Statuatory rape Options

[T00000]

What are you opinions on statuatory rape? Do you think it's a fair law? You are considered a rapist if you are 18 or older, and you have sex with someone under 18. Even if it's your girlfriend or boyfriend, and it was consensual.

[angel-roh]

so your saying that statuatory rape is a guy/girl but have a young boyfriend/girlfriend... umm like do sex with them and they are like younger than u is illegal? like having sex with a younger age than you is illegal? or am i not making any sense, michelle? haha

[T00000]

well umm haha the law is that, if you are 18 or older, you aren't allowed to have sex with anyone under 18. So basically it's a really dumb law that was made to prevent incest and shit. but it's so dumb, because unless your boyfriend and you were born the exact same second, you are committing statuatory rape if you have sex with him and he's 18 or vica versa before your 18th birthday. if that makes sense...

[angel-roh]

omg that law is so stupid!! damn lotta laws are changing these days... hmm i wonder wat`z next scary T_T i think that's messed up... well i guess they did that so the teen pregnancy can reduce... hm but yeah i think that's messed up. wait hmm i guess it's ok.. i guess it's fair...nvm i dont know sometimes i have that feeling that it's not fair and all...but yeah okok the honest answer is that...hmmm i think the law is gay and stupid period.

[ryfitaDF]

how is it going to make a difference? if it's not really rape then why would anyone press charges?

So basically it's a really dumb law that was made to prevent incest

how is it going to stop you from having sex with a family member?

[xHalf nHalf]

i personally think it should be changed cause its not like ppl even care about it...its happening anyway so they might as well?

[T00000]

how is it going to make a difference? if it's not really rape then why would anyone press charges?



how is it going to stop you from having sex with a family member?

because a parent who knows about her kid's sexual relations and doesn't approve of it, or otherwise, can report their kid for being raped, and the "offender" would go to jail. it doesn't just stop incest, it stop child molestation too, it's one of the major anti child molestation laws but it also applies to teens who are sexually involved if one of them is older than 18.

[sadolakced acid]

it's made to stop older people from tricking younger childern into having sex.

won't really matter, if it's both parties agree, it's not likely that the police are going to find out.

[onenonly101]

Yeah sure it's nasty but it ain't none of my business since they bot hagreed to having sex. It is also for parents who do not want there girls dating older men.

[JlIaTMK]

well.... laws tend to be one sided.... it prevents incest.... true.... but i really dont know.... ppl still break the law.... the other day i was watching news on the tv and they talked about how the precentage of underage sex goes up.... and we really dont do anything against it

[ComradeRed]

All victimless crie laws should be abolished because they do more harm than good. They create victms. If my right hand werent injuted id elaborate more in depth which ive done elsehere.

[visualfusion]

well.... laws tend to be one sided.... it prevents incest.... true.... but i really dont know.... ppl still break the law.... the other day i was watching news on the tv and they talked about how the precentage of underage sex goes up.... and we really dont do anything against it

Laws and rules are made to be broken.

[dragyn]

actually they aren't. they're made to be followed.
but the nature of a law/rule is like an unspoken challenge.

I think that law is kind of pointless, but then again, not. they're trying to keep people under 18 from having sex, but instead of punishing the consenting "illegals", they're only punishing the "adults"

and calling it rape.

incredibly stupid, if you ask me.

if they're going to punish people at all, they should punish both of the people involved.

[redsoxbaby87]

this may be a little random but...giving someone a wet willy is considered rape and just thought i would let you all know.

if it was consesual it shouldnt be considered rape.

[onenonly101]

rape1 ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rp)
n.
The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.
The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction.
Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice.


It should be called statutory rape

[melface]

I'm still not understanding this whole 'stops incest' thing... How does it STOP incest? And plus... I think there is also this thing where if you are 16 years old and your parents are OKAY with you having sex with a person over 18 then it's not considered statutory rape.
what if I willingly wanted to have sex with someone that was 19? would it still be called statutory RAPE?.... it just doesn't make sense to me

[sarangxai]

I believe it is the dumbest law in America. If the person agrees to it, then what's the problem? It's like saying someone under the age of 18 doesn't have a brain and can't decide what they want to do with their own body! People should be able to do what they want with their own bodies.

[Spirited Away]

^^ So let say your baby girl of 14 years wants to have sex with her 23 year old boyfriend... You'd let it slide? Or what if that 23 year old boy coerce your child to have sex even though she didn't want to?

I think this law is mainly to deter older, perverted losers, from targeting young girls for their sexual pleasures.

And I'm with omg_melface... what does this law has to do with preventing incest?

[ComradeRed]

Statutory rape laws are wrong. Here is why:

Coercion is inherently wrong. Thus, the purpose of law ought to be to prevent coercion. Law prevents coercion through counter-coercion (the police). But when "law" (or, more appropriately anti-law) is used to coerce non-coercive behavior (such as consensual sex), then the law itself BECOMES the soruce of the coercion, and therefore is unjust.

[Spirited Away]

Statutory rape laws are wrong. Here is why:

Coercion is inherently wrong. Thus, the purpose of law ought to be to prevent coercion. Law prevents coercion through counter-coercion (the police). But when "law" (or, more appropriately anti-law) is used to coerce non-coercive behavior (such as consensual sex), then the law itself BECOMES the soruce of the coercion, and therefore is unjust.

How then, do we prevent it, or any other crime for that matter, if not by the force of law?

[ComradeRed]

You misunderstand the point.

Law is supposed to use coercion to prevent coercion --> this is called defense, and is perfectly fine.

But "victimless crime laws" use coercion to prevent non-coercion --> this is no different from coercion in the first place (AKA crime).

