to have intelligent sex education for teenagers. That'd be a GREAT start, compared to all this abstinence-only dumbness.
Read this article about the state of DC's public schools, and then tell me how much you trust the schools in the areas affected most to be trusted with that enormous responsibility.
I wish things were different. Kids today may be more unprepared and uninformed than ever before.
there is always judicial discretion in criminal sentencing, but only to a certain extent. there are criminal guidelines for sentencing and the court has the right to weigh different mitigating and aggravating factors in arriving at a sentence. judges can depart from the guidelines in special circumstances, but their departure will be highly scrutinized.
imo, judicial discretion isn't gonna make that much of a difference when there is a mandatory minimum for statutory rape convictions. that is the reason why i think the law needs to be changed. its archaic, just like so many other things in our society. people will be reading about this case in history books 50 years from now. the chapter will be titled "uncivilized america in the year 2007" and you will also find discussions about "creationism", why people thought gays shouldnt serve in the military and....paris hilton's 45 day jail sentence.
there needs to be some regulation on the books that makes people think twice about taking advantage of a girl's inexperience and youth. Throwing out the age of consent concept entirely is ridiculous.
Rock, I agree but can we agree that, perhaps, compulsory sentencing is not such a great look? I think judicial discretion has its place, especially in these cases.
judicial discretion = corruption and inconsistency.
I think the discretion here should be on the part of the prosecutor, who obviously fucked up, and continues to.
In an ideal world, this would be the case. But you know and I know (I've worked at my firm for nearly 11 years) that allowing wolves to be self-policing equals a lot of fucked-up chickens. Law is what you can get away with, as the adage goes, and this applies to both offenders and counselors. Most attorneys I know personally would rather claim highly favorable judgements or settlements regardless of likelihood of fault and then go on to stake successful careers on the basis of such victories. Is has been my experience that wildly successful yet prudently altruistic lawyers are at a premium in this country. The prosecutor in question is simply one of tens of thousands of attorneys in this country who, following procedure, would do the exact same thing; It's procedure over common sense seven times out of ten.
That said, I support an age of consent with appropriate stipulations (such as Georgia has unfortunately enacted after the fact). You have no idea how many whip-smart-for-their-age teenage girls go weak-kneed over "older men" that only have one thing on their minds. "But daddy - he LOVES me!" should be the stuff of every discerning father's nightmares.
I can't think of anything that prevents women from getting an education and acheiving success more than a teen pregnancy.
Sure, there are stories of amazing kids who get pregnant at 16 and overcome the odds to become successful/happy.
But that is the exception, not the rule.
My goal would be for more women to get equal education and opportunities and I don't see how doing away with an "age of consent" could possibly help reach that goal.
I can't think of anything that prevents women from getting an education and acheiving success more than a teen pregnancy.
Sure, there are stories of amazing kids who get pregnant at 16 and overcome the odds to become successful/happy.
But that is the exception, not the rule.
My goal would be for more women to get equal education and opportunities and I don't see how doing away with an "age of consent" could possibly help reach that goal.
Right. But more importantly, the date the law was revoked would also constitute an official pedophilic holiday.
General abstinence education in schools is not a bad thing if it is part and parcel of a larger, more realistic curriculum.
I'm all for age of consent laws designed to deter adults from preying on underage children. However, if the point of such a law is to deter teenage pregnancy than I'd first like to see some longitudinal studies that compare the rates of teenage pregnancy with the implementation of strict age of consent laws, adjusted for class and race, AND taking into account what the predominant sex educ policy is in the sate and see what the correlation is.
Personally, I wouldn't expect to see age of consent laws having much impact on the rates of teenage pregnancy one way or another. If teens are ignorant enough to have sex underage, they're not likely going to be educated enough realize that this is also an illegal act. Look at the rates of speeding and drunk driving amongst the same population and consider how punitive laws are in addressing those kind of violations.
