Raise Age of Consent.

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
There is, in fact, a 12. Right next door to you, Neph, in the great state of Delaware.

The law states that “a child who has not yet reached his or her sixteenth birthday is deemed unable to consent to a sexual act with a person more than 4 years older than said child. Children who have not yet reached their twelfth birthday are deemed unable to consent to a sexual act under any circumstances.”
[/quote]

That’s a bit misleading, in terms of age of consent. I am sure there is at least one state where a 7 year old and a 6 year old can have sex without violating statute… but that doesn’t make 6 the age of consent.

[quote]
If the pages were 16 or over, then they are of legal age of consent in the District of Columbia. However, they are still considered minors under Federal Law. If Foley used the Internet, which falls under the definition of “interstate or foreign means of communication”, to “entice a minor to perform a sexual act”, then he is in violation of this law.[/quote]

Yeah, well… like I said, I’m not sure this is a good law.

22

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

If the pages were 16 or over, then they are of legal age of consent in the District of Columbia. However, they are still considered minors under Federal Law. If Foley used the Internet, which falls under the definition of “interstate or foreign means of communication”, to “entice a minor to perform a sexual act”, then he is in violation of this law.[/quote]

By chance, do you have any links to the actual wording of the law; I can only find secondhand accounts for some reason. For instance:

“Many experts believe it will be hard to construct a criminal case against Foley, especially if he never acted on the messages. Federal law makes it a crime to use the Internet to entice or solicit sex from minors, but charges cannot be brought unless the actions would constitute crimes in the states where they occurred.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-na-legal5oct05,1,2489458.story?coll=chi-news-hed

23

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Brad61 wrote:
The age of consent is different in different states. In some states it may be too low. In some states it may be just right.

Kind of like a Three Bears type of thing.

Yeah, which is why I’m asking my question. Should it dictated by federal law? And, set at what age?[/quote]

whadaya doing a homework assignment or something? you seem hell bent on getting answers.

24

[quote]LBRTRN wrote:
Varqanir wrote:

By chance, do you have any links to the actual wording of the law; I can only find secondhand accounts for some reason. For instance:

“Many experts believe it will be hard to construct a criminal case against Foley, especially if he never acted on the messages. Federal law makes it a crime to use the Internet to entice or solicit sex from minors, but charges cannot be brought unless the actions would constitute crimes in the states where they occurred.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-na-legal5oct05,1,2489458.story?coll=chi-news-hed

[/quote]

Here is the full text of this law:

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C117.txt

The relevant section is 2422, “coercion and enticement”. Subsection (b) reads:

“Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 30 years.”

[Note: the Internet qualifies as a “means of interstate or foreign commerce”, particularly if your provider’s servers are in a different state than you are.]

Now, obviously Foley did not try to turn his male pages into prostitutes, but now we get into the dicey business of speculation on just what kind of “sexual activity” he was trying to entice the boys into, and in what state he planned to engage in these activities. If he planned to have one or more of the boys suck him off in a hotel room in Virginia (where the AoC is 18), for example, he would be in violation of this law.

That dirty little clause, “or attempts to do so” (which in fact has been stricken from other sections), seems to imply that he needn’t have even been successful in his enticements, just that he made the suggestions.

Admittedly, it would take a pretty slick (and nasty) federal attorney to try to make any charges stick under this law. Better settle for something surer, like a sexual harassment suit.

25

[quote]nephorm wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
The law states that “a child who has not yet reached his or her sixteenth birthday is deemed unable to consent to a sexual act with a person more than 4 years older than said child. Children who have not yet reached their twelfth birthday are deemed unable to consent to a sexual act under any circumstances.”

That’s a bit misleading, in terms of age of consent.
[/quote]

Seems pretty clear cut to me. If a child is deemed unable to consent to sex before his or her 12th birthday, then it follows that 12 is the age at which that child is deemed able to consent to sex. Take out a few words and you get “12 is the age of consent”.

Actually, Neph, there is exactly one state in which this would theoretically be legal: Colorado. Under 18-3-402(d), a six-year-old and a ten-year-old could theoretially have sex legally. As long as one party is not more than four years older than the other, any age under fifteen appears to be allowed. I know of no other state where this is the case. Not even Delaware.

Obviously, this is letter-of-the-law rather than spirit-of-the law stuff. And in fact, Colorado has no specified “age of consent.”

Colorado does, however, recognize English Common Law, which dictates that a boy as young as 14 and a girl as young as 12 can marry. So does DC, which may be what you were referring to earlier.

26

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

“Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 30 years.”

[Note: the Internet qualifies as a “means of interstate or foreign commerce”, particularly if your provider’s servers are in a different state than you are.]

Now, obviously Foley did not try to turn his male pages into prostitutes, but now we get into the dicey business of speculation on just what kind of “sexual activity” he was trying to entice the boys into, and in what state he planned to engage in these activities. If he planned to have one or more of the boys suck him off in a hotel room in Virginia (where the AoC is 18), for example, he would be in violation of this law.
[/quote]

Thanks! I can see how this might be a bit tricky.

“to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense”

For the sake of argument, lets assume Folley wasn’t attempting to set up any sort of meeting (I don’t know if he was or not) and was only engaging in “internet sex,” if Folley sent the e-mails from Florida–where the age of consent is 18 when the adult is over 24, right?–and the boy recieved them in D.C. (where was the boy anyways?), where the age of consent is 16, did Folley commit a crime?

I think there is precedent in the reverse (the state in which the adult lived it was legal, but in the state the minor lived it was not), but is there any precedent for this situation?

27

There shouldn’t be an “age of consent”. Why would you possibly want it raised?