So...I almost got arrested...

[slackinatthebas]

For example: If I think that the 19 year old should be punished because he's committing an immoral action and you don't, where do we go with that?

just my opinion, but i don't think it's the governments job to impose morals. that's like catholic priests speaking out against pedophilia. there are all sorts of deviant people in the government. they're people too. they go home, have their old lady stomp on their groin with high heels while she chokes them with a clear plastic bag while two horse screw on a loop in the dvd player just like that guy that lives on the corner rubs himself down with vasoline and wears women's lingerie. what people do with themselves or each other behind closed doors is their business as long as they both consent. wich itself imposes all sorts of other dilemmas. do you want to go have your sexual acts notarized to prove consent? morals start to get imposed when religion rears it's ugly head. it's not the governments job to tell me that i can't have sex with a girl that's 16 when i'm 18 just because some super Christianized, holier than thou, over righteous zealot knows we're not married. ugh... free country indeed.


sorry if i offend anyone, and this isn't just directed at you, deluge, just people that actually think it's the governments job to say that two consenting people aren't allowed to do what they want with their bodies to gratificate themselves.

as long as no one gets seriously injured or dies due to what they do for happiness.

to the OP: that sucks. at least you had the security tapes. out of curiosity... are your parking lots recorded as well? like, could the officer acquire the guy that threw it in the lot's liscence plate number and track him down and give him a fine for littering or something?

oh... sorry for the rant... i just have so much pent up rage

 

[Muusers]

You guys are missing hte point. KST works in a pron store! He can hook us all up with free pron!!

I think you meant to say that, right?

 

[Deluge Of Sound]

just my opinion, but i don't think it's the governments job to impose morals. that's like catholic priests speaking out against pedophilia. there are all sorts of deviant people in the government. they're people too. they go home, have their old lady stomp on their groin with high heels while she chokes them with a clear plastic bag while two horse screw on a loop in the dvd player just like that guy that lives on the corner rubs himself down with vasoline and wears women's lingerie. what people do with themselves or each other behind closed doors is their business as long as they both consent. wich itself imposes all sorts of other dilemmas. do you want to go have your sexual acts notarized to prove consent? morals start to get imposed when religion rears it's ugly head. it's not the governments job to tell me that i can't have sex with a girl that's 16 when i'm 18 just because some super Christianized, holier than thou, over righteous zealot knows we're not married. ugh... free country indeed.


sorry if i offend anyone, and this isn't just directed at you, deluge, just people that actually think it's the governments job to say that two consenting people aren't allowed to do what they want with their bodies to gratificate themselves.

as long as no one gets seriously injured or dies due to what they do for happiness.

I agree with you, but the problem arises when the people who do think the local government should reflect morals of the locals that are governed under it. Should the two groups disagree strongly enough to get local legislation passed, it simply becomes a war of attrition, where whichever side can muster 51% of the vote will have its way.

We can't take away their right to vote because they're trying to enforce their morals on us, unfortunately. :scowl:

 

[PSPookie]

I think you meant to say that, right?

It seems you have managed to crack the code

 

[fenderx55]

Our justice system working the wrong way?

That never happens...

 

[Deluge Of Sound]

 

[DudeistMonk]

a cop came into the store carrying a magazine and dragging a 14 year old kid.

Wait so the cop brought the kid into the store...I think he's going to be on the Moms against mamories **** list next.

 

[WickedPissah]

Doesn't everyone know our justice system is fairly jacked?

Edit: Fixed it. Norway, not Noway.

Well, where I come from, it's Naw-way

this thread has HOF potential.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

Yeah, the death penalty has a lot of head-scratching involved with it; how on earth can a prosecutor block DNA evidence and still go to sleep with a clear conscience?

There are two things going on: first a DA is a politician, and politicians do what they need to do to get ahead, period; second, law enforcement makes people cynical. Maybe a suspect didn't commit murder (at least not that murder,) but chances are the suspect is pretty scummy and not the kind of person that many will miss if he is locked up or executed. Finally, once a person is executed, no matter how suspect, the furor dies down, because the person in question has "died down." A prosescutor knows all he has to do is get the person fried, and in a day or two, he can go back to business as usual.

 

[BetterBottomEnd]

it's not the governments job to tell me that i can't have sex with a girl that's 16 when i'm 18 just because some super Christianized, holier than thou, over righteous zealot knows we're not married. ugh... free country indeed.

I by and large agree with you but the point of the law is not to force someone else's morals on you its that someone somewhere decided that a 16 year is not capable of making legally binding decisions such as signing contracts or consenting to sex. They also decided that an 18 year is able to make those decisions and vote and go to war but still can't make responsible decisions about alcohol. It doesn't make much sense.

 

[Eric Perry]

There are two things going on: first a DA is a politician, and politicians do what they need to do to get ahead, period...