So I'm not necessarily for abolishing age of consent - I'm more for laws that take into consideration the relative ages of the couple involved. But I'm definitely in favor of more progressive sex ed programs that are realistic rather than purely idealistic. I'm not opposed to general abstinence as PART of a larger curriculum...but abstinence-only has been proven - time and time again - to be utterly worthless. It might have people feel better on a moral level but it has very little impact on the rates of teens engaging in sexual behavior. In the long run, better sex ed (not to mention easier access to contraception) would do far more to lower the rate of teenage pregnancy that harder enforcement of existing age of consent laws.
I'm all for age of consent laws designed to deter adults from preying on underage children. However, if the point of such a law is to deter teenage pregnancy than I'd first like to see some longitudinal studies that compare the rates of teenage pregnancy with the implementation of strict age of consent laws, adjusted for class and race, AND taking into account what the predominant sex educ policy is in the sate and see what the correlation is.
Personally, I wouldn't expect to see age of consent laws having much impact on the rates of teenage pregnancy one way or another. If teens are ignorant enough to have sex underage, they're not likely going to be educated enough realize that this is also an illegal act. Look at the rates of speeding and drunk driving amongst the same population and consider how punitive laws are in addressing those kind of violations.
So I'm not necessarily for abolishing age of consent - I'm more for laws that take into consideration the relative ages of the couple involved. But I'm definitely in favor of more progressive sex ed programs that are realistic rather than purely idealistic. I'm not opposed to general abstinence as PART of a larger curriculum...but abstinence-only has been proven - time and time again - to be utterly worthless. It might have people feel better on a moral level but it has very little impact on the rates of teens engaging in sexual behavior. In the long run, better sex ed (not to mention easier access to contraception) would do far more to lower the rate of teenage pregnancy that harder enforcement of existing age of consent laws.
I agree with you on this. For hardened adults, I don't believe that imprisonment is really as much of a deterrent for those bent on rape and/or pedophilia as much as it is a testament to a society that stands for the punishment of those who willfully ignore their moral laws. The legal implications of certain crimes constitute one good reason among social and moral and personal ramifications not to transgress. For kids, who have some hope left, it's just groins and all. What a mess.
Can you imagine what would happen if a clear, intelligent, and comprehensive nationwide sexual education program was enacted? Hell: what about the worldwide social revolution that would arise if the Catholic church allowed birth control to be anything less than a damnable sin and ceased spreading deliberate misinformation about AIDS?
In the long run, better sex ed (not to mention easier access to contraception) would do far more to lower the rate of teenage pregnancy that harder enforcement of existing age of consent laws.
Yes - compared to places like Britain, Canada, Sweden and France (whose teens are comparably sexually active) the US has the highest teen pregnancy rate and the least emphasis on sex education. Higher rates of STDs as well.
Judge Throws Out Sentence in Teen Sex Case[/b] By BRENDA GOODMAN
ATLANTA, June 11 ??? A Georgia Superior Court judge today ordered the release of Genarlow Wilson, who has served two years of 10-year prison sentence for having consensual oral sex with another teenager at a party when he was 17. Prosecutors said they would appeal the order.
A small group of Mr. Wilson???s supporters gathered and watched in silence here as Judge Thomas H. Wilson???s order arrived, page by tantalizing page, over a fax machine at the Atlanta office of Brenda Joy Bernstein, Mr. Wilson???s attorney. (The judge and the imprisoned man are not related.)
Not until the thirteenth and last page was it clear that the judge had ordered that Mr. Wilson be freed. ???It???s an order of release!??? said Ms. Bernstein, staring at the page for a moment, stunned. Then Ms. Bernstein grabbed the hand of Mr. Wilson???s mother, Juanessa Bennett, and ran toward a bank of reporters and cameras, yelling, ???He???s released!???
Juanessa Bennett, in a voice barely above a whisper, said she felt as if she might faint.
