GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   It's Going To Be Illegal To Fuck 18 yr olds now in California (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1062863)

dave90210 03-29-2012 02:25 PM
It's Going To Be Illegal To Fuck 18 yr olds now in California
 
According to some new law it's going to be illegal only in California to have sex with anyone over the age of 18 when you have authority over them. So that's a teacher, employer, photographer, preacher, police officer etc. It's going to be a felony to have sex with an 18 and up female if you have authority over them.

So if this law passes California will have the highest age of consent in the country. They want to make this law on a teacher student relationship that happened in Modesto and guess what the girl was of legal age.

If you shoot porn in California I wouldn't doubt if they go after you guys too since you have authority over the adult woman that your shooting.

What's next changing the age of consent to 40?

More info here
http://abcnews.go.com/US/mom-califor...5#.T3TTBcz-tFo

Due 03-29-2012 02:31 PM
Technically you can't have authority over someone of age unless they are locked up, you are an officer of the law or you are their guardian of some kind.

Else the person that is 18 and up will always be in a position where they can leave if they wanted to

$5 submissions 03-29-2012 02:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Due (Post 18852249)
Technically you can't have authority over someone of age unless they are locked up, you are an officer of the law or you are their guardian of some kind.

Else the person that is 18 and up will always be in a position where they can leave if they wanted to
Makes sense actually. Custodial power versus free consent.

brassmonkey 03-29-2012 02:34 PM
sounds ok to me

L-Pink 03-29-2012 02:34 PM
So a 21 year old girl bangs her 22 year old shift manager at Burger King and it's a felony offense? Sexual felony at that?

.

Jim_Gunn 03-29-2012 02:39 PM
The reading comprehension level on this board is astonishing. The article says that some woman is pushing for a new law. This law, if it were to be passed, would apply to teachers, presumably only public school teachers and high school students. It doesn't mention any other people. WTF are you even talking about "authority". No one has such authority over other adults except in some particular circumstances like a police officer working on the job or dealing with mentally handicapped people or such things.

InfoGuy 03-29-2012 02:41 PM
Never mind, I didn't read the article.

L-Pink 03-29-2012 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn (Post 18852271)
The reading comprehension level on this board is astonishing. The article says that some woman is pushing for a new law. This law, if it were to be passed, would apply to teachers, presumably only public school teachers and high school students. It doesn't mention any other people. WTF are you even talking about "authority". No one has such authority over other adults except in some particular circumstances like a police officer working on the job or dealing with mentally handicapped people or such things.
You read the link without posting first? :1orglaugh

.

96ukssob 03-29-2012 02:49 PM
what about marriage? isnt that authority? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

KillerK 03-29-2012 03:28 PM
People need to read the article.

LOL

ottopottomouse 03-29-2012 03:36 PM
There's already something similar here but I don't know the full scope of it.

mafia_man 03-29-2012 03:42 PM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_3mKXQYXAb...ns+mat+tom.jpg

2012 03-29-2012 03:49 PM
damn, that's fucked .............. there goes all my plans

19teenporn 03-29-2012 03:51 PM
Let's move to fuck 19 years old sluts then...

2012 03-29-2012 03:52 PM
Get out of our pants please

Grapesoda 03-29-2012 04:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn (Post 18852271)
The reading comprehension level on this board is astonishing. The article says that some woman is pushing for a new law. This law, if it were to be passed, would apply to teachers, presumably only public school teachers and high school students. It doesn't mention any other people. WTF are you even talking about "authority". No one has such authority over other adults except in some particular circumstances like a police officer working on the job or dealing with mentally handicapped people or such things.
thank you Jim :thumbsup

2012 03-29-2012 04:06 PM
I'm so glad they got that covered man. that HAD TO BE THE TOP FUCKING PRIORITY for everyone . I swear when I left the house I could hear everyone talking about this particular issue everywhere ..........

xxxdesign-net 03-29-2012 09:57 PM
while it's true that if a law is passed making it illegal for a teacher to have a relationship with say a 23yo student, because one supposedly has authority over the other, it will open the door to making a boss/employee relationship illegal based on the same pretext... that being said, the thread starter could be a little bit more honest next time he makes a thread...

lucas131 03-29-2012 09:59 PM
i vote for 40+, it will sure produce clever people

CHMOD 03-30-2012 12:09 AM
USA is becoming a more and more fucked up society every day.

Instead of focussing on sex, it would be a good idea to fight violent crimes and drug/weapon traffic.