True... But defense attorneys are not politicians and are generally much, much scummier.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

True... But defense attorneys are not politicians and are generally much, much scummier.

I guess you can make the argument that lawyers can be scummy, but they are necessary. Lawyers can also be wonderful warriors for principle too.

 

[Eric Perry]

I guess you can make the argument that lawyers can be scummy, but they are necessary. Lawyers can also be wonderful warriors for principle too.

No argument here.

 

[Matt Till]

I have only been in a porn store once, and it was pretty weird. It wasn't my scene, and there was one of those fake "real looking" sex dolls in a glass case with her legs spread and she looked pretty surprised to see me.

I couldn't only hang for a few minutes, so I purchased my penis shaped ice cube tray for my girlfriend from the lady running the porn shop, who had a mustache that I still to this day envy, and was on my way.

Prudish or not, it's lame that Mr. Porn store patron decided to just throw his porn out the window where anyone could get it and cause a situation like this. I'm glad you don't have to go door to door letting your neighbors know what a perv you are for peddling smut to kids.

 

[cheezewiz]

Has anyone actually confirmed that you someone selling porn underage in South Carolina would actually have to register as a sex offender? That seems ludicrous to me. Sex offender laws are for real sex offenders, not someone who got lazy on checking ID's (not that the OP did in this situation....but gladly that one worked out and it was found he did nothing wrong.)

A quick google check of South Carolina law indicates these are the offenses that if you are convicted of, require offender registration.

Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree (paragraph 16-3-652); Criminal sexual conduct in the second degree (paragraph 16-3-653); Criminal sexual conduct with minors, first degree (paragraph 16-3-655 (1)); Criminal sexual conduct with minors, second degree (paragraph 16-3-655(2) and (3)); Engaging a child for sexual performance (paragraph 16-3-810); Producing, directing, or promoting sexual performance by a child (paragraph 16-3-820); or Kidnapping (paragraph 16-3-910)


I guess I'm not familiar with law other than in Ohio, but I don't see one that applies.

 

[slackinatthebas]

I by and large agree with you but the point of the law is not to force someone else's morals on you its that someone somewhere decided that a 16 year is not capable of making legally binding decisions such as signing contracts or consenting to sex. They also decided that an 18 year is able to make those decisions and vote and go to war but still can't make responsible decisions about alcohol. It doesn't make much sense.

very good point indeed. may i point out that the person that decided that is of the moral code that a 16 year old cannot make legally binding decisions? not trying to argue, just pointing it out...

 

[MatticusMania]

very good point indeed. may i point out that the person that decided that is of the moral code that a 16 year old cannot make legally binding decisions? not trying to argue, just pointing it out...

I cannot, for the life of me, make out what you said at all...

so youre pointing out that the person who decided that is of the moral code, 16 year old, yadda, yadda....

/Clarification Fail

 

[Dr. Cheese]

Has anyone actually confirmed that you someone selling porn underage in South Carolina would actually have to register as a sex offender? That seems ludicrous to me. Sex offender laws are for real sex offenders, not someone who got lazy on checking ID's (not that the OP did in this situation....but gladly that one worked out and it was found he did nothing wrong.)

A quick google check of South Carolina law indicates these are the offenses that if you are convicted of, require offender registration.

Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree (paragraph 16-3-652); Criminal sexual conduct in the second degree (paragraph 16-3-653); Criminal sexual conduct with minors, first degree (paragraph 16-3-655 (1)); Criminal sexual conduct with minors, second degree (paragraph 16-3-655(2) and (3)); Engaging a child for sexual performance (paragraph 16-3-810); Producing, directing, or promoting sexual performance by a child (paragraph 16-3-820); or Kidnapping (paragraph 16-3-910)


I guess I'm not familiar with law other than in Ohio, but I don't see one that applies.

Cheez, I have heard of some areas where folks have to register for some pretty lightweight offenses. This country tends to go crazy over anything related to sex.:scowl:

 

[cheezewiz]

Cheez, I have heard of some areas where folks have to register for some pretty lightweight offenses. This country tends to go crazy over anything related to sex.:scowl:

Absolutely Doc, and I think it's ridiculous if it applies to the OP's case.

I personally think sex offender registration is a good thing, but with the understanding that it's for REAL sex offenders. I completely disagree with registering a guy who doesn't check ID's, or a 19 year old boy/girl who has sex with a 17 year old boy/girl, etc.

I think registration was INTENDED for real predators, but as usual, when overzealous legislators get involved, the process got screwed up.

 

[superfunk47]

I hate people in this country sometimes...sex is not a bad thing. It's what has kept us going for thousands of years. Instead of keeping an eye on the real criminals, we spend our time and money pushing the line of what can be prosecuted. :scowl: