Dad Accused of Using Stun Gun on Daughter's Friend Over Naked Photo

Kandahar said:

So let me get this straight: If she had been 18, it would have been perfectly fine, because she'd suddenly "have the experience and maturity to make good decisions" that everyone acquires on their 18th birthday. But since she was 17, she's a child who is incapable of thinking about the consequences...and therefore electroshock to the guy's testicles is the best solution?

(And let's not even go into the fact that the picture was of the 23-year-old guy, not the innocent "child.")

Click to expand...

There has to be a line somewhere. Yes, 18 is an arbitrary spot for it to be, but so would any other age of majority.

reefedjib said:

You teach them to be adults before they are adults.

Click to expand...

Yes, you do, but you do not expect them to be adults before they are.

Redress said:

Yes, you do, but you do not expect them to be adults before they are.

Click to expand...

Sure you do. How can you teach them to be adults, unless you treat them as adults?

reefedjib said:

Sure you do. How can you teach them to be adults, unless you treat them as adults?

Click to expand...

How do you teach any one to be anything before they actually do it? Are you trying to say that there is no point in teaching any one anything except by experience?

Redress said:

How do you teach any one to be anything before they actually do it? Are you trying to say that there is no point in teaching any one anything except by experience?

Click to expand...

In the case of teaching a teenager to be an adult, yes. There is little book knowledge that substitutes for making adult decisions.

reefedjib said:

In the case of teaching a teenager to be an adult, yes. There is little book knowledge that substitutes for making adult decisions.

Click to expand...

Not book learning, no. Mentoring however, yes.

Redress said:

There has to be a line somewhere. Yes, 18 is an arbitrary spot for it to be, but so would any other age of majority.

Click to expand...

You are confusing issues. Laws are arbitrary; personalities are not. You do not suddenly become capable of better judgement on your 18th birthday; it's a slower process, and different for everyone. Ignoring legality, we can't just assume that someone is too immature to make sexual decisions knowing only that they are 17.

Kandahar said:

You're right, it's considerably less dangerous than either of those things. Sending someone pictures of your junk isn't endangering anyone's life, unlike those.

Click to expand...

That's what's so funny about this... when kids get drunk or high or do something dangerous, well, kids will be kids. When they show each other their body parts, it's an outrage that must be stopped.

Just another faux moral panic created by old people who can't stand these crazy kids and their darned cell phones and technology. If they did it as a kid it's ok, otherwise its a danger to society. It happens all the time, always has and probably always will.

Kandahar said:

So let me get this straight: If she had been 18, it would have been perfectly fine, because she'd suddenly "have the experience and maturity to make good decisions" that everyone acquires on their 18th birthday. But since she was 17, she's a child who is incapable of thinking about the consequences...and therefore electroshock to the guy's testicles is the best solution?

(And let's not even go into the fact that the picture was of the 23-year-old guy, not the innocent "child.")

Click to expand...

I think the people of California set the age of consent so high because they realize how unprepared their children are until the older ages. I would've expected to see an age of consent of 18 exist in ultra conservative states as that's the stereotype, but then it follows that a conservative family would raise more responsible children, better able to handle the world earlier on. Children from Liberal homes tend to seek sex about 2 years earlier than children from Conservative homes. Here in SD the age of consent for sex is 14, and marriage with parental consent at 16. Our children have a longer leash because they're more responsible. CA knows that their failed public education system and Progressive policies retard their children development, so let them decide what their age of consent is for themselves. If you don't like it, don't live there.

Redress said:

There has to be a line somewhere. Yes, 18 is an arbitrary spot for it to be, but so would any other age of majority.

Click to expand...

I completely agree. Any age of consent is 100% arbitrary whether we're talking about sex, marriage, drinking or voting. There's nothing magical that happens on one's 18th birthday which automatically grants them an informed world view to then shape opinion of policy off of.

CaptainCourtesy said:

I actually agree with you to a point. Sexting has become a way to harass others. Because teens have far less impulse control... a condition because of their brain development... when someone sends naked pictures, it is quite possible that those pictures can be used as a harassment tool. I've seen this lots of times. Someone will "sext" a picture to someone, who will then spread it to others to embarass that person. Is there a way to stop this? Probably not, similar to trying to stop teens from having sex. Best course of action is early education on this sort of thing, both on internet and cell phone usage, and on interpersonal relationships. The better and more open relationship one has with their child, the more likely they will be able to help them and possibly prevent things like this.

Click to expand...

But the failure is in seeing it as something that is never acceptable. If they send it to someone they hardly know, or they don't realize the potential consequences, then sure. If it's a mature 16 or 17 year old sending to someone they really know well and trust, there's really nothing I see wrong. Like teen sex, it's not inherently bad, but can be depending on the situation.

And frankly, even where it is a bad thing, I'd rather my child sext than drink or drive without a license or do drugs or actually have sex or any number of things that it's often considered normal young adult behavior.

CaptainCourtesy said:

I actually agree with you to a point. Sexting has become a way to harass others. Because teens have far less impulse control... a condition because of their brain development... when someone sends naked pictures, it is quite possible that those pictures can be used as a harassment tool. I've seen this lots of times. Someone will "sext" a picture to someone, who will then spread it to others to embarass that person. Is there a way to stop this? Probably not, similar to trying to stop teens from having sex. Best course of action is early education on this sort of thing, both on internet and cell phone usage, and on interpersonal relationships. The better and more open relationship one has with their child, the more likely they will be able to help them and possibly prevent things like this.

Click to expand...

I'd like to see the schools step up to the plate with a wide range of tech etiquette instruction. Computers, cellphones, texting. What is the proper media for what type of communication? When is it rude to be texting? When is a phone call or face to face interaction called for?

I have a rental and have had a fairly good relationship with the couple who are moving out on July 1st. We communicated very well, mainly by texting. We had a misunderstanding recently and I told her that we could not work this out by text, and I insisted the wife call me, and we were able to have a conversation and work out our issue.

My take...

The 23 year old was wrong with regards to the law. I have little moral qualms with a 23 year old with a 17 year old. I think that's pushing the age thing quite a bit, but without any other factors its hard to make a judge. For example I might think differently about:

a 17 year old girl that managed to go to a local college party and meathead frat guy acted the Big Awesome College guy and essentially pressured her into the notion and they've flirted since as she feels its a status thing and he's just happy to have a young floozy

than I would about:

a 17 year old that was a year ahead of most of those her age and a 23 year old who had been held back one year in elementary school, and thus had met as a freshmen / senior in High School and reconnected a few years later on facebook and something sparked.

And it goes on.

I knew a number of 17 year olds, boys and girls, that were freshmen with me in college because they had either been skipped ahead or had a birthday in such a way that they were generally a year younger than everyone in their class based on its date in conjunction with how the school happens. Maybe that's why in general I view 17 a bit different than 16 and below in regards to "case by case basis" type situation.

So while I don't know if I'd say wha the guy did was morally wrong, it was definitely legally wrong. Like it or not, the law is the law, and you gotta respect that OR if you don't you gotta own up to the punishment. The dad should've called the cops and go from there.

Now, similarly, what the dad did was wrong with regards to the law. You can't essentially kidnap or incarcerate someone (which forcing him to get tied up is just that) and then assult them. Its just not legal. Again, in regards to the morality of it, I'm kind of iffy as I understand the notion of wanting to defend ones daughters or seek revenge for it, but at the same time I buy the "innocence manipulated" type of notion when its a 17 year old instead of a 13 year old. If it was the latter you'd have no question in my mind whether I had an issue morally with what the dad did or not. However, he broke the law, and the law is the law, and he's going to have to own up for it as well.

If I was a jury, if these were the facts and the only facts presented, I'd convict without hestitation. If the girl was 14 or less then you'd probably have a great deal more hesitation in me then I would for this. If she was 11 or under i'd dare say I'm unsure which way I'd go at all.

Redress said:

Not book learning, no. Mentoring however, yes.

Click to expand...

Mentoring yes, but by age 17 the mentoring should be minimal unless there is a demonstrated problem. I don't see going out with a 23 y/o as a demonstrated problem, unless he's a douche.

Dav said:

You are confusing issues. Laws are arbitrary; personalities are not. You do not suddenly become capable of better judgement on your 18th birthday; it's a slower process, and different for everyone. Ignoring legality, we can't just assume that someone is too immature to make sexual decisions knowing only that they are 17.

Click to expand...

Actually, you are kinda confused here. The law makes it's arbitrary line due to best guesses about personal ability. We designate 18 as being an adult, since at that point, generally, more often than not, hopefully, people will be able to act as adults. Individual's are different, but you cannot craft a law that takes this into account.

Dav said:

That's what's so funny about this... when kids get drunk or high or do something dangerous, well, kids will be kids. When they show each other their body parts, it's an outrage that must be stopped.

Just another faux moral panic created by old people who can't stand these crazy kids and their darned cell phones and technology. If they did it as a kid it's ok, otherwise its a danger to society. It happens all the time, always has and probably always will.

Click to expand...

Both underage drinking and drug use have laws to prevent them. We cannot stop them, but we can work to limit them to an extent.

Redress said:

Actually, you are kinda confused here. The law makes it's arbitrary line due to best guesses about personal ability. We designate 18 as being an adult, since at that point, generally, more often than not, hopefully, people will be able to act as adults. Individual's are different, but you cannot craft a law that takes this into account.

Click to expand...

Except that nobody was talking about laws until you brought it up. That's where you're confused; Kandahar was talking about maturity, and you responded as if he was talking about legality.

Frankly though, it's at the height of stupidity to have laws against sexting anyways, not to mention enforce those laws. It's illegal for an adult to make a move on a minor, but the minor will not get arrested for doing anything with an adult, or another minor. The same logic should apply here. Consent laws are there to protect minors, not persecute them. So maybe someone gets embarrassed. Is it better that they are embarrased and also punished? Actually, I think I recall a story about a girl in that very situation who then killed herself. Underage stupidity should not be illegal. Unless it is physically/mortally dangerous stupidity, like drug and alcohol use. Sexting isn't even in the same league.

reefedjib said:

Is a 30 y/o male and a 16 y/o female fair game? What's the limit?

Click to expand...

That's a bit different than 23 and 17.

Arch Enemy said:

That's a bit different than 23 and 17.

Click to expand...

Intentionally so.

Jerry said:

I think the people of California set the age of consent so high because they realize how unprepared their children are until the older ages. I would've expected to see an age of consent of 18 exist in ultra conservative states as that's the stereotype, but then it follows that a conservative family would raise more responsible children, better able to handle the world earlier on. Children from Liberal homes tend to seek sex about 2 years earlier than children from Conservative homes. Here in SD the age of consent for sex is 14, and marriage with parental consent at 16. Our children have a longer leash because they're more responsible. CA knows that their failed public education system and Progressive policies retard their children development, so let them decide what their age of consent is for themselves. If you don't like it, don't live there.

Click to expand...

Really? Because according to this http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/USTPtrends.pdf ; here are the states with the highest rates of teen pregnancy:

1. New Mexico
2. Nevada
3. Arizona
4. Texas
5. Mississippi
6. Delaware
7. Arkansas
8. Georgia
9. Tennessee
10. South Carolina

I see a lot of Conservative states on there with a lot of pregnant teenagers.

By the way, California ranks 15 (still pretty high - but lower than other states with large Latino populations - which is also a notable trend among several of the states listed here).

Further, the liberal states of New England tend to make up the predominance of the bottom 10.

So, facts trump your anecdote.

PeteEU said:

So this thread is all about a right wing conservative father with sexual issues that cant accept that his daughter is growing up? The father should be thrown in jail for not only being a moron but attempted murder.

Click to expand...

No, this thread is all about a left wing liberal father with sexual issues that cant accept that his daughter is growing up..... it's California afterall. :roll:

reefedjib said:

Is a 30 y/o male and a 16 y/o female fair game? What's the limit?

Click to expand...

In CO it's ok. Age of consent here is 16. That's probably about right for age of consent laws. The 23 yr old and the 17 year old isn't all that bad. I like how people freak out and pretend there's child porn or some other stupid crap. A 17 year old is not a child.

We really go overboard on this issue a lot. At some point we may have to step back and start using our brains. I know, I know; it's a lot harder and not as fun as just running off of knee-jerk emotional responses. But it will serve us much better in the long run.

FilmFestGuy said:

Really? Because according to this http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/USTPtrends.pdf ; here are the states with the highest rates of teen pregnancy:

1. New Mexico
2. Nevada
3. Arizona
4. Texas
5. Mississippi
6. Delaware
7. Arkansas
8. Georgia
9. Tennessee
10. South Carolina

I see a lot of Conservative states on there with a lot of pregnant teenagers.

By the way, California ranks 15 (still pretty high - but lower than other states with large Latino populations - which is also a notable trend among several of the states listed here).

Further, the liberal states of New England tend to make up the predominance of the bottom 10.

So, facts trump your anecdote.

Click to expand...

You fail at statistics... just because a more conservative state has a higher teen pregnancy rate does not mean that it is the conservatives in those states which have the pregnant teens.

And as for "the liberal states of New England tend to make up the predominance of the bottom 10", let's take a look at the actual bottom ten:

41. Iowa
42. Nebraska
43. Massachusetts
44. Wisconsin
45. Utah
46. North Dakota
47. Minnesota
48. Maine
49. Vermont
50. New Hampshire

Bold = deep blue state, Underline = deep red state

3 of 10 is hardly the "predominance". In fact, it's the same as the number of very conservative states on the list. According to Cook PVI, the bluest state - Vermont - and the reddest state - Utah - are both on the list. Maybe that ought to tell you something.

And Jerry was at least right about his state, which is just above the top 10 at #40. But mostly, it looks like you can't determine things like teen pregnancy by the overall ideology of a state.

i think the dad went over the top, particularly if the images had not been anywhere but between the two of them.. additionally if you consider that she obviously was allowed to "spend alot of time out of view" so to speak; what did he expect with so much freedom?
though in a bit of contrast, i cant say that i wouldnt do something as crazy over my daughter, if the intent were to slander..

as for the questions of "legal age of consent", ill throw this out... i was 17 when i enlisted.
seems im capable enough to pick up a weapon to keep the wolf away, but i couldnt drink, couldnt vote and i couldnt legally consent to sex.. is that a bunch of crap or what?

they(the state/federal govt) sure didnt mind me filing income taxes since 15, but i still wasnt viewed as being capable of consent to.. well.. anything.. until the magical moment i turned 18.

who makes these imaginary lines of consent?
and why are there so many variations by state?

PeteEU said:

So this thread is all about a right wing conservative father with sexual issues that cant accept that his daughter is growing up? The father should be thrown in jail for not only being a moron but attempted murder.

Click to expand...

My guess is that the only reason you would mention the word "conservative" is because of your own bais. Unless you have evidence of this, we can just accept that it is nothing but your opinion, which, without any facts, is valueless.

But thanls for sharing.