PornoMonster 03-30-2012 12:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxxdesign-net (Post 18852812)
while it's true that if a law is passed making it illegal for a teacher to have a relationship with say a 23yo student, because one supposedly has authority over the other, it will open the door to making a boss/employee relationship illegal based on the same pretext... that being said, the thread starter could be a little bit more honest next time he makes a thread...
Several companies have this as a company policy anyway.....

alextokyo 03-30-2012 01:13 AM
If it's all the same, I guess I'll just stick to 11 year olds.

If she's old enough to count, she's old enough to mount. :1orglaugh

$5 submissions 03-30-2012 01:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 18852281)
You read the link without posting first? :1orglaugh

.
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

DamianJ 03-30-2012 02:46 AM
Maybe someone watched Girl With The Dragon Tattoo?

ruff 03-30-2012 03:35 AM
We need still more ways to lock up people in this country. The USA must look to the rest of the world the way we look at California. Just plain nuts.

travs 03-30-2012 05:14 AM
that's just fucked up

Rochard 03-30-2012 08:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn (Post 18852271)
The reading comprehension level on this board is astonishing. The article says that some woman is pushing for a new law. This law, if it were to be passed, would apply to teachers, presumably only public school teachers and high school students. It doesn't mention any other people. WTF are you even talking about "authority". No one has such authority over other adults except in some particular circumstances like a police officer working on the job or dealing with mentally handicapped people or such things.
The problem is the terms used are too vague. What it does it mean to have "authority" over someone? Does that mean someone is a prisoner, a student, or an employee? Does a manager at Wendy's have "authority" over one of their employees. I would think yes. Companies and the US military already has rules and laws in place about this.

One hand, the teacher who is banging his eighteen year old student has done nothing wrong. He's having sex with another adult. On the other hand, I have a daughter in school, and if I found out her teacher was having sex with her - no matter her age - the least of his concerns would be tossing the salad in prison.

dev777 03-30-2012 08:22 AM
wont pass. period.

L-Pink 03-30-2012 08:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff (Post 18853142)
We need still more ways to lock up people in this country. The USA must look to the rest of the world the way we look at California. Just plain nuts.
Unfortunately what happens in California, trends/legislation, tends to spread to the rest of the nation.

.

xxxdesign-net 03-30-2012 09:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PornoMonster (Post 18852939)
Several companies have this as a company policy anyway.....
so? big difference between being a company policy and being a government enforced law...

xxxdesign-net 03-30-2012 09:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev777 (Post 18853464)
wont pass. period.
what makes you believe that? 23 states already have such a law

Quentin 03-30-2012 09:45 AM
For those interested, here's the actual text of the bill (AB 1861):

Quote:
SECTION 1.
Section 1243.5 is added to the Government Code, to read:

1243.5.
(a) If a teacher or school employee is convicted of a violation of Section 288.6 of the Penal Code, he or she shall forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which he or she is a member, effective on the date of the conviction.
(b) Any contributions to the public retirement system made by the teacher or school employee described in subdivision (a) shall be returned, without interest, to the teacher or school employee, in a manner conforming with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code.
(c) The school district that employs a teacher or school employee described in subdivision (a) shall notify the public retirement system in which the person is a member of the person?s conviction.

SEC. 2.
Section 288.6 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

288.6.
(a) Any teacher or employee at a public elementary or secondary school who engages in a sexual relationship or in excess and inappropriate communication with a pupil of any age who is enrolled in the school is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in a county jail pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.
(b) For purposes of this section, ?excess and inappropriate communication? means any communication by a school employee to a pupil, regardless of who initiated the communication, that may be viewed as derogatory, sexual, lewd, threatening, harassing, discriminatory, or suggestive in nature.
(c) In addition to the penalties provided by this section, a person who is convicted of a violation of this section shall, pursuant to Section 1243.5 of the Government Code, forfeit his or her rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which he or she is a member.

SEC. 3.
No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
I can see a couple places where the bill could be treading into some questionable territory from a First Amendment perspective (mostly within the statutory definition of "excess and inappropriate communication" it provides) but I have no idea how a court would interpret that language, or whether a successful First Amendment based challenge could be mounted against the bill on that basis, should it ever become law.

There are already laws regulating the relationships between teachers/students on the books of some other states, btw, along with similar laws that make it a crime for people like psychiatrists/psychologists to have sex with their patients (or even ex-patients), including some that even cover professions like dental hygienists.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123