Free-Range Kids

This Mother of 3 Is on the Sex Offender Registry for Life Because She Made a Mistake as a Teen

Do you feel safer?

|

Shawna Baldwin
Free Range Kids

Sometimes when I write about the sex offender registry, I get comments like, Those scum don't deserve to ever live a normal life.

This note below is a reminder that a study of 17,000 people on the registry by the the Georgia Sex Offender Registration Review Board found that only about 5 percent were "clearly dangerous," and 100 total registrants could be classified as sexual predators.

Not that the other thousands and thousands of registrants were all Romeo and Juliet cases, or teens who sexted. Just that most people who have been arrested for a sex crime don't do it again. Some will. Most won't. And the public registry has no deterring effect either way.

So just as we allow everyone from drug kingpins to bank robbers to serve their time and then resume their lives (even living next to banks!), that's what we should do with people who were arrested for sex offenses.

But we don't. We put people on the the registry for life, as if an 80-year-old is no different than a 25-year-old. We insist on lifetime therapy as if a person needs to visit a shrink every single week, for 40, 50, 60 years to learn a lesson. Not only is this obviously ridiculous, it has been proven ridiculous.

So here is Shawna Baldwin's tale. She is on the registry for life. Does this make any of us feel safer?

Dear Free-Range Kids: My name is Shawna and I am a required to register as a sex offender for having sex with a teen when I was a teen myself. Here is my story.

When I was 12 my mom befriended a neighbor in the apartment complex we lived in at the time. She was around 21-22 at the time and I thought she was absolutely the coolest person I had ever met. I idolized her. She was more interested in being my friend than my mom's friend, and was there for me through some very bad times while we were neighbors. We moved and lost contact. Then when I was 18 we reconnected.

She was around 31 at this time and hung out with her friend's 14-year-old son. I had moved in with her and the 3 of us became close friends. She would always tell me how much he liked me and that him and I could have mixed-colored babies and they would be so pretty.Which got my mind thinking about him in a way that was more than friends.

On my 19th birthday she said she wanted to have a party and the 3 of us got drunk and played truth or dare. She had us dance naked and kiss in front of her. Him and I had sex that night.

The next morning she took him to his mom and she filed charges against me. I was sentenced to 6 months jail, lifetime probation and lifetime registry as a sex offender. I will be turning 34 in December and I'm still required to register and be on probation. I have to take polygraphs every 6 months and still attend sex offender group therapy. I have 3 children and this is starting to affect them.

Two years ago they passed a law that says I cannot take my kids to the park anymore. This includes lakes, as they are State parks. Their friends can never stay over for a sleepover and where I can have their birthday parties is limited. My husband and I, along with our 3 kids, have had to move in with my mom on many different occasions, due to my restriction on where I can live and not being able to find a home.

I have all the backing from my probation officer and therapist to try and get off probation and registry. However, due to my felony, it is hard to find any job where I would make the amount of money I need to go back to court.

The system is failed and everyone is being painted with a broad brush. I want to become a voice for sex offenders and hopefully get connected with the right people and organization to start changing some of these laws. Not everyone should be called a sex offender.

Sincerely, Shawna

Turns out I'd seen Shawna in the deeply affecting documentary Untouchable, by David Feige. It chronicles the efforts of a powerful Florida lobbyist, Ron Book, who was so outraged and heartbroken (and, it feels to me, guilt-ridden) to learn that his now-grown daughter was molested by their nanny that he has dedicated his life to making the sex offender laws harsher and harsher. Book is delighted that no one on the registry can resume a normal life. At the end of the movie we see him raging that the children of those on the registry should be taken away.

If Book's wish became national law, Shawna's three kids would go to foster care.

Shawna's story may be unusual. Then again, every registrant's story, just like every non-registrant's story, is unique. But our laws aren't. They are heavy, blunt instruments forged in fury rather than reason. Shawna's right: It is time to change our sex offender laws. And it is time to get rid of the public sex offender registry.

