This is a classic example of well intentioned laws getting in the way of common sense.

And an example of how a definition in one state may not square up with a definition in another state, but once the label is set...it goes across state boundaries with all the baggage attached.

The only real thing that happened is a young man's life is ruined due to a legal definition that makes no sense at all.

This is what happens when the Nazi end of the Left meet the Fascist corner of the Christianists. Pure evil.

oh man, we reached Goodwin's Law already?

really this is one of those rare cases IMHO where we actually need a national age of consent law, so this crap doesn't happen. This is also a very good reason to trust but verify what somebody says when they say they are of age. A college friend almost went down this road when we were freshman... The girl was amazingly hot, and mature, and had a thing for college guys. I got that jailbait vibe and fortunately my buddy trusted the only sober guy in the room. 2 months later a different guy was arrested for bedding her, since she was 14. We found out a couple of guys doodged the bullet... she had quite the reputation, and didn't care about that at all.

One of the easiest (and most wounding) complaints about liberals is that they hate everything government does and want a whole lot more of it. Clumsy sanctions and on the sexuality of young people is a perfect example,and yes, that includes sex ed...

...But we you understand why people are so tempted to try it.

(The first less-than-gorgeous pic we've seen of any of those kids, and she's supposed to be glowing. And he's got a look on his face like a friend just called him on the cell to say that New York weeklies think he coulda gone out with Miley Cyrus or somebody.)

The first link gave me an ACCESS DENIED!!!! WARNING THIS SITE IS DEEMED INAPPROPRIATE FOR BUSINESS!!

Damn, so it must be pretty good. What is it?

The second link was fine. I sent it to my 18 year old sister. That boy is fine. I'd say he's too young but in a few years age won't matter as much ;-)

But to the important stuff: DA's who push these charges and misguided agendas that so flagrantly deny thought and common sense should not have jobs where they make important decisions that affect peoples' lives.

They should be ditch diggers. Making $5/hour under the table. Easily replaceable by the next guy tragically desperate to make a buck.

Gretchen -

You're missing the point.

This kind of DA gets off on destroying other guy's lives.

*stands and applauds Gretchen*

Couldn't have said it better myself. And yikes! that boy is hot! Reminds me of my 18-year-old-but-looks 24 nephew. The hotness is killin' me! o_O

And I tell ya what, that other boy Ricky could've easliy been one of my high school boyfriends. Or any one of my friends' boyfriends. We were all under age (and probably stoned). What's that saying? "Young, dumb and full of cum."? Yeah, we were that.

In other teen news, daughter #1 has been nominated to attend the National Youth Leadership Forum on Medicine next summer in Houston! I'm blown away; apparently, it's quite an honor. I'm going to go investigate the website now. (I sure hope I can afford this, it'd be a tragedy for her to have to miss it on account of finances.) The letter said they (the NYLF) would be sending more info soon. Egads! My baby is growing up! o_O

Classically Liberal's write up is excellent except for this quip blaming "religious" people for the problem, which is total BS:

"But those same [RELIGIOUS] supporters, in various states, put laws on the books which would mandate the young man's arrest, imprisonment and his joining the sex registry database, if this had happened there."

The laws that would make the children described criminals are wrong and need to be changed, like, yesterday. But trying to lay the blame for this mess at the feet of "religous" people is a crock. It was the left that, to their great credit, pushed hard for tough laws against sex abuse of children. It was actors on both sides of the political spectrum, as well as certain cowardly and incompetent agents of the state, that to their great discredit, produced the abuses described in Amy's excellent post here. "Religious" people had no more nor no less to do with the problem than any other segment of society.

So anyway, last night I was working with this lovely Indian-born woman who was raised in Europe and whose family is now happily scattered across the States. Big project, first of 9 nine days in a row; at the end of the session, she says "Oy vey...."

But that's beside the point. The point is this----

People are always trying to fuck with other people's sexual attitudes, an impulse felt by the left no less often than the right. The woman I worked with talked about how annoyed she is when she sees Indian women wearing heavy scarves (etc.) in the gymnasia of Los Angeles. (The LA megapolis has an Indian neighborhood, Artesia. Who knew?)

How would you score this one (per Drudge)?

Answer carefully.... Pretend for a moment that you're a hillbilly from the middle east.

13? Back in Waltucky, MI in the 70's that would have been considered a late bloomer.

I recently heard an even worse story. A boy in New England had sex with a 15 year old when he was 18 or 19. The girl's parents raised a fuss, he got probation but had to register as a sex offender. Then some vigilante saw him on a sex offender registry and murdered him.

We need a national standard and a reasonable age gap provision.

It seems a cop out to lay this on religion. Look at Nifong. No religion involved, just a DA using the system to advance his career.

Poeple keep electing legislators who think the answer to every problem is a law or some sort of government action. Then they whine at the results they don't like.

Yes, it is a stupid law. We voted for the people who passed the stupid law. What does that say about us? Evidently a lot of people want to be told how to live their lives. I'd like to opt out, thank you.

Well, no matter where you are, there's a stupid law - and it's waiting to catch you in its absurdity.

In CA, for instance, plastic knives are banned. CA is also famous for some ridiculous gun laws and the shenanigans around those.

People always imagine that laws are for other people. Huh.

MarkD - I'm right with you. Well said.

Mike NiFong of the Duke LaCross case is alive and well in every county, state and federal courthouse in this country. It's called "vindictive prosecution," and it's legal.

The big problem is that prosecutors are more concerned with padding their record with sex offender convictions, rather than fairness and justice.
Amazing that Wisconsin convicted an (8), EIGHT year old of sex offences. See the bottom of this page:

http://cfcoklahoma.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=137%3A-sex-offender-restrictions-could-backfire&Itemid=1

Also, read this very good article called, "The Crux of the Problem." Here:

http://cfcoklahoma.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=128%3Athe-crux-of-the-problem-are-he-law-makers-who-pass-laws-without-expert-advise&Itemid=1

If these links don't work, just copy and paste.

but I would add that, in addition to all the people who want to be told how to live their lives, there are the people who want to tell others how to live theirs (the two characteristics often overlap).
Either group is easily identifiable by the outrage they express toward those who want neither.

That's terrible. I know bartenders, having been one, have a defense against serving minors if they had reasonable belief the minor was not a minor. Seems like there'd be something like that here. Apparently not. I have posted in favor of the laws on a previous thread, and I still think there's something not quite right about an 18 year old and a girl not through puberty yet. But there does need to be some case by case judgement involved. And, much as I'm against large-scale federal nannying, I think the age of majority and age of consent need to be standard nation-wide.

I posted this on my website. Mary, the mother of Ricky is a very close friend of mine. Mary is also COO of oklahomadotorg

great post Amy... the reason I have always come back to your discussions is you present topics often glossed over by traditional media outlets.