The point is that, "crimes" are really using coercion and fraud -- in other words, hurting someone. "Victimless crimes" hurt no one and/or are consensual -- therefore they are not really crimes. By trying to enforce laws against them, the laws themselves become criminal, because they are the things that are causing harm.

[pikimoo]

Here in Nevada(unsure about other state laws), it is considered statuatory rape if anyone under 18 has sex at all. Wether it's with someone older or younger than 18.

I do think it IS pretty stupid and maybe should be lowered to 15 or 16 and under. Though it probably won't make much of a difference. Many people under the age of 18 have already had sex without being caught.

With REAL consent (no pressuring), it should be fine.

[KaraBaby]

I think that it's wrong for a 30 year old woman/man to be having sex with someone under the age of 18. However my boyfriend will be turning 18 in january. I don't turn 16 until april (the law does allow a 2 year "leeway") So for 3 months that law applies to us.

Stupid.

[Spirited Away]

You misunderstand the point.

I think I still don't understand.

How is it consensual, if a young girl doesn't want to have sex with an older man, but is forced to do it?

I don't see how it's a victimless crime.

[ComradeRed]

If a young girl is FORCED to have sex, that is normal rape -- not statutory rape. But CONSENSUAL sex between an older and younger person is victimless.

[Spirited Away]

If a young girl is FORCED to have sex, that is normal rape -- not statutory rape. But CONSENSUAL sex between an older and younger person is victimless.

Ah, I see your point.

Well, aren't there different level of punishments for rape and statutory rape though, because isn't one more severe than the other?

[sadolakced acid]

statutory rape is to make sure older people don't take advantage of younger people who don't know what thier doing.

it's not to stop the 19 year old and 17 year old from having sex. it's to stop the 30 year old from tricking the 13 year old to consent to sex.

[x hYpErRoSeY x]

well thats dumb

[shawty_redd]

i think it depends on the age of the 2 people. if its a 13 yr old girl with like a 40+ plus man then thats just wrong but if its a 16 yr old with a 18yr old then is not that bad i guess

[aud_chua]

hahah..! that's why having a bf who's 18+ while you're (general) 17 and under is BAD!! you end up becoming "jail bait." i don't even get it cuz like.. kissing is bad already! the cops start looking at you funny and sh!t when they see that the bf looks 20+ and the gf looks like a minor.. oh well...
i think that it really doesn't make sense cuz with the definition of "rape," consensual sex really isn't rape at all! maybe legislators are just being overly paranoid... LIKE ME! lolz..!

[sadolakced acid]

it's considered sexual abuse if someone above 16 is doing it with someone below-
you're teacher can get fined lots of money if they know that someone above 16 and below are doing it and they don't report it.

[Ze world is a Ma...]

that law is stupid but real rape is when you fck someone that doesnt want to have it with you and you force them DURH

[baybietenshi]

the law makes perfect sense to me. some people under the age of 18 arent capable of making decisions for themselves. and hey! why should they be going around having sex? they're still babies and what happens if she gets pregnant? yups. then comes that very controversial issue, abortion. if the guy/girl love the other person, they'd respect that and wait

[ComradeRed]

Who are you to decide who can make decisions for themselves and who can't? SOME people can't make decision for themselves, so take away that right for ALL people?

[Angel_Cece]

that law is dumb

[acidbreeze]

say i'm 20 and my girlfriend is 16.

we do it both voluntarily.

why would she report it to the cops and have me sent to prison?

[ComradeRed]

If you break up, and she wants a way to get back at you...

[sadolakced acid]

or if someone else finds out, and reports it.

[ComradeRed]

Yeah ... with all the new powers of the government, the FBI is probably spying on you when you have sex.

[sadolakced acid]

yea. that must be it. there's no way it could be the parents of the minor finding used condoms in the trashcan.

[Devastation]

What are you opinions on statuatory rape? Do you think it's a fair law? You are considered a rapist if you are 18 or older, and you have sex with someone under 18. Even if it's your girlfriend or boyfriend, and it was consensual.

it is fair to the law. and im by it every way.

[sikdragon]

18 is the age of consent, it is a law made to give police the right to arrest pedophiles.

[sporadic]

I say that if you're in love with some one who's legal, and you're still under 18, that shouldn't matter. Have sex with them, as long as both of you are willing.

Unless it's like a 12 year old and a 30 year old.. That's nasty.

What if you're seventeen and your boyfriend is eighteen? Is that still rape?

[slurp]

i dont really see a point of the law, not like anyone really follows it or do they?

[sporadic]

Nope, but not a lot of people follow the drug rules either..

[sikdragon]

if ur that close in the age of consent then dont get caught, it wont be rape then.

[*[2]Nekked*]

just because it was consensual doesnt make it legal. i disagree with it but thats the way it goes, i guess..

a friend of mine got in a legal issue with his ex girlfriend because she broke his car windows or something, but one of them slipped and commented about how they were having sex and he was 18 while she was 16, and yeah they charged him with statutory rape

the law isnt only meant for kids who get tricked by old men. its also meant to reduce teen pregnancy, etc.

[sikdragon]

its not meant to reduce teen pregnancy, maybe it's working that way but not what it's meant for.

everything is legal until ur caught!!!!

[vivieeeen]

it protects the minor... in some way..
and yea...

everything is legal until you're caught

[emptyminded]

I'm confused. This law doesn't make sense? Or atleast there should be different punishments for the different age levels. If it was 13 to 40 that should be like life or something and if it was 16 to 18 well then it should be a year or two. I can't really coment like I want because I don't really get this law.