Should a 17yo boy caught getting a bj from his 15yo gf be registered as a sex offender?
Inspired by the rape question - technically she's below the legal age of consent, but seriously? I actually heard of this happening - the kid beat the rap but he could have gone down, big time.
Just part of my repository of useless knowledge. It's true though most states are 16 and 17 with 16 being the most common. Hawaii was 14 until a few years ago O_O
Now there is some federal law about crossing state lines to engage with someone under the age of 18 or something to that effect and pictures or video of anyone under 18 in a sex act or naked sexual pose is illegal under federal law.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at April 20, 2017 6:11 PM MDT
IDK, it's a state issue. Not a power granted by the Constitution. Kind good that it isn't because it makes it more reflective of the times and regional cultures.
18 is a fairly recent and modern age of consent standard. The archaic models would still say 12-13. Ages have gone up, not down..
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at April 20, 2017 7:33 PM MDT
Again, IDK. They are granted the power and and until they are I say it's a bigger can of worms. The Federal government already has it's finger in areas it isn't Constitutionally authorized to be in and it always makes things more problematic when they do that. I honestly don't see much problem with the situation as it is now and honestly think it would go against your favor in fact. It would likely be 18 across the board and with no exemptions. The Federal government just doesn't have a good track record with these things and would likely bring the whole nation under the lobby of the Evangelical Right. I'm veering off topic here. Sorry
Most states have a amount of years the adult must be older than the minor to be statutory rape. Such as a 16yr old minor the adult must be 19 or 20 to be statutory rape. Most police don't publicize it much because some would take advantage of the law.
I disagree. I think it should be 18 in all states with age difference rule to protect the 18 and the 16 or the 17 and the 20. But other than that they should be charged as a sex offender. There is just a world of difference mentally between a 16-17 yr old high schooler and a older adult graduated and in the real world.
While I do think it would be easier if it were uniform. It would be yet another Federal overreach of power that the Constitution does not give them. As far as the horny teens....They should stay with the other horny teens.
My son is 23, his wife is 21. When they first got together, he was 19, she was 17 - in my home State of South Australia, he was legal and she wasn't (consent is 18 here, unless there is one year or less age difference between partners, a 16yo is legal with a 17yo but no older, likewise a 17yo can have an 18 or 16yo partner). Had anyone informed the authorities, he could have been in a lot of trouble - thankfully nobody did. My wife and I knew what was going on, I assume her parents did too, nobody cared - as long as they were being safe and discreet. Kids will be kids. They're parents now, she got pregnant at 20 a couple of months before they were marrried, almost a year after they started living together. My grandson is 3 months old, born the day after his father's 23rd birthday. The law is archaic. 2 years difference isn't great, a girl is usually that much more mature than a boy anyway.
This post was edited by Slartibartfast at April 20, 2017 7:27 PM MDT
I don't believe that anybody under the age of eighteen should be registed as a sex offender. Thanks to stupid teenage impolsive behaviour, if that was the case I'd be doing time Until l was 108 years old. And I agree with you in saying the age of consent should be sixteen, it wouldn't matter if it was sixteen or fourth six, it wouldn't change people's thinking as to wheather they wanted to remain a virgin or not.
This post was edited by BabyDol3o4 at April 20, 2017 7:55 PM MDT
Benedict Arnold 