Failed-life tragedy... and a great screenplay! Would there have been a Raging Bull if Jake LaMotta hadn't gotten nailed corrupting the morals of underage girls? A perfect world is art's tomb.

>> Reminds me of my 18-year-old-but-looks 24 nephew. The hotness is killin' me!

Eww.... All I can think of now is my Aunt Norma in a nighty.

California's gun laws are pretty lame, but when I was in the gun shop last weekend putting in an order for my Disneyland-approved flash suppressor-less M1A I saw the guy at the counter next to me actually fail the HSC, so maybe it's a wash.

Thanks, Eric, I resemble that remark! o_O

"is also a very good reason to trust but verify what somebody says when they say they are of age."

Verifiying is no defense if the ID turns out to be false. it has happened.

Another aspect of this madenss is the gender disparity in prosecution and sentencing. If two under-aged people have sex, if is usually only the male who they go after.

Say - there's another strange idea here for the mocking: that a magic switch gets thrown at the age of (18, 21, fill in blank here).

Some of this happens because the layman has no idea what "rights" are, any more than s/he does about what "porn" is other than some level of excitement and shame they feel at one time. And of course they want others to be responsible - not them.

What's worse? Joe, 18, and Susie, 16, in the woods in his car, or Joe, 55, at home with Susie's sister Norma, 18?

Thinking about jr. high / high school, it was mostly the girls who were predatory towards the guys! I was pounced on my first time. Second time as well. Come to think of it...

>>Some of this happens because the layman has no idea what "rights" are, any more than s/he does about what "porn" is other than some level of excitement and shame they feel at one time.

I'm sure you're right on both counts.

Still, and only anecdotally, I've been genuinely surprised at just how clued up teenage boys can be about age(s) of consent.

They may not like the laws, but they seem to know perfectly well what's on the books.

>>They may not like the laws, but they seem to know perfectly well what's on the books.

Considering what the article is about, they should be aware. Knowing that you can be accused of molestation, rape, etc., I'd take the steps to protect myself as well nowadays, if I was that age.

I would likely recommend any young man get a signed statement from the girl attesting to her age. Then it can't be a he said/she said situation, which he will lose.

This may seem extreme, but in todays climate of manadatory arrest/prosecution for rape, and the hysteria over paedophilia, I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Sadly all too common these days and its hurting our society far more than helping it. Shades of the Genarlow Wilson case in GA.

Boys should be aware of it in this day and age. Any parent, (especially their father) is not doing their parental duty by not informing them of the laws and consequences of sex in this day and age.

There was a big case here last year in Oregon, in McMinnville where the local DA wanted to put 3 boys in juvie/jail and put them on the sex offender list because they spanked a bunch of girls in their middle school. It was some misguided school prank for the day and many girls spanked right back (as kids walked down the hall). After months and months of threats and court dates they boys got lucky with only an apology to the girls (one cried she'd been traumatized) they spanked er "assaulted" and had to pay $500 or so restitution for counseling and take sensitivity training classes. The girls who spanked boys? Nuthin. No charges.

Then there is Fitzroy Barnaby in Illinois who got on the sex offender list because he fit the law's defintion of a "potential" sex offender. His crime was restraining a 14 year girl to yell at her (he grabbed her arm for say 30 seconds or less, dumb but not criminal IMHO) for almost killing herself by walking in front of his car as she listened to her ipod. Appeals court even held up the judgement. He'd have been better off legally if he'd hit the girl instead of swerving away.

This is why you have many men staying the hell away from kids, even sometimes ones they're related to.

I too have a problem with CL's line here:
"But those same supporters, in various states, put laws on the books which would mandate the young man's arrest, imprisonment and his joining the sex registry database, if this had happened there."

Bullshit. It goes both ways. Its easy feel good legislation for either side of the aisle to get them re-elected. Its why I've grown to hate John Walsh of "Americas Most Wanted" fame and the main reason I think Bill O'reily is an idiot (he's a major supporter of megan's law). Just the same as I hate Bill Clinton for being a sexual harrasser who got a free pass from his supporters (NOW etc) who'd fry anyone not sharing their political beliefs doing the same thing he did.

Sio....By and large, I agree with you. However, Walsh and O'Reilly both want mandatory sentence lengths for child molesters, not necessarily with the mandatory prosecution without thinking and applying common sense. Yes, it's fraught with possible dangers, but we also need to start making DA's and prosecutors in the DA's office accountable for not thinking before they blindly go after people for something. Simply because they can, doesn't mean they should. This kid should never even have shown up on the docket. The DA should have thrown it in the circular file as soon as it hit his desk.

As long as they insist on teaching sex-ed in middle school, then they have to get rid of the statutory rape laws. If you're going to teach a 13 year old how to install a condom, you can't go arresting them for actually USING the damn things.

How about we make the law specific enough to cover its original intent, eh? Because an 18 year old and a 17 year old doing the horizontal bone dance isn't the same as a 48 year old and a 17 year old doing it. Nor is it the same as an 18 year old and a 7 year old.

But asking for sense from lawmakers is like asking for blood from stones. You can ask until the heat death of the universe, but none will be forthcoming.

"I am, of course, totally against pedophiles or, say, 19-year-olds who knowingly go after 13-year-olds. But, there are 13-year-olds who look older, especially those who dip into the makeup and slutgear. If we turn a 15- or 16-year-old who had sex with that kid, believing him or her to be of age, into a criminal -- this is likely to turn a potentially productive citizen into some failed-life tragedy, right from the start. Hurts them, hurts society. And it's just wrong".

Well-said, Amy. I applaud you for adressing this topic.

The problem is that we have all this appropriate outrage against pedophiles, yet a young man who thinks he is with a girl around his age doesn't qualify as a sex offender...or shouldn't under any law imaginable.

And, even more unfortunately, this skews all the statistics regarding sex offenders, making it seem like they're much more common than they are, which is increasing the parental concern and outrage, resulting in even more stupid laws.

To me, a true pedophile is someone who lusts after an obvious, sexually-undeveloped CHILD. Once a girl looks like a woman, any guy could potentialy lust after her, so that doesn't make him a pedophile. I mean, he's not likely to go after your 3 yr old! Therefore, it's just crazy to make him register as a sex offender in the same way a true pedophile should. We need another designation for this sort of situation.

> But, there are 13-year-olds who
> look older, especially those
> who dip into the makeup and
> slutgear.

I don't care how true that is. Don't care, don't care, don't care. It's just a creepy thing to read, because it's been said by gazillions of twisted fuckers over the years who are trying to make rhetorical room for inappropriate sexual interest.

"But she *looked* older...."

