To me its not really about whether or not you are attracted to young children. Like someone tried to distinguish earlier in the thread, some people are but never act on it due to their morals and/or fear of the law.
If you plan to act on it with the knowledge that the person is underage, you are still acting as a predator, even if the person isn't actually underage. Thought crime would be if we started prosecuting the people who are attracted to underage children but don't act on those feelings.
You mean drunk people want to have sex? No way! Honestly though considering women have worse sexual treatment in Russia, Taiwan, etc I would want to see the theory compared to these places.
Overall, a lower drinking age is better (18 instead 21) in my opinion. Statutory rape is rather hard to quantify as there is a difference between consensual statutory and statutory rape.
Honestly if someone meets a 17 year old girl in a bar that only allows 18+, it shouldn't legally fall on the guy for statutory rape. As far as he was concerned she wouldn't be there if she wasn't 18.
I agree with Ksandra, I mean honestly, the "I assumed she was legal," or "she told me she was 18" defense is pretty poor. If there's any doubt, you should probably check just to be sure.
I'll admit, i've carded a couple of one night stands just to make sure my life wouldn't be completely fucked due to me wanting to get my dick wet.
My knee-jerk reaction is to say no, but I think the burden of proof isn't on the 17 year old, it's the guy, and I'm not sure I agree with that. If he legitimately did everything he could to make sure she was legal - and can prove it, which is the hard part I'd imagine - then she's to blame, not him. I'd also argue that the bar is to blame if their bouncers can't spot fakes, but then again, I don't know how sophisticated fakes have gotten.
And thats what I was saying.
I strongly disagree with this statement.
A bar is not selling sex. Unless the sex is actually happening inside the bar, they should not be held responsible for actions that happen after people leave the premises.
The only action they are at fault is allowing an underage person on their property where alcohol is distributed. (state by state varies)
I think it starts setting a terrible precedence if you are going to lay blame on them for sex.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Swaab
Is that a joke? Cause I can't stop laughing.
Yes, but the bar broke the law by allowing a place for such a situation to even occur when they are required to prevent it. ID proofing is not hard to do for them so why should it not have anything to do with them? Why should they have no accountability to a possible and obvious repercussion?
Also on the comment of checking someones ID (yeah get your mouth off mine and pull out your ID please maddam!) it is not like you spot a fake ID nowadays by it being printed off a cereal box. These things look legit, and noone is pulling out their pocket flashlight (we carry those right?) checking for light transparency against their real ID. While on a different level I wouldn't blame myself for accepting counterfeit money because I didn't check it before accepting it.
Personally I don't see the difference between someone born 4/17/1997 and someone born 12/17/1997 too.