Ponce arrested

highly doubt it wrote:

I agree there isn't a difference. as I mentioned before, however, there is a good chance a slutty 15 year old has some mental issues and perhaps should be protected from dirty old men. In other words, perhaps it makes sense for the law not to incentivize old men to go hunting for teen sluts.

Oops, didn't see this one.

Then it should be illegal for ANYONE to have sex with her. not just "dirty old men". And why would additional sex be harmful to such a mentally-issued slutty 15 year old?

law needs some revision wrote:

highly doubt it wrote:

I agree there isn't a difference. as I mentioned before, however, there is a good chance a slutty 15 year old has some mental issues and perhaps should be protected from dirty old men. In other words, perhaps it makes sense for the law not to incentivize old men to go hunting for teen sluts.

Oops, didn't see this one.

Then it should be illegal for ANYONE to have sex with her. not just "dirty old men". And why would additional sex be harmful to such a mentally-issued slutty 15 year old?

I don't know. I'm not a child psychologist. The statutory rape laws I think usually apply to minors as well if there is something like greater than a 2 year age difference. So like a 17 year old male would be in trouble for having sex with a 14 year old. Makes sense because it can be surmised they were taking advantage of the girl. As for additional sex, I don't know, you seem to be assuming that no harm can be done to a non-virgin. I don't think it works that way. If Ponce has sex with a 15 year old once, then is there no further harm done if he continues having sex with her?

At least Oscar Ponce can still run faster than most people on here. Maybe he'll run some 60mile weeks in jail prison yard and get out and crush he road racing scene!

highly doubt it wrote:

I don't know. I'm not a child psychologist. The statutory rape laws I think usually apply to minors as well if there is something like greater than a 2 year age difference. So like a 17 year old male would be in trouble for having sex with a 14 year old. Makes sense because it can be surmised they were taking advantage of the girl. As for additional sex, I don't know, you seem to be assuming that no harm can be done to a non-virgin. I don't think it works that way. If Ponce has sex with a 15 year old once, then is there no further harm done if he continues having sex with her?

I'm not assuming that no harm can be done to a non-virgin. One of the goals of all this was to show you that "promiscuity clauses" indeed do/did exist. But I didn't say that no harm could come to a non-virgin. I didn't say either way.

What exactly are you calling "harm"? Is what you're calling harm any different than any harm that a teenage boy could give to a girl? The issue there that should be addressed/punished is the harm itself, not the age difference.

ps - for whatever it's worth to the subject at hand, there aren't that many "dirty old men" (depending on what 'old' is) out there getting busted for this. 58% of the offenders are under the age of 20

Again, I'm not a child psychologist so I'm not going to guess exactly what the harm entails. The harm may not be any different than a teenage boy would give. The question is whether the teenage boy is culpable for the act. Thats the reason why minors can still be held accountable for statutory rape if there is a big enough age difference. Below a certain age I'm sure the teenager can't get in trouble. My guess would be that 16 is the cutoff for boys being culpable. And clearly you aren't going to punish a 16 year old for having sex with another 16 year old, they are on equal footing. But an 18 year old with a 15 year old may be a different story.

well, i think i'm out of gas as far as this discussion goes. thanks for putting up with me

The point of incarceration is not to change behavior. Countless studies prove that incarceration does not change a criminals behavior, especially sex offenders (who along with drug offenders are least likely to be reformed and have the highest recidivism rate). We are in an era where prison time means locking a criminal away so that they can't hurt themselves or anyone else.

Other than that I completely agree with your point. I'm slightly OCD towards incarceration because i'm a criminal justice major...

Ah doan thing so wrote:

He is probably in Mexico, Poncee moved from there at age 14 to the US.

And for God's sake, it's spelled "reaper."

It's also spelled "Ponce."

NO wrote:

The point of incarceration is not to change behavior. Countless studies prove that incarceration does not change a criminals behavior, especially sex offenders (who along with drug offenders are least likely to be reformed and have the highest recidivism rate). We are in an era where prison time means locking a criminal away so that they can't hurt themselves or anyone else.

Other than that I completely agree with your point. I'm slightly OCD towards incarceration because i'm a criminal justice major...

WRONG. Do your homework. Sex offenders do NOT have a high recidivism rate. Only sexual predators of the worst kind do. Sex offenders overall as an entire group have the LOWEST. In fact, in Ohio last year only 2% of sexually oriented offenders reoffended. Of that 2%, nearly half were not new sex offenses, but failure to register offenses, which are secondary. There are countless studies out there and I suggest you visit Margie Slagle's website, or ANY website that has published studies on the matter. I hate it when people get facts blatantly incorrect.