> I've been genuinely surprised
> at just how clued up teenage
> boys can be about age(s) of
> consent.

It's more about cataloging the relevant metrics than any eagerness to test boundaries. I'm not sure friends and I ever had a sincere conversation about the xx-xx-xx parameters of a woman's figure after our sixteenth birthdays. These are just the numbers that people consider when they talk about sex, and young guys need all the topics they can get.

> I would likely recommend any
> young man get a signed statement
> from the girl attesting to her
> age

What's with all this proceduralism? It's not like high school sophomores are going on sales trip in distant cities where they're meeting exotic women in the fern bars of the downtown Hyatt, right? I'd bet most teenagers actually know the first people they fuck. Often, they're from the neighborhood. Often, they have a chance to talk first.

If during the first, twentieth or three-hundredth meeting with teenage girls I knew in the seventies, a boy had presented paperwork for signatures, fucking would not have resulted. "Elton John's new album sucks, duzzenit?"

>>It's more about cataloging the relevant metrics than any eagerness to test boundaries.

That's it exactly.

(The lure definitely comes from boning up on the metrics. Self-impressed bedroom lawyers the lot of them!)

The middle teen boy years; self-impressed in the bedroom, indeed

My gut says they are pulling an "Al Capone Tax Evasion" type thing.

is also a very good reason to trust but verify what somebody says when they say they are of age.

Yeah, I know that was the first thing I was thinking as a teen trying to get laid. Oh wait, it wasn't. Because it would never have occurred to me in a million years that I might go to jail for fucking another teen - or someone who sure looks like another teen.

This does make me wonder about the legality of the sex I had at virginity's loss. The girl I lost my virginity to, was only twelve. We went to church and school together. After being harranged about how evile sex was (at least out of wedlock), we decided to find out and actually had the sex. It was kind of fun, but in hindsight really scary - she could have easily gotten preggers.

So yeah, I lost my virginity to a twelve year old. Of course it was the day after my thirteenth birthday party. Now I have to wonder if it was a crime.

>>We went to church and school together.

Maybe atheists do it later?

Jody -

Honestly, I don't think it would have happened, were it not for the fact that we had the eviles of sex shoved down our throats at church. I imagine that given access, we probably would have tried smoking pot too - that was the other major evile we were warned about.

That said, atheists start much earlier than that. They eat babies too, didn't you know?

I suggest the "reasonable person" standard that's already widely used in the law. If a party to sex reasonably believes the other party is of age — no crime.

> But, there are 13-year-olds who
> look older, especially those
> who dip into the makeup and
> slutgear.

I don't care how true that is. Don't care, don't care, don't care. It's just a creepy thing to read, because it's been said by gazillions of twisted fuckers over the years who are trying to make rhetorical room for inappropriate sexual interest.

There is a difference between a 16-18 year old attending a high school football game and hooking up with a supposedly 16 year old chick and the 20+ year old trolling the local teeny-bopper hangout.

Also, while not trying to blame the victim, a girl dressing up and putting herself out as 16 when she's 13 or 14, shows a lack of awareness, but what is a 17 old going to do, ask for a birth certificate?

> But, there are 13-year-olds who
> look older, especially those
> who dip into the makeup and
> slutgear.
I don't care how true that is. Don't care, don't care, don't care. -Crid.

I agree, but imagine how the scenario looks: she's a cutie who claims to be 16, and looks it. Maybe even her friends do as well. How're you gonna figure it out? My 14 yr old has girls in his class that look like college freshmen, and act like it. It isn't the age, but the age you think they are that will make you go through. Most college guys realize they shouldn't look at high schoolers for this reason, there's just way too much downside.

Yeah, DuWayne I hear you about what you are really thinkin' when you are a late teen and see some cute young thing. It is usally stifled when somebody you know gets arrested for it. Suddenly drunk college women seem more fun... Though they can be dangerous too.

I get what you're saying Wolf but I just don't trust them anymore to make good laws give the current climate on the issue. Their hearts are in the right place but their methods aren't. I can still listen and agree with O'reily somewhat on the issue but Walsh to me just operates on pure emotion from his own tragic situation without looking at the logical side of things.

Another reason that shows the left's guilt in promoting these insane laws is how they treat male stat rape victims and female ones. When child rights/women's rights groups and government offices go after boys and/or men who were raped for child support of the product of that criminal action, it's always stated as whats best for the minor child.

Which minor child though? The newborn or the one who was raped by an adult? You're making a rape victim pay their rapist for the resulting kid... some equality there. See Alexander Shire in MI for one example of that horror show. Think one case hit the newswires from Kansas a week or two ago too.

> How're you gonna figure
> it out?

> what is a 17 old
> going to do

You'll talk to her, maybe get to know her friends. Find out what her course load is like at school, or why (if she's young enough for there to be any doubt) she doesn't have one. How come you haven't seen her around here before? Does she spend summers with the grandparents in upstate New York/Iowa/Wyoming? Does she get along with the folks and the siblings? How long has she lived in this town, and how long has she known this friend of hers who's sitting on the other side of you? And BTW, are you a psychotic fucking ax-killer?

That sort of thing.

I've never met the fourteen year old who can convincingly convey college enrollment, though I've never searched for her. Actual freshman coeds were plenty childish enough, back in the day.

Hi every body posting on here my name is Ricky im the boy in the story I just want to say we got to put a stop to kids getting in trouble for teen sex to get more of my story you can go to http://www.rickyslife.com and i also built my own site that you can visit at http://www.cfciowa.org on my site you find articles on other boys that are getting in trouble becuase our government is throwing our lives away and i also got articles on a wide range of things my mom and two other ladies that there boys got in trouble for teen sex run there own radio show you can visit there site at http://www.talkingpointsradio.com it is a very good show you guys can visit there site to find out more i also want to say we all have to come to gather to fight these laws on teen sex for the simple fact that if we dont the government is going to keep throwing young lives away and we got to put a stop to them doing what they are doing
Thank you
Ricky

Aggreed Sio.... It's all hysteria now when we talk of these types of issues. So the lawmakers are injecting hysteria into the law, when the law should be dispassionate. They have lost sight of the fact that the purpose of law is justice, and that doesn't necessarily mean punishment.

Justice is false accusers getting slapped with the same sentence as the falsely accused would receive if convicted. Justice and equality really amount to the same thing. And since a majority of laws passed in the rape/divorce/violence areas are so heavily biased toward women, true justice, just like equality, can't happen.

I feel for John Walsh and what happened to his son, but the lawmakers need to keep things level. Honestly, if they don't, we could see the tea being dumped in the harbor again. And it would be a sad thing, as this country really is the best in the world.

Every case will be different. That's why we have courts. A reasonable person standard is the right way to go. Would a resonable person have believed the other party was of age?

