Just to be the devil's advocate. The man who was entrapped could have been planning to stage a meeting with this young individual to warn him about the dangers of soliciting sex. Entrapment is the greater of the two evils. Considering the man was in no way forcing or tricking the boy into any sexual acts.
| |
Fuck the Police!
| |
Izen wrote:
You guys have me totally marked. Bravo. Now if you get me any sort of reputable research that states that sex is "emotionally dfficult" and I might start listening to you. Or you can just keep going on about what you've been told since birth because your parents always know what they're talking about. Of course, what does it matter now anyways? You're all just butthurt over someone you don't even know's opinion and think that somehow you're going to change it, but I only listen to reason, not belief. First off, I got all my information from Psychology textbooks and study. Also, they did not state it was "emotionally difficult", but the repercussions depending on the person can be that way. Also, you assume that the term "emotionally difficult" is the same general definition as yours..So your argument is nullified by your arrogance to be correct. Also, "the day you turn you are totally ready to start a family". Thats another assumption made..because its the law does not make it correct, just socially acceptable. Also, Entrapment isnt bad. By definition its "luring" someone into committing a crime. Does not mean they "have" too. If I put 100 dollars out on the streets, the people dont have too take it. If they choose to do so, its because a lack of intelligence. Hell, its a lack of moral development. What is that, stage 1? Dont get caught and its okay? I swear Izen, your stuck on ..Stage 4 I believe? Where its blind acceptance of morals taught - Socially acceptable? | |
Markfoot wrote:
Just to be the devil's advocate. The man who was entrapped could have been planning to stage a meeting with this young individual to warn him about the dangers of soliciting sex. Entrapment is the greater of the two evils. Considering the man was in no way forcing or tricking the boy into any sexual acts. He could have told the boy during the phone conversation, etc. He could have also called the police and handled it in many ways. The police would not have grounds to arrest if he just went to the house, although comments made via phonecall could serve as evidence. | |
Chidori123 wrote:
First off, I got all my information from Psychology textbooks and study. Also, they did not state it was "emotionally difficult", but the repercussions depending on the person can be that way. Also, you assume that the term "emotionally difficult" is the same general definition as yours..So your argument is nullified by your arrogance to be correct. Oh, lol, sorry. Here I am thinking you're trying to re-enforce your own point when you're actually on my side. Things vary from person to person. In the grand scheme of things, that difference is more significant than age. Please stop arguing with me if you don't actually disagree. Also, "the day you turn you are totally ready to start a family". Thats another assumption made..because its the law does not make it correct, just socially acceptable. It's called sarcasm. I know it's hard to hear over the internet, but I figure a man with such an array of psychology textbooks by his side could induce that. Also, Entrapment isnt bad. By definition its "luring" someone into committing a crime. Does not mean they "have" too. If I put 100 dollars out on the streets, the people dont have too take it. If they choose to do so, its because a lack of intelligence. Hell, its a lack of moral development. What is that, stage 1? Dont get caught and its okay? So then, if I coerce a teen or a child into having sex with me, it's not bad. It's their fault. Entrapment is setting up a situation to make someone do something they wouldn't likely do under normal circumstances. Fish don't have to take the bait, so it's okay to yank them out of the water and put hem in a bucket to get killed later. They lack the intelligence to know not to do it, so when they actually do it, they deserve the consequences. Unless you're trying to put forth that it's okay for the police to do it because they have the community's best interest in mind. Lol. And off you go spouting some useless "Stage" bullshit without context to, I dunno, try and make yourself sound smart or something. Pretty cool, guy. I swear Izen, your stuck on ..Stage 4 I believe? Where its blind acceptance of morals taught - Socially acceptable? Totally. That's why I'm saying that it shouldn't be such a deal to accept a sex offer from a 14-year-old boy. Ask anyone. I'm a hardcore morals freak. All in all, here's what you need to learn how to do: 1. When you're arguing with someone, provide facts that are clear and support your point. 2. Stop assuming that you can psychoanalyze people over the internet. You've already failed here. Shouldn't be too hard for someone's who's taken a whole college level psychology course. | |
Chidori123 wrote:
Izen wrote: Entrapment is against the law. It is in no way good. I know somebody who was entrapped before. They left there car somewhere when they where drinking, and went home. After only a few hours sleep, he was told by the police that he had to move his car. He went to his car to explain that he couldn't because he was drunk. But nobody was there, so he sat down in the car to wait, and the police came and arrested him for drunk driving. Fucking bullshit, Pigs are corupt as fuck. | |
I'm just going to say I completly agree with Izen.
| |
Yeah, 2 god damned weeks later. The guy who writes this blog is an asshole anyways.
| |
Florida is one of them. (Age of Consent is 16, that is.)
Actually I don't see really a reason as to why the AoC can't be 16 all around. An idiot at 16, is still going to be an idiot at 18.