In granting Mr. Wilson???s habeas corpus petition, Judge Wilson wrote that it would be a ???grave miscarriage of justice??? for Mr. Wilson to be kept in prison for the remaining eight years of his sentence.
Comments
I mean, what's the far harsher outcome? A 18 year old man being locked up for statuary rape? Or a 15 year old with child? Seems like the latter is far, far more of an enduring burden. If policy is going to intervene, I'd rather see it do more about preventing the latter.
Concentrating on your first suggestion would help combat both problems.
Sure...I'd take the lesser of two evils too....
But one thing is for sure....either way the CHILD is the loser.
For every 100,000 teen-aged mothers there MIGHT be one dude in jail for consensual sex.
So how many of those 100,000 teen-aged mothers were impregnated by someone over the age of consent?
Its simply that, the young man that is the focus of this thread, is an example of extremely sympathetic facts. People like Keith hold this up as an example of how unfair the system is and its hard not to agree. What they dont show you, is the hundreds of 30 year old child sex predators who know exactly what they're doing, because then you realize why the law is the way it is in the first place and has been for about 300 years.
Contrary to the common perception that teenage sex and pregnancy typically stem from two teenagers getting caught up in the heat of the moment, new research reveals that many teenage girls are being sexually exploited and impregnated by adult men.
In fact, a study prublished in the American Journal of Public Health [4/1996] found that adult men fathered two-thirds of the infants born to school-aged mothers in California in 1993. On average, these men were 4.2 years older than the senior-high mothers and 6.7 years older than the junior-high mothers.1
Likewise, a review of CA's 1990 vital statistics found that men older than high school age sired 77 percent of all births to high school-aged girls (ages 16-18) and 51 percent of births to junior high school-aged girls (15 and younger).
Men over age 25 fathered twice as many teenage births as did boys under age 18, and men over age 20 fathered five times more births to junior high school-aged girls than did junior high school-aged boys. 2
Which child?
Rock, I agree but can we agree that, perhaps, compulsory sentencing is not such a great look? I think judicial discretion has its place, especially in these cases.
judicial discretion = corruption and inconsistency.
I think the discretion here should be on the part of the prosecutor, who obviously fucked up, and continues to.
Agreed
I agree with Oliver on that for sure.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/10/AR2007061001496.html?hpid=topnews
Read this article about the state of DC's public schools, and then tell me how much you trust the schools in the areas affected most to be trusted with that enormous responsibility.
I wish things were different. Kids today may be more unprepared and uninformed than ever before.
imo, judicial discretion isn't gonna make that much of a difference when there is a mandatory minimum for statutory rape convictions. that is the reason why i think the law needs to be changed. its archaic, just like so many other things in our society. people will be reading about this case in history books 50 years from now. the chapter will be titled "uncivilized america in the year 2007" and you will also find discussions about "creationism", why people thought gays shouldnt serve in the military and....paris hilton's 45 day jail sentence.
As a friend from Alabama once told me....
"Most kids are ate up with the dumb ass".
LOL.
P.S.
write your congressperson.
"Dear Congressperson _______"
I want to have sex with your 15 year old grand-daughter.
Sincerely,
Keith."
Dude......you got it ass backwards....
"Dear Congressperson _______"
Your 15 year old grand-daughter wants to have sex with me.
Sincerely,
Keith."
BINGO WE HAVE A WINNER
In an ideal world, this would be the case. But you know and I know (I've worked at my firm for nearly 11 years) that allowing wolves to be self-policing equals a lot of fucked-up chickens. Law is what you can get away with, as the adage goes, and this applies to both offenders and counselors. Most attorneys I know personally would rather claim highly favorable judgements or settlements regardless of likelihood of fault and then go on to stake successful careers on the basis of such victories. Is has been my experience that wildly successful yet prudently altruistic lawyers are at a premium in this country. The prosecutor in question is simply one of tens of thousands of attorneys in this country who, following procedure, would do the exact same thing; It's procedure over common sense seven times out of ten.