No mens rea — no crime.

I've never met the fourteen year old who can convincingly convey college enrollment (Crid)

Ever known a fourteen year old who can appear sixteen or seventeen? That's enough to get a seventeen year old up for rape.

The proper way to handle such ambiguous possibilities is a reasonable person standard, just like we have for assault and other crimes.

Also, the younger party party who perpetrates the fraud is at fault. They have used deception to tempt an unwitting person into a potentially criminal act. Let's not forget who's causing the problem: the liar.

> Let's not forget who's
> causing the problem:
> the liar.

The one who's causing the problem is the older guy (at whatever interval) who can't keep his pants zipped... Teenagers who can't handle fucking without risking such insane legal consequences are by definition too young to fuck. Consider that in the scenario Amy first describes, the girl was sharing details of sexual intimacy with her partner's mother, which hardly conveys mastery of womanly powers. And she shortly became a runaway besides.

Laws designed to protect children have apparently done some damage. Perhaps policy redress is in order. I'm not sure a national standard is the best way to go... It may well be that the maturity of teenagers varies as much with geography as anything else.

Nonetheless, when you start calling for broader "reasonable person" standards, you're playing with fire.

And it's tragically disheartening to read a bunch of older guys saying "I saw an xx-year-old who you'd *swear* was in her thirties! What, you've never seen a girl dressed like that? Well by golly, *I* sure have...!"

Being "reasonable" in every sense is something that gets taught to sons, and it's something they can learn for themselves as they grow. Meanwhile, most people in society --every woman on this blog, I'd wager, and certainly every adult of my close aquaintance-- is not bothered by this risk. And we don't want to have to adjudicate these cases for you or your sons. If you practice and teach reasonable conduct, you won't have to worry so much about our "reasonable" judgments.

"I'm not sure a national standard is the best way to go... It may well be that the maturity of teenagers varies as much with geography as anything else.

Nonetheless, when you start calling for broader "reasonable person" standards, you're playing with fire."

*C'mon, Crid. Don't let a little thing like Federalism get in the way of establishing a national age of consent law.

*By the way, good luck finding an enabling provision in the Constitution authorizing Congress to act on this. Maybe a connection to interstate shipping of prophylactics?

*This well and truly sucks for Ricky, but it kind of reminds me of Pete Rose - he agreed to the punishment.

I agree with Gretchen and Flynne. That guy is pure hotness!

Reversing the whole she's 16 but looks 30 thing....

I still look 19, would it wrong for me and him.....

Oh nevermind.

You know this story kind of illustrates most peoples innate goodness, that or their innate willingness to take it up the ass and ask for more - has I been in Ricky's position I probably would have shot most of the DA's staff before the cops took me out.

Quite frankly I find it inconceivable that people who get screwed over in such a manner don’t do more than talk about it.

Situations like this are unconscionable, outrageous, immoral, and unconstitutional - but no one does jack shit about it until they are personally affected - politicians wont do anything either, not until the political cost of doing nothing is far, FAR worse than fixing these situations.

You want to know why there is no other intelligent life in our universe? In the very rare instances that a sentient sapient species raises itself far enough out of the slime were legislate ourselves into extinction.

It wont be asteroids, global warming, super volcanoes, or disease that wipe out our species - it will be piece of shit laws that make it too damn dangerous to be within 50 feet of a woman.

Many say ricky should of verified age: well folks he was in a club for 16-20 year olds on a teen night and this young lady and her friend (age 12) were let inside no ID check. So who the hell was protecting Ricky? And when I asked the cops this after he told the truth their response and I quote, "the more girls, the more boys, the more money" and therefore the club was never held accountable even though ordinances are set to be a age requirement in this club. I also met Amanda, she came over several times and I never would of guessed she was thirteen as she was a bright young lady and mature. Want to know the joke folks? YOUR child in most states can go to a planned parenthood and get birth control WITHOUT mom or dads permission or notification..Yep call them yourselves..they do not educate about age of consent or the consequences like life registry as a predator, they simply hand out birth control and try to educate about "abstinence". First clue, if they are there to get birth control abstinence is furthest thing from their mind. And its not just teen sex youths, are going down for internet chat, cell pics of younger friends etc. Listen to my radio show sometime via internet/phone and listen to the stories. If we continue to put cases like these teens on a registry then how the hell do we know who the real dangers are? Hell gus blackwell told me recently, "the predators are hiding in the registry) he is the whip dog of public safety here in OK. Well why is this? He says cause the "public demands he pass these laws to protect children" HA bull shit!!! The public is manipulated by media and govt to beleive these laws protect children. Show me one damn child protected by these laws? If a truely dangerous predator wants yur child no law will stop them EVER! why? Cause they could care less!!!! So you have ten predators in your town and you remember the first five which ricky is in..you go to the store...and GASP, oh my gosh there is Ricky so you keep a eye on him and watch him hoping he screws up so you can call the cops and just for a second you take your eyes off your cart and child and oops your child is gone..why? cause as you were watching predator Ricky you failed to notice or know the real dangerous man standing behind you who truly is a pedifile and has more then one crime under his belt...now I ask who is at fault? You? NO the government for the laws which cannot protect any child the way they are written and making you think the registry is some great thing. want more info? write me rickysmom@rickyslife.com or sign my petition www.rickyslife.com there is a federal Romeo law but big surprise politicians are not aware of it in the Adam Walsh Act nor do they care..they fix the laws ruining lives and they lose federal burn funds...so you the people who believe in their BS go on living paying high taxes while the politicians continue to lie as well as the media..read childrens stories: www.cfciowa.org or www.ethicaltreatment.org more stories www.derekoftexas.blogspot.com (his mom will be on show tonight;) Please folks educate yourselves after all you allowed the government to violate our constitution on these registries and now more are coming for DUI, Domestic violence, arson, drugs etc and like sex offenses will go back many years. think your safe? think again..we need limited government not more laws!! Again please sign my petition help me save these young mens lives and futures cause it can be your child the American government and people are throwing away www.rickyslife.com

Also, sex offender treatment want to know what you learn? "If your not in a committed relationship its deviante sex" so how many here had deviante sex relations with a one night stand? And one mom had to take chaperone classes want to know what they were told in class? "bathing and spanking your children is sexually grooming them" Now ask yourself are you sexually grooming your child by bathing them? spanking them? sign my petition please help me pass Romeo laws for kids like my son Ricky and all our osns www.rickyslife.com or www.cfciowa.org

Amy, I'm not sure where CL got the information about Arizona's law, but it's incorrect. According to Arizona Revised Statutes, consensual sex with a 15 or 16 year old girl is not a crime as long as the boy is no more than 3 years older or they are both high school students. Consensual sex with a 17-year-old is never a crime. This ensures that outrages such as what happened to Ricky don't happen here.