Advertisement

NEXT: Butch Otter Still Opposes Legalizing CBD Oil; Uses Hyperbole to Explain Why

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The important thing is that legislators got to pad their resumes.

    1. That and unconstitutional laws are still in effect.

      The courts have all twisted the Constitution to keep these registry laws in effect. They are punishments (see what happens if you fail to register), violations of ex post facto in many cases and unconstitutional to tell people they have where they can live, work, etc if not incarcerated.

      1. As we are seeing in Texas, the registries are also destroying plea deals that were properly satisfied decades before the registry was implemented. The deal was altered for the worse long after the fact, ergo the ex post facto violations.

        States who do this remind me of Darth Vader in “The Empire Strikes Back” when Vader kept altering the deal he had made with Lando where Han, Leia, and Chewie were held as prisoners to lure Luke to Cloud City. Remember that at first Leia and Han would remain on Cloud City as prisoners, then Vader turned Han over to Boba Fett. When Lando objected, Vader again altered the deal and told Han to put Leia and Chewie on board his shuttle. When Lando objected, Vader said, “I’ve altered the deal! Pray I don’t alter it further!! It would be most unfortunate if I had to leave a garrison here.”

        That’s how states are with the retroactive application of their Sex Offender Registry laws.

  2. If this had happened 5-6 years earlier it wouldn’t have been a crime. AoC in GA was 14 until around 1995. The General Assembly raised it to 16 for the Olympics.

    1. You’d think they’d have temporarily *lowered* it for the duration of the Olympics.

      1. (You know, because elected officials like to shower favors on sports types)

        1. They didn’t want the world thinking we were a hillbilly hotbed of child marriage and daughter-fucking

          1. Unfortunately for SIV, the age of consent for chickens in Georgia remains legally undefined.

            1. (Makes note to vacation in Georgia!)

              Chicks, chickens, they’re all the same to me! No turkeys, though… Gotta have SOME standards! And I have heard that turkeys can “gobble” uncontrollably, with their sharp beaks, at times…

              1. The cool part about doing it with chickens is that, when you’re done with them, you can kill them and eat them. Try THAT with a hooker.

                CB

                1. It has been done.

  3. “Book is delighted that no one on the registry can resume a normal life. At the end of the movie we see him raging that the children of those on the registry should be taken away.”

    The “Newsweek” article you linked to says that Book has softened his stances at the encouragement of his daughter, though, so…

    1. Tell you what. Until he shows remorse and works to undo all the harm he’s done, he can stay on my offensive list for life.

      1. If by offensive list you mean woodchipper queue.

    2. The Newsweek article was from 2009. In Untouchable, Ron Book discusses how we should be tortured, waterboarded, possibly murdered, so if that is his soft stance, what was it before?

      Bottom line, Ron and his bimbo daughter deserve to be forced into homelessness just like he did to the registrants of Miami.

  4. What the? Have you taken over Radley Balko’s nut punching job?

    1. The real evil person in this was her 31-year-old ‘friend.’

      So the 31-year-old buys liquor and supplies it to two underage teens, gets them drunk, gets them naked, and then gets them to have sex together (no doubt secretly watching as well.) And then, the next morning, she turns in the 19-year-old girl and gets the 19-year-old in trouble??

      Questions:
      1) Why in the hell not just keep your mouth shut? Everyone had a good time, and no one should need to tell the police.
      2) Is that 31-year-old on the sex predator list now as well? And did she do any time or at least a fine and probation? Because in turning the 19-year-old in, she clearly violated far more laws than the teen, so should not have gotten off simply because she’s the one who turned her in.
      3) The 31-year-old orchestrated the whole thing, then immediately goes to the police. Isn’t that entrapment? Damn, the girl needed a better lawyer, that’s for sure.

