/b/'s Master Plan. pure genius. those there tags >>. bbe 14 year old boy what with girl of my age wells me she' s into elder guys next with her meeting we i Love You
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (37)
[ 37 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#1 - therichie
Reply +67 123456789123345869
(09/10/2013) [-]
MFW tags
User avatar #2 to #1 - zaiopeperse
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(09/10/2013) [-]
I haven't seen that reaction pic in ages Have a thumb :3
#35 - DarkestLink
Reply +19 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
That's a ******* perfect scenario.
#39 to #35 - kaycie
Reply +14 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
#5 - lolerbot
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#19 - bloodygod
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
I MA, iM A WARRIOR!
I MA, iM A WARRIOR!
User avatar #22 to #19 - dishesaredone
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
what is that comment from
I MA, iM A WARRIOR!
User avatar #24 to #22 - bloodygod
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
The Boondocks
#30 to #19 - guyandface
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#21 to #19 - bloodygod
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#10 - cantankerousotter
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
HFW
User avatar #18 - niggastolemyname
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
dat lightbulb
#37 to #18 - drunkasaurus
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
User avatar #47 to #37 - imadethisforitems
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
This picture will never be relevant again, but I love it.
User avatar #45 - sunice
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
still child pornography on 14yo part
User avatar #51 to #45 - phsycokidx
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Sexting isn't pornography
User avatar #53 to #51 - ronsha
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
It can be if pics are involved. Otherwise its not.
User avatar #55 to #53 - phsycokidx
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
The child pornography law is very flawed..... two 16 year olds could send eachother pictures and both be registered as sex offenders... but, they can legally have sex due to to closeness in age.. this law was created to stop older adults from taking advantage of children.. not locking up teens and ruining their lives... this law is currently being abused
User avatar #56 to #55 - ronsha
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Of course half the laws in the book are ignored (ie. jay walking, no sodomy, underage sex, etc.) not to mention the laws that were created because of highly improbable happenings to stop it from happening again (I reiterate highly improbable)
The main problem is we're following a law book that was written ages ago, and only editing or inserting things into it that benefit the people that do the "editing"
User avatar #29 - Crusader
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Can you get in trouble if the other person claims to be old enough?
Isn't that entrapment?
User avatar #38 to #29 - iveseensomethings
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
it's the fact that the guy, who is usually older than 30, is chatting with a girl (sometimes boy) who says she (or he) is under the age of 18 (sometimes under the age of 15) and the guy goes there for sex which is established in the chat.

I don't care what it's called, putting the face of a sexual predator or a pedo for the world to see is a great idea.
User avatar #40 to #38 - Crusader
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
No, but the cast and crew of To Catch A predator can't be charged because anon claimed to be over 18.
User avatar #41 to #40 - iveseensomethings
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Oh. I thought you were referring to the idea behind the show in general.
User avatar #44 to #29 - dermustang
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
nah. In US law, no matter what age they tell you they are it's still statutory rape (and pedophilia) if they're under the age of consent. The age of consent is actually 16 in most states, but it's 18 in California and NY which is why that's the one you see the most. They can even show you a fake ID saying they're over the legal age and you'll still be charged with statutory rape if anyone reports it. There's been cases of "fishing" where these underage girls go to parties with fake IDs, take some poor bastard home, and then surprise 'em with their real age and threaten to report it if they don't pay up. Luckily they get charged with fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud so they get in big trouble, but the guys often get charged with sex crimes anyway so...

tl;dr No matter what the circumstance is, if the girl is underage, you're a sex offender in the eyes of the law. It's a broke system that we're trying to fix, but that's just how it is.
User avatar #48 to #44 - Crusader
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
No, I'm fairly sure that it's entrapment, because you need two things to be charged guilty.
Guilty mind
Guilty body
Guilty body being you actually have to commit a crime, hence why thinking of murdering someone isn't illegal.
Guilty Mind is knowing what you were doing, hence why there are insanity pleas and mental infirm please for people that are insane and retarded, respectively.
To have the guilty mind you must know you are committing a crime, or know that what you do is illegal, hence why manslaughter is only manslaughter if you can prove that they were doing something to cause the death, often referred to as criminal negligence or (something else, I can't remember at the moment, starts with an "r").
If you are driving drunk, and know you are drunk (because you know drinking and driving is a crime), and hit someone, that's criminal negligence causing death, ie manslaughter
Whereas
If you are driving along the road and there is a person walking down the middle of the road wearing all black and you hit them because you can't see them, that's not manslaughter, because you are do not have a guilty mind, it was just an accident, you can't legally be charged unless it is revealed that there was a problem with your car "blown headlight, etc" that made it so you could not see them and stop in time.
User avatar #49 to #48 - dermustang
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
hitting someone because you can't see them could easily be charged as involuntary manslaughter because even if you didn't mean to hurt anyone and you took all possible precautions, you still killed a person. It's left to the discretion of the jury and DA as far as whether to sentence you and for how long, but it's still possible to be charged.

Guilty body is the main component in criminal cases, guilty mind just determines the severity of the charge. Guilty mind is the biggest difference between Murder and Manslaughter. When it comes to sexual offenses, statutory rape in particular, guilty mind is hardly taken into consideration. Rape is sex under the condition of duress, so guilty mind is heavily implied but the coercion is still a part of guilty body. That's why there's a couple of different degrees, with the more minor ones being for sex while intoxicated (consent can't be given but it wasn't necessarily violent, i.e. no guilty mind) and the major ones for raping someone at gunpoint (guilty mind is definitely there).
I'm in BLET (basic law enforcement training) right now in NC so I'm really only well-versed in those laws. If there's huge differences in our regions, that would explain the different policies. But to the best of my knowledge, statutory rape is nationally punished by hundreds of degrees all mainly based around the difference in age between the two parties. Because of this, guilty mind is rendered basically obsolete. Even if you have full reason and logical support to believe someone is of the legal age, you can still be charged with a sex offense for having intercourse with them if they are underage.

CAN is the big word there, as many consensual cases of this are left unreported for obvious reasons. The biggest cause of reports is pissed-off parents not liking their 15 year old daughter having an 18 year old boyfriend. But even if they had an ID saying they were 18, a minor is a minor and it's an offense to sex anyone under the age of consent
User avatar #50 to #49 - dermustang
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Although like I said before, and like you mentioned right now with mens rea and habeus rea, the person entrapping the offender doesn't always get off scott-free. The offender is still breaking a federal statute and could be arrested and charged, but the underage party could be subject to charges of fraud, conspiracy, possession of illegal documentation, and other offenses based on the situation.

tl;dr The person having sex with an underage party is still a sex offender if they get reported, but the underage party could be liable for criminal offenses of their own if they're trying for entrapment or something else. To Catch A Predator is fine in most cases because the target is voluntarily following clearly underage children around, but some other cases on that show are in a greyer area. It's technically not entrapment, but it's a dick move and it's definitely a fluke in our flawed justice system.
#62 - kevintk
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
[ 37 comments ]
Leave a comment