These kinds of laws make the US look like it's run by the Church Lady. The age difference laws make the most sense because it allows for normal healthy sexual exploration by horny teenagers, yet prevents them being preyed upon by older men (and sometimes older women). If there wasn't so much guilt associated with sex, maybe there could be some rational intelligent dialogue in this area.

MSLGW, I would be very interested in where to find the statistics that the article you posted are based on. It sounds to me like they (the stats) must have had some teens mixed in with the asshole-type predator.

The one who's causing the problem is the older guy (at whatever interval) who can't keep his pants zipped (Crid)

The whole notion that an older person is automatically responsible for the frauds and crimes of younger people --- it's insane. That an older person would be held responsible for someone they don't even know is younger, is even more insane.

This "can't keep his pants zipped" cliche is the man-hating bullshit. People are responsible for their own bodies. Yes. Even females.

Nonetheless, when you start calling for broader "reasonable person" standards, you're playing with fire. (Crid)

So you say, but you've got no argument. I have a millenia old legal principle that has served well for crimes with ambiguities of intent, that is still used with prudence by courts and juries, and allows local standards and elements of circumstance to weigh in decisions of criminal intent.

That's a lot more powerful and persuasive than your scary bugbear cliche: "playing with fire."

Consider that in the scenario Amy first describes, the girl was sharing details of sexual intimacy with her partner's mother, which hardly conveys mastery of womanly powers. And she shortly became a runaway besides. (Crid)

Heh. Well, I know adult women who do that. But the fact remains that young men of the age of legal consent can go to prison for the frauds perpetrated by younger females. In other words, there are other examples.

Being "reasonable" in every sense is something that gets taught to sons, and it's something they can learn for themselves as they grow. Meanwhile, most people in society --every woman on this blog, I'd wager, and certainly every adult of my close aquaintance-- is not bothered by this risk. (Crid)

Apparently, Amy is. I am. I've been in bars and seen 17 and 16 year old girls pass themselves off as 21. When I was a bouncer, it was a constant liability risk. It's not rare. You're very naive, and you underestimate the craftiness of young women.

And we don't want to have to adjudicate these cases for you or your sons. If you practice and teach reasonable conduct, you won't have to worry so much about our "reasonable" judgments. (Crid)

Well, your wants and desires aren't persuasive to me. Sorry. There's nothing unreasonable about a young man of legal age having safe sex with someone he reasonably believes is of age.

Wanting to punish the reasonable party for acts of fraud perpetrated by another party's lies, that's unjust and stupid.

Of course, if you hate men, or think females are intellectually deficient, it might make sense. Excuse-making for people with vaginas is so passe, Crid.

Being "reasonable" is not just something to be taught to sons, its something to be taught to daughters as well. We're not as stupid as you might think. As the mother of a 9 year old boy, I'm pretty damned concerned about this. Not sure if Canada is following in your footsteps, but I'm certainly going to find out. I'm having a hard time understanding how you can defend this when the stupidity of it, particularly in the case we've been presented with here, seems so obvious. This boy isn't a "sex offender" in the sense any reasonable person would judge.

Crid -

Teenagers who can't handle fucking without risking such insane legal consequences are by definition too young to fuck.

Which stops them? We're talking about fucking hormone ridden teens here, not people who are prone to making well reasoned decisions. A great many of them are unaware of such potential consequences. Nor are they likely to realize that their potential sexual partner might be too young.

Teens fuck - it's a part of being a teen. And while it may have been different when you were a lad, these days the girls are often more predatory about it than the boys - especially the younger ones.

When I was eighteen, I was pursued by a young lady who turned out to be fourteen. She claimed to be nineteen and looked the part to me. She saw my band play and decided that she had to have some of me. She played the part well and gave me no indication that she was remotely that young. She was obviously very sexually experienced and it was only through a mutual friend that I learned she was that young.

Thankfully, her parents were far more keen on dealing with her behavior, than trying to get the guys she fucked thrown in jail.

Though I have agree with you on national standards.

Sorry for the double post...slow Saturday. However, I was reading the various links to "Ricky's" story and feel like some part of the story is missing. I wonder how it got to the point where the sex became "public" knowledge such that the DA could pick it up and run with it on his own?

So, they had sex. She talked to his mom about it. Still in the family. Months later, she runs away and calls police who take her home. How exactly, did this lead to police coming to question Ricky? Do police returning runaways hang around for family counselling? Don't they just do a quick assessment about whether the girl is physically safe in her home and take off to let the family discuss things? Did Amanda spend her whole time in the police car lamenting that if only she hadn't been forced into sex by her much older boyfriend, everything would be cool? I would think 13 year old runaways complaining that their parents just don't understand would be pretty common and not generate a whole lot of investigation. Maybe its an A to B thing where they live, but it seems someone in her family must have said something to start an investigation. Then, faced with the truth of their daughter's consent and deceit, they backed off.

And to get back to this whole age/gender thing...her own parents judge her mature enough to be responsible for consenting to sex. Why isn't she on a sex offender list too...for failing to keep her legs closed when she knows she's underage? She's a slut, a dangerous predator, luring boys in with her underage hotness.

Wow, I rarely get so annoyed at one of your comments, Crid! Congrats. If boys have to keep their zippers up when age is at question, girls should have to keep their legs closed. I just don't see how a life long sentence for this behavior makes the world a safer place.

This is another underground tactic of gov't psychopathes behind the scenes to eliminate those "grey" areas. Just as American Citizens can be labeled as "terrorists" for being of the "wrong" race or "wrong" religion - now, even a kid can be labeled as a "sexual predator" for having sex with the "wrong" age person?

What happened to human intention? Since when did legislators leave out the human spirit in law regarding humans? Even worse - 17 is not mature. When the gov't treats a teenager as a mature adult, it's basically turning against our kids. Kids in love or even having casual sex is no where near predator behavior, yet the grey area has been eliminated by the gov't psychopathes.

How many other ways will the gov't turn against the American People until they wake up!

> the frauds and crimes

What frauds? Men are attracted to someone they shouldn't pester... That happens a lot. What laws are broken?

> People are responsible for
> their own bodies.

Children are given a little latitude. I'm cool with that.

> you've got no argument.

Here's the argument, Mr. Millenia: If, having been surprised by the youth of a new partner, you find yourself in court (civil or criminal) with attorneys or prosecutors doing their best to depict your conduct as depraved and horrific, don't come cryin' to me that a jury of your peers has no "reasonable persons."

Actually, don't come cryin' to me anyway. The whole point is that people who behave well don't annoy society with their need to be reasonably judged.

> you underestimate the craftiness
> of young women.