      1. Poor folk don’t get good lawyers, silly man.

        1. Good point!

          Maybe the mom here should just go ahead and take her 3 kinds to a State Park and get arrested. Then get a public defender (pray for a good one!). THEN finally a poor person can get her day in court!

          Or maybe put up a GoFundMe web page…

          1. What good does that do? Case dismissed, but doesn’t get them a restraining order vs. future charges.

            1. Dang it! I suspect you’re right! Sad to day…

              The whole thing is often just a racket to enrich the lawyers-judges-prisons-industrial complex! The more people that we can hassle and punish, the more power, money, and glory we gather for ourselves!

      2. I think the mom filed charges. Poor writing.

      3. “The next morning she took him to his mom and she filed charges against me.”

        I don’t the “she” that filed charges was the 31 year old room mate. I think it was the boy’s mother.

        Also, the lady on the registry should fight this a “ex post facto” law. She said this law passed 2 years ago, but her “crime” was 15 years ago. They are applying a current punishment to a “crime” that happened prior to the law passing.

        1. There was a court ruling somewhere that being on the registry wasn’t “punishment”, it was something else, and so sex offenders weren’t protected against ex post facto rules. I’m not sure if it was a state or federal decision. If it was a state other than the one Shawna lives in, then hopefully some attorney will take up the case on the ex post facto ground (among others), but it would have to be pro bono, since she has no money for a lawyer, nor a reasonable prospect of earning it.

          It does seem like the 31-year-old was the real villain here, getting a 14-year-old drunk and encouraging him and a 19-year-old to have sex, and I do wonder if charges were filed against her and, if so, what the outcome was. Just who told the 14-year-old’s mother about what happened, the 31-year-old or the boy himself, isn’t clear.

      4. If I read that correctly, the 31 yo told the boy’s mom, and she went to the cops.

      5. 3) The 31-year-old orchestrated the whole thing, then immediately goes to the police.

        The writing was unclear on whether it was the 31 year old predator or the boy’s mom who reported it to the police.

        The next morning she took him to his mom and she filed charges against me.

        I concluded the latter.

        Maybe Lenore could clarify.

      6. IF you believe the story. I don’t.

  5. Conor Friedersdorf ?@conor64 Jan 6

    There are a lot of opinion magazines on the right. @reason is the one I rate least likely to compromise its principles for President Trump.

    1. …as opposed to compromising for other reasons.

      1. They would compromise a lost faster for Premier Hillary.Since most of the Reason staff voted for her.

    2. Reason isn’t on the right or left.

      1. i think some people need to try and grasp that politics is not something sufficiently captured by Nolan Charts, or “spectrums”, or other attempts at visualizing what are in fact combinations of entirely different philosophical arguments.

        they are not differences of “degree”, nor are they polar opposites that can maintain perfectly “blended” ideas somewhere equidistant between them. (the false-conception of libertarianism being a midway point between left & right)

        Simply put = libertarianism is on the “Right” because of self-ownership. what is meant by “right” is not one half of a spectrum, but rather a shorthand term for a historical body of ideas.

        That said = I don’t know what Connor intended by that; for all i know he lumps in Reason as a watered-down heritage foundation. I don’t really care enough about his opinion to want to find out.

        1. Right wing means a “naturally favored class, elite”.

          In a libertarian world there is no such thing since most of us classic liberals believe in a meritocracy.

          Now you (and most commenters here) might be right wing as conservatives.

          1. Palin’s Buttplug|1.7.17 @ 4:12PM|#
            “Right wing means a “naturally favored class, elite”.”

            Stupid even by your abysmal standards, turd.
            Please tell us how the left wing equalized all parties. I’ll be waiting.

            1. Right-wing politics hold that certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable,[1][2][3] typically defending this position on the basis of natural law, economics or tradition.[4](p693, 721)[5][6][7][8][9]

              I know you’re an idiot, Sevo, so I am supplying the Wikipedia definition which is sourced multiple times (those little numbers included).