That said, I support an age of consent with appropriate stipulations (such as Georgia has unfortunately enacted after the fact). You have no idea how many whip-smart-for-their-age teenage girls go weak-kneed over "older men" that only have one thing on their minds. "But daddy - he LOVES me!" should be the stuff of every discerning father's nightmares.
Sure, there are stories of amazing kids who get pregnant at 16 and overcome the odds to become successful/happy.
But that is the exception, not the rule.
My goal would be for more women to get equal education and opportunities and I don't see how doing away with an "age of consent" could possibly help reach that goal.
Right. But more importantly, the date the law was revoked would also constitute an official pedophilic holiday.
General abstinence education in schools is not a bad thing if it is part and parcel of a larger, more realistic curriculum.
Personally, I wouldn't expect to see age of consent laws having much impact on the rates of teenage pregnancy one way or another. If teens are ignorant enough to have sex underage, they're not likely going to be educated enough realize that this is also an illegal act. Look at the rates of speeding and drunk driving amongst the same population and consider how punitive laws are in addressing those kind of violations.
So I'm not necessarily for abolishing age of consent - I'm more for laws that take into consideration the relative ages of the couple involved. But I'm definitely in favor of more progressive sex ed programs that are realistic rather than purely idealistic. I'm not opposed to general abstinence as PART of a larger curriculum...but abstinence-only has been proven - time and time again - to be utterly worthless. It might have people feel better on a moral level but it has very little impact on the rates of teens engaging in sexual behavior. In the long run, better sex ed (not to mention easier access to contraception) would do far more to lower the rate of teenage pregnancy that harder enforcement of existing age of consent laws.
I agree with you on this. For hardened adults, I don't believe that imprisonment is really as much of a deterrent for those bent on rape and/or pedophilia as much as it is a testament to a society that stands for the punishment of those who willfully ignore their moral laws. The legal implications of certain crimes constitute one good reason among social and moral and personal ramifications not to transgress. For kids, who have some hope left, it's just groins and all. What a mess.
Can you imagine what would happen if a clear, intelligent, and comprehensive nationwide sexual education program was enacted? Hell: what about the worldwide social revolution that would arise if the Catholic church allowed birth control to be anything less than a damnable sin and ceased spreading deliberate misinformation about AIDS?
Yes - compared to places like Britain, Canada, Sweden and France (whose teens are comparably sexually active) the US has the highest teen pregnancy rate and the least emphasis on sex education. Higher rates of STDs as well.
The New York Times
Judge Throws Out Sentence in Teen Sex Case[/b]
By BRENDA GOODMAN
ATLANTA, June 11 ??? A Georgia Superior Court judge today ordered the release of Genarlow Wilson, who has served two years of 10-year prison sentence for having consensual oral sex with another teenager at a party when he was 17. Prosecutors said they would appeal the order.
A small group of Mr. Wilson???s supporters gathered and watched in silence here as Judge Thomas H. Wilson???s order arrived, page by tantalizing page, over a fax machine at the Atlanta office of Brenda Joy Bernstein, Mr. Wilson???s attorney. (The judge and the imprisoned man are not related.)
Not until the thirteenth and last page was it clear that the judge had ordered that Mr. Wilson be freed. ???It???s an order of release!??? said Ms. Bernstein, staring at the page for a moment, stunned. Then Ms. Bernstein grabbed the hand of Mr. Wilson???s mother, Juanessa Bennett, and ran toward a bank of reporters and cameras, yelling, ???He???s released!???
Juanessa Bennett, in a voice barely above a whisper, said she felt as if she might faint.
In granting Mr. Wilson???s habeas corpus petition, Judge Wilson wrote that it would be a ???grave miscarriage of justice??? for Mr. Wilson to be kept in prison for the remaining eight years of his sentence.
(read more)