|
russotto, here's the thing of it.
I don’t want some 30 year old guy making the decision about when statutory rape is and isn’t a victimless crime. Have you ever listened to a child molester speak about their crimes? I have. It twists your mind around. They never think it was a bad thing. They always think that they were lovingly introducing the child into the world of sex, or that the child was instigating it by “flirting” with them [I just threw up in my mouth a little]. They also see the crime as victimless.
It’s just not effective to say to someone “Sometimes sex between a 30 year old and a 14 year old is victimless, and sometimes it isn’t. You go ahead and use your best judgment, and we’ll let a jury referee later.” There has to be an established age of consent, it has to be applied across the board, and it has to be enforced consistently or it isn’t effective.
I have a little bit of skin in this game. One of my good friends was an English teacher at a private school. He had an inappropriate relationship with one of his students – she was 16, he was 25. She was definitely the aggressor, the instigator, the one controlling the situation. But he went to jail for 9 months. He’s an honest guy, and a good guy, but what he did was wrong, and he was justly punished for it.
It doesn’t matter that she looked and acted like a grown women. She wasn’t – legally and morally. There are protected categories under the law, and those categories need to be clearly defined and consistently applied. “No” should always mean “No”. 17 is not 18. You should never have sex with a cloven-hoofed animal.
-sm
|