              Monarchists and those loyal to the throne, traditionalists (Christian/Muslims) and a whole host of favored elites are “right wing”.

              1. According to the definition you posted, there is also the possibility that one would believe certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable due to economics.

                There’s your meritocracy, and also where libertarians would be more likely to land, rather than supporting an undeserving elite or tradition.

                1. According to the definition you posted, there is also the possibility that one would believe certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable due to economics.

                  Agreed, but “economics” is too vague to be useful here.

                  A market system with a landed aristocracy might be right-wing while a pure meritocracy-based market system would not be.

                  1. Palin’s Buttplug|1.7.17 @ 4:34PM|#
                    “Agreed, but “economics” is too vague to be useful here.”

                    More arm-waving, no answer.

              2. Palin’s Buttplug|1.7.17 @ 4:24PM|#
                “I know you’re an idiot, Sevo,”

                I know you’re a liar, but ANSWER the QUESTION, you piece of shit.

                1. This question?

                  Please tell us how the left wing equalized all parties.

                  Why should I? I never made such a claim, I don’t represent the “left”, and I don’t care about “equality” in outcome.

                  So why should I?

                  1. Palin’s Buttplug|1.7.17 @ 5:13PM|#
                    “So why should I?”

                    Because lefties like you are commonly claiming the advantages of socialist economies when they make claims regarding the right
                    So, just to make sure your bullshit is balanced by the facts regarding lefty hell-holes you prefer, read here for what the left-wing hell holes you prefer actually deliver rather than a wiki claim that a certain poitical views “hold” (hint: feelz ain’t worth shit).
                    “The Poverty of Income Inequality”
                    […]
                    “The Soviet Union was supposed to be a classless society. Western leftists assumed that was true. They were wrong. Not only did the Soviet Union have a rigid hierarchy of classes, but it also had the same income inequality as any other economy in its class.”
                    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fp…..greenfield

                    1. You’re completely full of shit once again, Sevo.

                      I only support capitalism as an economic concept – nothing else. You are like the idiot Fox News host who calls Warren Buffett a “socialist” because he rejects the shitty concept we call “conservatism”.

                      Conservatism is garbage. A sack of shit relabeled as a political concept. It needs to die now.

                    2. I only support capitalism as an economic concept – nothing else.

                      Capitalism by definition is only an economic concept, and it’s incompatible as an economic concept with both the political and economic policies you advocate, including strongman regimes, punitive taxation, theft, and price controls, to name but a very few.

                    3. Palin’s Buttplug|1.7.17 @ 5:45PM|#
                      “You’re completely full of shit once again, Sevo.:”
                      You make that claim, we KNOW it to be true of you.

                      “I only support capitalism as an economic concept – nothing else”
                      While you lick Obo’s ass and tell us how great O-care was as “capitalism”.
                      You need top get a better dealer; you can’t keep your stories straight for more than 15 minutes at a time.

                  2. Based on my time here, I think the question has something to do with you, a bet, and if it was paid.

              3. Hey buttplug……did you pay up????

              4. You use the world’s left wing bottom scum, Wikipedia, as your proof? You do know that they skew hard Left, right? And your ‘certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable’ is a better description of the RINO and Democrat elites, and those are your masters. Incidentally, a thousand flimsy references are the flaw of the intellectually vacuous. Your AGW buds are no different, same with your anti-fracking allies.

                Communists, Leftists, Monarchists, those loyal to whatever throne, traditionalists (Muslims) and a whole host of favored elites are not ‘right wing’ by any stretch, but serious fellow travelers of the Left.

                But, your moniker reveals just where your head is!

          2. Then all the wonderful technocratic flavors of progressivism and socialism are actually right wing? I don’t think that dog hunts.

          3. You believe in a meritocracy? Sure you do. We believe you.

          4. Right wing means a “naturally favored class, elite”.

            Funny, in my first hand experience, “left wing” means that.