I take no measure of their craftiness at all; I want nothing from them they can't give (or that I can't) take in an adult style. So all that sizzling cleverness and feminine treachery causes no problems.

> your wants and desires
> aren't persuasive to me.

Excellent! We'll keep that principle in mind as we explore this matter.

> fraud perpetrated by another
> party's lies

Jesus, do you live your life in the fourth segment of some Aaron Spelling drama from the late seventies, where Joan Collins and Farah Fawcett entrap innocent passersby in webs of cunning and deceit?

If a convenience store clerk sells a twelve-pack of Bud to a teenager, he gets in trouble even if the kid was carrying convincing ID. The kid gets in trouble too, but the clerk gets it worse, because he was the adult.

That's how I feel about sex for teen boys. If you wanna do manly things, be a man about it, and don't make excuses.

> We're talking about fucking
> hormone ridden teens here

Hormones excuse misconduct?

> not people who are prone
> to making well reasoned
> decisions.

Everybody's gotta learn sometime. A lot of the best people get taught about these things before they need to know by people who care for them, which works out best for everyone.

> these days the girls are
> often more predatory

DuWayne, that's just silly. Teenage girls are predators! They're conniving and they're voracious!

Dude, seriously.

> When I was eighteen, I
> was pursued by a young lady
> who turned out to be
> fourteen.

Nightmare! How did you survive?

> part of the story is
> missing.

Yeah; the part that explained how two people seemingly eager for adult play could be so incompetent at it. I'm guessing broken homes, and/or alcohol and drugs. What you do think?

> She's a slut, a dangerous
> predator, luring boys in
> with her underage hotness.

This has got to be a joke. You're the blog vandal or something.

> a life long sentence for this
> behavior makes the world
> a safer place.

I didn't say that this particular guy should go to prison forever... I said that we apparently have a policy problem. And that until it gets corrected, protecting your children from its hazards is not that big a deal, given the burden of raising them anyway.

> What happened to human
> intention?

It's a pain in the ass to adjudicate, that's what happened to it. So we'd really rather not be bothered. I don't care what's going on in the words of thirteen-year-old girls, and I don't care what's going on in the pants of 14-year-old boys.

Wanna know why those women in the middle east (and elsewhere) wear chadors and burkas and veils? Because the men in those cultures enjoy pretending that a man's sexual nature is an an unholy beast, a frightful monster which must never be tempted... And while we're at it, honey, it would be best if you didn't drive a car or get a college degree.

Here in the western world, the rule is: Gentlemen, we don't care what you feel about her. "Your wants and desires aren't persuasive." Even she really is asking for it (and she almost never is), you're expected to behave in a manner that doesn't cause disruption. That's adult masculinity in the United States, and you're never too young to get started at it.

"Here in the western world, the rule is: Gentlemen, we don't care what you feel about her. "Your wants and desires aren't persuasive." Even she really is asking for it (and she almost never is), you're expected to behave in a manner that doesn't cause disruption. That's adult masculinity in the United States, and you're never too young to get started at it".

I didn't say that this particular guy should go to prison forever... I said that we apparently have a policy problem. And that until it gets corrected, protecting your children from its hazards is not that big a deal, given the burden of raising them anyway."

Crid, I agree with Jeff. You are naive. I don't know if you're raising kids today - or were decades ago - but your saying that it "almost never is the girl" is horribly outdated. Girls have very much become the aggressors these days. And I don't think it's fair to expect a young man who is in club, which is supposed to be populated by legal adults, to have to have a "conversation" that would reveal a girl's "immaturity".

Jeff is right. The "reasonable person" statute should apply (though it won't because we are so focused solely on age). My daughter is 14. She looks 14 - skinny and underdeveloped. Yet, she has 14 yr old friends who look 21 - big boobs, full hips, flowing hair, etc - and, believe me, they "work it". They know it gets them into clubs and concerts and allows them advantages that less mature girls don't have. Many grown men would find it impossible to figure out their age unless they were forewarned.

The bottome line is that NONE of this - even a young boy's naivete - should qualify him as a "sex offender." Those laws are meant to catch pedophiles who will go after your 3 yr old - not a boy or man who finds the fully-developed female form appealing! This is a travesty!

I can't understand why you are trying to put the blame entirely on the boy, or his parents. That is very unfair. I know people who have almost been bankrupted by these sorts of charges against their sons.

These laws needs to change. We need standard "Romeo" laws or some such remedy in every state to prevent this sort of tragedy, Crid. Surely, you would be on board with this?

Gasp!! I actually agree with lovelysoul on something! :)

I have been studying this stuff since 1977, when most states totally decriminalized female sex at any age, and made every effort to criminalize as much male sex as they could. Thank you, Betty and Gloria and fellow demons.

Do you all know that before the 70's, in nearly all states not only was it a crime for men to have sex with 'jailbait', but it was also a crime for 'jailbait' to have sex?

In some states, sexual activity by under-age females was a major reason they got sent to reform schools. I am not making this up.

So, as part of a long-term goal of de-criminalizing almost everything disgusting females do, the feminists lobbied to remove sexual activity for young females as a crime. Their argument was that anything that is not a crime for an adult woman should not be a crime for a girl.

Yet, they tightened the rules to criminalize as much male sex as they could.

So, today, you have laws which allow a 15 year old girl to have as much sex as she wants, with never any penalty, even if she commits fraud, but the fraud cannot be used as a defense for a man.

This is insane.

I believe the age at which a girl can be a sex partner of an older man with no crime for him should be the same age when it is no longer a crime for her. Yes, if a 12 year old girl can have sex with an adult man with no crime, then it should not be a crime for him either.

I do not think that is correct. I think young girls who engage in consensual sex should get some time in an institution for ethically impaired girls; I am not advocating pedophilia; but criminalizing sex for the young girls as well. Those who are against this assume girls are mindless idiots, controlled by impulses with no capacity to control their behavior. Nonsense. Girls simply aren't as stupid as Gloria and Betty and fellow demons claim.

I also think the age difference is stupid. If my daughter were still 15 and sexually active, I would much prefer she have sex with a mature man, with assets to care for her and the child. Yet, we toss these guys in jail, but if she has a baby by a 15 year old boy with not a cent to his name, we say, um, okay.

This is not especially about sex. It is about Betty and Gloria and fellow demons trying to throw as many men in jail as they can.

Has anyone noticed that a girl having sex with an adult man, knowing he is too old, involves conspiracy to commit a crime, and accomplice to a felony? So, the girl who seduces a man is committing a crime. Yet, we do nothing.

Here in Mexico, State of Puebla, the crime with a girl is using undue influence or fraud to corrupt a minor child. Under age 12, major crime. Age 12 or 13, it is a legal presumption undue influence is involved.

Age 14 to 17, is jailbait, but only the parents or guardian or the girl can initiate charges.

Stupid? No, here being an unwed mother is stigmatized to the degree girls commit suicide. If the parents prefer, he marries her, or in rural areas, they live as husband and wife; I am told this is called private marriage.

Yet, if a man does use undue influence, he can be jailed.

When I first started coming here, the neighbor woman, one of the most beautiful women I know, was 20 0r 21, on her second 'husband' and had 5 kids, no twins.

It was considered better for her to 'marry' than to throw him in jail.

A couple years ago I ascertained a 14 year old friend was in love with me. It really scared me. I asked a mature friend about it, and she said not to worry, treat her like always and it would go away. She herself had fallen in love with a mature teacher at that age, and the only effect is she realized she wanted a mature, intellectual man for a husband. Her husband is my best friend and he is what she wanted.

She also said the girl will never forget me as long as she lives. I must point out at the time I was 64 and have never been confused for a handsome man. I always treated the girl, a family friend, like a person, not a girl, and this is apparently what triggered her emotions. I saw her yesterday and it seems to be gone, though she is still very fond of me.

In my opinion the law here is correct. Men should not be going to jail and having their lives destroyed based on a simple number issue. Common sense should be used. At present, a 15 year old girl could have willing sex with 300 men, and all 300 would go to jail, but nothing happens to her. Insane.

LS is the vandal! I'm certain! No doubt!

No woman would ever really be this foolish.

> Girls have very much become
> the aggressors

Aggressive to what end? What is the terrible thing these girls want to do to this innocent little fellow of your dreams? Scratch his eyes out? Steal his video game collection? Shuffle his baseball cards? Reprogram his Ipod with nothing but Miley Cyrus?

Well, it's nothing they can succeed at without the cooperation of their victim.

> NONE of this - even a young
> boy's naivete - should qualify
> him as a "sex offender."

Right. I said that. But meanwhile, they can easily protect themselves...

> I can't understand why you are
> trying to put the blame entirely
> on the boy

Because he can put a stop to it by keeping his responses under control, because good men learn to do that eventually no matter how unpleasant it can be, because I don't want to be bothered adjudicating it or paying taxes to have it adjudicated, and because you all (unless there's really just one of you) come off like a buncha fuckin' Arab primitives. If you are sincere, then you don't recognize the miraculous brilliance of my country, the United States of America, in protecting the freedom of women.

> men would find it impossible
> to figure out their age

I don't know about that... How much time are they taking to make the judgment?

.....WAIT!!! Don't answer. I don't want to have to ask. I don't care. Take as long as necessary, and don't bother me anymore.

> We need standard "Romeo" laws
> or some such remedy in
> every state

Tell me more about this problem we're having with interstate teen fucking. Is this a regional thing? (I'm guessing it's mostly the near south [Tennessee Valley/Appalachia], the western Mid-Atlantic, and of course the northern Mountain zones. Kind of like lyme disease a few years ago.)

And don't call me Shirley!

> even if she commits fraud, but the
> fraud cannot be used as a defense
> for a man.
> This is insane.

See, that's the same rhetoric as Jeff. I think this is one guy with a will to publish....

Besides, isn't Saturday night on this blog always a quiet time?

||||||||||||||
NEWS FLASH!!!!
||||||||||||||

ROGUE TEENAGE FUCKTOYS RAMPAGE IN THE SOUTHWEST. DETAILS WITH ANDERSON COOPER, TONIGHT AT 7

Crid the sad thing is in this day and age you can go to jail for having sex with the wrong girl - case in point Mila Kunis got the job on that 70s show, she conned all the casting directors into thinking she was 18 when she was 14.

"Because he can put a stop to it by keeping his responses under control, because good men learn to do that eventually no matter how unpleasant it can be, because I don't want to be bothered adjudicating it or paying taxes to have it adjudicated"

Exactly. I don't think it should be adjudicated, and I don't want to pay for it either. It's a total waste of tax dollars to prosecute teens for doing what teens have always done.

This is not a "man" who yet has his responses entirely under control. We're talking about teenagers.

And this isn't happening just in the Appalachias, Crid. I live in south Florida, but I'm sure you can ask almost any parent of teens anywhere and they'll tell you the same. Girls have gotten a lot more bold about pursuing boys than in the past.

For instance, they do a lot of the calling now. When I was a teen, we were taught to wait for the boy to call and ask us out - to let him do the pursuing - but now, girls don't mind being the one to call a boy. That's more what I meant by "aggressors." It's not really a bad thing...except when we start arresting teenage boys and charging them the same way we would a 60 yr old going after a 14 yr old.

Btw, that's funny about reprogramming his Ipod with nothing but Miley Cyrus. lol

Irlandes, we were on the same page until you started talking about how it would've been preferable for your 15 yr old daughter to be with an older man "with assets to care for her"...and all this older man/young girl stuff. Frankly, that came off a little creepy to me.

I don't advocate older men being with young girls under any circumstances. Mature adults of either gender shouldn't be exerting sexual influence over immature teenagers. 14 yr olds don't "fall in love" with 60 yr olds. They don't even know what romantic love is yet.

They may develop crushes on teachers - or(very likely) they may be drawn to financial stability over poverty - but that isn't "love". Old men fool themselves into believing young women "love" them all the time, but it's never true.

I agree that boys shouldn't be criminalized more than girls. But, among teens, or where there's a reasonable (or reasonably assumed) age difference, it shouldn't be criminalized at all...or only to a misdemeanor degree at the most.

"MSLGW, I would be very interested in where to find the statistics that the article you posted are based on. It sounds to me like they (the stats) must have had some teens mixed in with the asshole-type predator."

Specifically, which article, and which statistics?

If you haven't listened to the Blogtalkradio interview with Edward Blackhoff, Producer of "Incest - A Family Tragedy," I highly recommend it.
The documentary won 12 prestigious awards. I bought the video and highly recommend it to everyone. You can listen to it here. I recommend a pen and paper.
http://cfcoklahoma.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=80%3Aincest-a-family-tragedy&Itemid=1

Click on the link within the article and fasten your seat belts.

This has got to be a joke. You're the blog vandal or something.

Of course its a joke, just like labeling male teenagers who have sex with other teenagers "sex offenders" is a joke. Except one of them is really happening...making it not so funny.

The vandal may still be lurking, but I don't think it me. Or LS. Wasn't it you who suggested that people obsessed with something are usually the culprit? That's it! Crid's been here, like forever, just waiting for his chance to bring down Amy's blog! I figured he was clever, just didn't know HOW clever.

> in this day and age you can
> go to jail for having sex with
> the wrong girl

Wasn't that always the case?

> This is not a "man" who yet
> has his responses entirely
> under control.

We should encourage them to hurry up about it.

> just waiting for his chance
> to bring down Amy's blog!

Yes, but for all these years, I've toiled to do it the old fashioned way-- by giving righteous offense. To just bore people to death is pussywork.

Crid -

Hormones excuse misconduct?

They certainly should provide some mitigation in this context.

Everybody's gotta learn sometime. A lot of the best people get taught about these things before they need to know by people who care for them, which works out best for everyone.

Which is great for, say, my kids. I am all about trying to inform them of everything I can. Given that I have a lot of life experience and made a lot of mistakes, I expect them to be well prepared for most anything. The same could not be said for me, as an example. And it has nothing to do with my parents not caring or trying to avoid difficult conversations. They were simply very naive and inexperienced.

DuWayne, that's just silly. Teenage girls are predators! They're conniving and they're voracious!

Goddammit, your showing your age crid:) Yes, many of them are exactly that. They look old enough and they want to play with older boys. They act like girls who are old enough, look like girls who are old enough and show obvious experience with the sex and pursuit of the sex. And some of them even have fake id's. At what point do we accept that rather than being a horny teens fault, there is some responsibility to be cast on them?

If it were a slap on the wrist, maybe a night or two in jail and probation, this wouldn't be much of a discussion. But that just isn't the case - in a great many instances it has longterm, or in the case described here, lifetime consequences. I'm sorry but that is bullshit. Ruining a young boys life because he didn't have the experience or information to warn him off, is just fucking insane.

Nightmare! How did you survive?

Thankfully, the police were never involved. Had they been, I might well have the same story as the boy described in this post, or something similar.

Crid -

Out of idle curiosity, do you honestly not see the difference between a seventeen to nineteen year old having sex with a thirteen year old (who lied about her age) and a forty year old doing the same?

Yeah, I just don't want to have to worry about it. When you invite 49-year-old men such as myself to fret and toil over the "lies" of 13-year-old girls, you ask too much.

But see Crid, I'm not asking you to worry about the lies of 13 year old girls, I'm asking you to worry about the egregious consequences of those lies. A young man's life, pretty much destroyed, is a high price to pay for such lies.

Oi, and here I thought you were actually old.

We have gone too far: 5 year olds are accused of sexual harassment, non-violent female teachers that have consensual sex with boys are required to register as sex offenders, and now the case of a young boy only a few years older than a lying girl.

If we are not careful no one will be able to have sex without government authorization, read Not Every Sex Act is a Sexual Offense

Who commits most sex crimes? Well, 95% of all new sex crimes are committed by those NOT on the registry. Family members and those known to the family commit 98% of all sex crimes. So much for stranger danger.
2nd question. Who is MORE LIKELY to committ a sex crime upon release from prison? Sex Offenders or NON-sex offenders?

For the answer, go here. www.cfcoklahoma and see the article, "Revisiting Department of Justice Recidivism Statistics and More Shocking Truths."

non-violent female teachers that have consensual sex with boys are required to register as sex offenders

Bernie, I don't recall a single instance where a non-violent male teacher that had consenual sex with girls wasn't requird to register...what is the difference?

This is the problem with this type of overzealous prosecution without any kind of common sense. This is why so many call for the "reasonable person" application.

It was asked earlier, but I haven't seen an explanation as to why this young man was pulled in and questioned to begin with. It doesn't make much sense.

Federal Judge Stops New State Sex Offender Law

A federal judge Wednesday put a stop to a new state sex offender law. The law would have reclassified sex offenders putting them in categories based on the crimes they committed.

Opponents say the new system is unfairly targeting non-dangerous offenders.

Read more:
www.cfcoklahoma.org

Perhaps they should register EVERYONE who is released from prison as NON sex offenders commit 5 times the sex offenses than released sex offenders.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/rsorp94pr.htm

Highlights include the following:

* Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%).
* Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for homicide.
* The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 had accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their most recent imprisonment and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release.

www.cfcoklahoma.org

Our nation and the states is in a financial crisis that could lead to bankruptcy. The Federal government is about to sell our homes to foreign countries

We need a serious "open debate" in the House of Representatives on this subject. In every state that intends to pass the Adam Walsh Act In the long run it will cost Oklahoma tax payers millions in new taxes for a law that protects no one but endangers everyone.

Please read the article "Federal Domestic Spending Bill Cuts Crime Funding Program by 67 Percent," at the web site below.
www.cfcoklahoma.org

You can calculate your state from there.

Oklahoma Cost of Implementing SORNA ……..$ 5,867,138
Oklahoma Byrne Money 2006……………………………….$2,790,472
Oklahoma 10 percent of Byrne money……………………..$279,000
Oklahoma 67% Byrne cut leaves 33% or............$92,085

These figures do NOT take into account these ever increasing costs.

• New personnel
• Software, including installation and maintenance
• Additional jail and prison space
• Court and administrative costs
• Law enforcement costs
• Legislative costs related to adopting, and crafting state law

Virginia determined that the first year of compliance with the registry aspect of SORNA would cost more than $12
million.3
• The first year of implementing SORNA would cost the Commonwealth of Virginia $12,497,000.
• The yearly annual cost of SORNA would be $8,887,000. Adjusted with a 3.5 percent yearly inflation rate,4 Virginia
would be paying more than $10 million by 2014.
• If Virginia chose to comply with SORNA, the state would spend $12,097,000 more than it would if it chose not to
implement SORNA and forfeit 10 percent of its yearly Byrne grant, a loss totaling approximately $400,000

Office of Justice Programs, "JAG State Allocations," April 23, 2008. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/grant/07JAGstateallocations.pdf

Randy Lopp, treatment subcommittee chairman of the Oklahoma Sex Offender Management Team says it best, "Most people who know anything about this are frustrated. It is just not helpful -- the laws as they are now,"

''I think if the general public understood the research, they would be willing to back the legislators to change the laws to make more sense and to protect children, because the laws as they are written are not protecting children," he said. "They are doing more harm than good.''

--
Once truth is acknowledged, you cannot deny it and remain true to yourself

States will spend millions for passing the AWA which is "doing more harm than good."

Legislators need to consult the EXPERTS rather than pass knee jerk legislation that actually endangers children and the whole of society. I encourage everyone to write their law makers demanding they stop endangering children with knee jerk legislation and BRING IN THE EXPERTS.

"Maine is one of the few states that is going about this correctly. They are "LISTENING TO EXPERTS, rather than passing emotional knee jerk legislation which protects no one but endangers everyone. The vast majority of states have passed laws that "Do more harm than good."

Protecting children and society must be done "intelligently."

Here is a short "audio clip" referencing the issue in Maine.

"Effectiveness of Sex Offender Registries Explored By Legislators-LISTEN"

Listen here:
www.cfcoklahoma.org."