I have no idea if Ponce is guilty or not guilty. Just curious why he was running "Mags" on Christmas Day and New Year's Day. That is a bit puzzling.

think about what you're saying. we are talking about an alleged crime and you are thankful about deterrence being so effective. where is your logic?

current ages are a very recent innovation and hardly universal. age was often based on physical maturity (to be of age), and so the current vituperation (sex at 17 or 16, which is almost universal, should hardly be treated in the same way as the incredibly harmful pedophilia involving someone who is physically still a child, completely different circumstances) depends on our current social circumstances. in fact, even in Colorado, it is possible to marry before the age of sixteen with parental consent and a court order!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age#History_and_social_attitudes

Did you see him on Mags?

Also, where is his wife this whole time?

My logic rests in the idea that we would have plenty more of these cases if the punishment weren't so harsh. It's a case like Masse's that helps keep things in check for the perverts we have visiting this board.

I'm no fool to think that there aren't H.S. girls trying to manipulate older men into having a sexual relationship. It's still wrong to act on it as an adult. If the punishment for this was 2 years of probation, how many more times do you think it would happen? My guess is lots! Making it illegal and a stiff punishment keeps the line very clear and only a few people will choose to cross the line.

I don't care what they "look" like, they are still children mentally and it's still a crime.

my lucky day wrote:

My logic rests in the idea that we would have plenty more of these cases if the punishment weren't so harsh. It's a case like Masse's that helps keep things in check for the perverts we have visiting this board.

I'm no fool to think that there aren't H.S. girls trying to manipulate older men into having a sexual relationship. It's still wrong to act on it as an adult. If the punishment for this was 2 years of probation, how many more times do you think it would happen? My guess is lots! Making it illegal and a stiff punishment keeps the line very clear and only a few people will choose to cross the line.

I don't care what they "look" like, they are still children mentally and it's still a crime.

Maybe we don't see more of these cases because reasonable parents don't want to subject their teenagers to the stress of testifying at a trial, which would likely cause them more psychological stress than the original "abuse" did.

Maybe we don't see more of these cases because, when they are caught, the teenagers defend the "perpetrator" and tell their parents that the sex was consensual and the parents realize that, while the situation is a little icky, giving the perpetrator a life sentence is far out of proportion to the crime and a waste of society's resources.

Maybe we don't see more of these cases because, in view of the above, parents are holding meetings with the "perpetrator" and his lawyers and coming to agreements that don't involve the judicial system. If I were a parent in the Ponce case, for instance, I might agree to not go to the police if Ponce resigned as a teacher and coach, agreed to never work with teenagers again, and payed X amount of money in "damages". In my opinion, this would serve myself as well as society better than paying to have the guy locked up for 10+ years and then coming out of jail incapable of holding a job and going on social services for the rest of his life.

my lucky day wrote:

I don't care what they "look" like, they are still children mentally and it's still a crime.

That makes no sense. Then it should be illegal for them to have sex AT ALL. Not just with adults.

my lucky day wrote:

My logic rests in the idea that we would have plenty more of these cases if the punishment weren't so harsh. It's a case like Masse's that helps keep things in check for the perverts we have visiting this board.

I'm no fool to think that there aren't H.S. girls trying to manipulate older men into having a sexual relationship. It's still wrong to act on it as an adult. If the punishment for this was 2 years of probation, how many more times do you think it would happen? My guess is lots! Making it illegal and a stiff punishment keeps the line very clear and only a few people will choose to cross the line.

I don't care what they "look" like, they are still children mentally and it's still a crime.

You're an idiot. Saying that having sex with a 16 year old is the same as having sex with a 6 year old is beyond ridiculous.

"Maybe we don't see more of these cases because reasonable parents don't want to subject their teenagers to the stress of testifying at a trial, which would likely cause them more psychological stress than the original "abuse" did."

Look, there's lots of gray area here where it might be abuse to sleep with a 17 year old girl that was preyed upon vs. a 17 year old girl that was "asking" for it. I feel much better about it being a crime to do it all with a severe punishment than to let dirty lawyers decide what was or was not consensual. If she's under 18, 10 years minimum. If you can't be a teacher and simply say no, how on earth do you have the ability to teach a child the ability to choose between right and wrong?

"Maybe we don't see more of these cases because, in view of the above, parents are holding meetings with the "perpetrator" and his lawyers and coming to agreements that don't involve the judicial system. If I were a parent in the Ponce case, for instance, I might agree to not go to the police if Ponce resigned as a teacher and coach, agreed to never work with teenagers again, and payed X amount of money in "damages". In my opinion, this would serve myself as well as society better than paying to have the guy locked up for 10+ years and then coming out of jail incapable of holding a job and going on social services for the rest of his life."

You're going to monitor where Ponce works for the rest of his life? Really? How do you expect to do that? The legal system creates a record for background checks that will keep Ponce away from children pretty easily. Do the crime do the time. Very simple. I say simple because there's no gray area for a teacher. If you're a teacher, and the other person, consensual or not, is a student, it's a crime. I don't care what the age is.

When an adult tells a student they will be expelled for not performing oral sex, it has a lot more weight than when someone your same age says it. Do you understand power and manipulation at all or are you just not thinking clearly?