- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Teen sends dick pic to 22-year-old woman, now he’s a child pornographer
Posted on 9/14/17 at 10:25 pm to OweO
Posted on 9/14/17 at 10:25 pm to OweO
quote:
That is stupid. So a 17 year old who sends a picture of his dick to a 22 year old woman will be categorized with sick fricks who are actually potential threats to children?
He IS a sick frick who is already a registered sex offender.
2
Posted on 9/14/17 at 10:31 pm to 777Tiger
That's a fricked deal for the lad.
Posted on 9/14/17 at 11:22 pm to Evolved Simian
He is a 17 year old autistic kid.
Something is gravely wrong with the system.
Something is gravely wrong with the system.
Posted on 9/14/17 at 11:22 pm to Twenty 49
quote:
They are, but they don't really see the similarity between dick-pic texting and abortion.
I doubt they are, and the similarity would be punishing the "wrong person." This came up during the Trump v Hillary debates.
I guess in this dick-pic case there really isn't even a theoretical "right person" (contrast abortion clinic/docs/nurses) unless the 22-yo asked for and/or retained/disseminated (huh huh) the pic.
Posted on 9/14/17 at 11:29 pm to HMTVBrian2
quote:
Nice false equivalency
Nice straw man.
There is no fallacy in my point, which is, a legal adult (in my e.g., the doctor) can do something sexual (turn boy into girl or vice versa) to a minor, and it's ok. But a minor (the 17 yo autistic dick-photographer) is guilty of a serious crime for doing something sexual (sending dick pic) to an adult.
And really it's for doing something to himself. So yes in that sense it's a false equivalency, but more an a fortiori argument.
This isn't just a lewd behavior crime, but a child-porn crime, which was designed to protect only minors, and only a minor is being punished here.
I admit, my comparison isn't a perfect mirror image, but this isn't a formal logic exam. Stop being obtuse.
This post was edited on 9/14/17 at 11:39 pm
Posted on 9/14/17 at 11:42 pm to Evolved Simian
Then arrest him for being a sick frick and something legitimate rather than something that is obviously farcical on the face of it. Have some integrity.
Posted on 9/14/17 at 11:42 pm to iPadThai
An 18yo dude that has sex with his 17yo girlfriend is a child predator for life if convicted.
Posted on 9/14/17 at 11:47 pm to McLemore
That is not a straw man, and your argument is not "a fortiori." The connection is tenuous at best. Stop being pretentious.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 12:11 am to iPadThai
This is the sickest thing I've read all day. I hope that prosecutor gets aids. He's the real monster in the story.
Besides, in most of the western world, the age of consent is 14-16. Even in the more puritanical US, it's usually 16-17. To pretend like a 17 yr old is a helpless child is asinine. 17 yr olds have jobs, drive, some are in college, some are emancipated. Just so much stupid.
Besides, in most of the western world, the age of consent is 14-16. Even in the more puritanical US, it's usually 16-17. To pretend like a 17 yr old is a helpless child is asinine. 17 yr olds have jobs, drive, some are in college, some are emancipated. Just so much stupid.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 4:11 am to iPadThai
common sense is lost in the court systems
Posted on 9/15/17 at 6:12 am to OweO
quote:
That is stupid. So a 17 year old who sends a picture of his dick to a 22 year old woman will be categorized with sick fricks who are actually potential threats to children?
Did she have some type of relationship with the kid?
Posted on 9/15/17 at 6:17 am to OysterPoBoy
quote:
I didn't even look at myself in a mirror until I was 18. You can't be too careful nowadays.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 6:33 am to iPadThai
Posted on 9/15/17 at 6:40 am to AbitaFan08
I'm just glad they didn't have the phones everywhere when I was 17.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 7:08 am to Peazey
quote:
That is not a straw man, and your argument is not "a fortiori." The connection is tenuous at best. Stop being pretentious.
It is a straw man to say my "argument," which wasn't really an argument but a vague observation about the upside-down nature of our reality, is a "false equivalency" when I wasn't even claiming or assuming two things were equivalent.
And there is certainly a "how much more so" ironic element to the idea that an adult doctor, who took an oath to do no harm, is not punished for administering "sex-change" drugs to a minor, while a minor is seriously punished for doing something less sexually invasive to a minor, which also happens to be himself. How much more has the doctor done something that SHOULD be punishable?
What is tenuous to one man may strike a chord with another. The only thing pretentious here is throwing out fallacy accusations without being able to back them up.
You can disagree with that it's a big deal, and perhaps it isn't, but it isn't a pretentious, tenuous false equivalency.
This post was edited on 9/15/17 at 7:10 am
Posted on 9/15/17 at 7:11 am to Peazey
quote:
Then arrest him for being a sick frick and something legitimate rather than something that is obviously farcical on the face of it. Have some integrity.
And this, exactly.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News