Yup! She murdered a john in his sleep, clear case of murder in the first. Or do you guys propose we give murderers a p*ssy pass now?
- - - Updated - - -
The victim didn't rape and threaten her, that was her pimp. The guy just solicited sex from her to which she agreed. He probably didn't even know she was 16.
- - - Updated - - -
No by the victim.
“Do not lose time on daily trivialities. Do not dwell on petty detail. For all of these things melt away and drift apart within the obscure traffic of time. Live well and live broadly. You are alive and living now. Now is the envy of all of the dead.” ~ Emily3, World of Tomorrow
Words to live by.
How is someone buying sex a perfect example this?
- - - Updated - - -
Well...... in the USA technically this may be true but in reality it would be kind of preposterous to convict a John of rape after having been solicited for sex by a prostitute even if it turned out she was 17 instead of 18. There would be no way for the buyer to really verify her age. The letter of the law and the spirit of the law is not really the same in these cases.
Strawman. First it's not relevant wheter he raped her or not. You can't simply murder someone even for raping someone. 16 is legal age where I live so it wouldn't be rape to begin with. Maybe illegal purchase of sex from victim of sex traffic. Even in case it would be considered rape, which might be in some states of US, you can't have victims punish someone for their alleged crimes. That's no justice just vigilantism.
Righteous no, but under the circumstances I can understand how this came about.
- - - Updated - - -
I normally don't ever agree with you, but that's a pretty good fucking point, I have no doubt her circumstances were dire, she was 16, and I am not saying whomever pimping her own wasn't confident enough to allow her to have a gun.
Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis
The client didn't make a deal with her pimp, she solicited sex from her client. Her client didn't threaten her and she agreed to have sex with him in exchange for money. Since she was 16, she couldn't legally consent but she did, in fact, actually consent thus making it statutory rape, but not actual rape.
First, I'm not "defending" anyone. I'm correcting your erroneous analysis. Second, you've really no place calling anyone dense when the actual facts have been repeatedly explained to you and you continue to spew the same drivel.
I was actually just countering the argument that someone who buys sex is a scumbag.
Rape and statutory rape are two different things. She was not raped by him, as indicated by the fact that she solicited him for sex. He did, however, commit statutory rape, regardless of him knowing her age or not.
It would be statutory rape.
That's a very interesting fact that I didn't even consider. If she had a gun, it's very well possible the entire ordeal was premeditated.
Since when was 16 17 and 51 weeks old? Your argument makes zero sense
either a person is a child and therefore... a child or they're an adult and an adult.
children shouldn't be charged as adults, 12 13 14 15 16 year olds shouldn't be charged as adults because people feel "but that's a bad crime" yeah so what? Does that mean they magically aged?
“Do not lose time on daily trivialities. Do not dwell on petty detail. For all of these things melt away and drift apart within the obscure traffic of time. Live well and live broadly. You are alive and living now. Now is the envy of all of the dead.” ~ Emily3, World of Tomorrow
Words to live by.
The age some one is considered an adult is frankly arbitrary. In some cases, (I’m not saying this one as I’ve already stated what I think should happen) people under the age of 18 should be held to the same standard as adults. If a 16 year old kills or rapes some one else with clearly no disregard for there actions and no remorse they should be held responsible to the same level as any adult, some one should not be able to get away with a crime or get a much lesser sentence for serious crimes just because they are a year or 2 under 18.
- - - Updated - - -
Something being legal doesn’t make it rape/
Well I mean people are saying this guy "probably" didn't know she was an underage sex slave, and it was therefore "wrong" for her to kill him while ignoring the fact that he was already breaking the law in the first place by hiring a prostitute... which he definitely known was illegal.
So it's hard to place him in any sort of "moral highground" here. While it's obviously conjectural... In essence, if you're in for a penny, you're in for a pound.
“Do not lose time on daily trivialities. Do not dwell on petty detail. For all of these things melt away and drift apart within the obscure traffic of time. Live well and live broadly. You are alive and living now. Now is the envy of all of the dead.” ~ Emily3, World of Tomorrow
Words to live by.
It was "wrong" (and illegal) for her to kill him unless her life was in jeopardy. Period. And sorry, but there's a huge difference in degrees between prostitution and murder. As a less extreme example: I've no problems with consenting adults exchanging money and sex (it being illegal is retarded), but I do have a problem with it being someone who's under the age of consent. Regardless of his knowing her age or not, he did commit statutory rape, regardless of the fact that she agreed to the exchange. That still does not justify his being killed unless, as I said, her life was in immediate danger.
So then we can safely assume that if you smoke weed, we can try you for selling meth to kids? Penny/pound and all.
Last edited by Mistame; 2017-12-06 at 09:29 AM.