            1. Same here.

        2. The Nolan Chart is certainly a big improvement over the one-dimensional political “spectrum” that most of the public still thinks in terms of. Libertarianism was conceived of as being neither left nor right, and people come to it from both “sides”. The popular conception that libertarianism is a form of conservatism is one we should try to dispel. If belief in self-ownership is the core of being libertarian, then religious/social conservatives who insist that we are owned by God or society and not by ourselves are our core opponents.

          1. If belief in self-ownership is the core of being libertarian, then religious/social conservatives who insist that we are owned by God or society and not by ourselves are our core opponents.

            Excellent!

            I wish I had written that.

            And I also agree that any “left/right” perception is a taint on Libertarianism.

          2. If belief in self-ownership is the core of being libertarian, then religious/social conservatives who insist that we are owned by God or society and not by ourselves are our core opponents.

            It seems really weird that the religious tradition that popularized self ownership and human equality in western civilization is somehow an opponent to the tradition that it popularized.

            Self-ownership requires human equality (innate human dignity) as a premise. Without it, there is no way to connect my ownership of my self to your ownership of your self. Self-ownership via innate human dignity says nothing of our relationship to a superior being. As we were discussing in another thread, rights (along with self-ownership) mean nothing in a void. The hermit who is out of touch with civilization has no use for the concept of self-ownership. It is only when two people interact that rights and self-ownership matter. It is entirely plausible that our relationship with other people (rights, self-ownership) is wholly different from our relationship with God (submission, etc.).

            1. The problem with religion is that it is inherently a collectivist, anti-individual endeavor.

              1. You know, except for the fact that everyone’s relationship with their god is intrinsically personal.

                Oh, and you’re about as classically liberal as Hillary Clinton. Duck off demfag.

                1. I think that’s a feature of certain religion traditions only. In others, the deity or deities deal with people on a per-tribe, per-nation, per-kingdom sort of basis and mete out collective rewards and punishments.

                2. everyone’s relationship with their god is intrinsically personal.

                  Except Catholics. They usually like to have a mediator.

              2. as a collectivist yourself, you should be quite comfortable with that, eh comrade?

            2. TGA, bingo. The irony of history is the source of ‘self-ownership’ IS from Christianity. Christian theology is filled with interesting notions of human liberty.

              One example:

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology

              1. The irony of history is the source of ‘self-ownership’ IS from Christianity.

                No, not really. It is from the age of Enlightenment. The Catholic church was wildly opposed and had previously supported slavery.

          3. If belief in self-ownership is the core of being libertarian, then religious/social conservatives who insist that we are owned by God or society and not by ourselves are our core opponents.

            At the risk of starting a religious debate, which is not my goal with this comment, all the “religious conservatives” I know, believe in free will. Those who choose to devote their lives to “God” are free to do so, just as those who choose not to are free to do so as well. Agreed, many try to use the state to control behavior, but they usually could not care less what one does in their personal lives. In my opinion they are on the brink of libertarianism if they would realize that free will should apply to state oppression just as it does with religious fundamentalism. I think it is the progressives who claim we owe some sort of forced allegiance to society, as in, we must take your money, and force you to bake cakes for the greater good.

            1. The Renaissance painters who challenged the Church’s authority did so by putting the emphasis about the universe on man himself. However, they generally all remained pious individuals. E.g. Raphael, Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Titian, Botticelli etc.. They, much like the Founding Fathers, believed in God’s authority and all human liberty flowed from this point of origin.

              1. They, much like the Founding Fathers, believed in God’s authority and all human liberty flowed from this point of origin.

                Well put. Something about starting a government to ensure human liberty comes to mind. We seem to have gotten off track at some point.

              2. They, much like the Founding Fathers, believed in God’s authority and all human liberty flowed from this point of origin

                Maybe you Canuck’s “founding fathers” but don’t try to speak for us Americans. Jefferson and Madison rejected that bullshit you spew.

                1. Yeah, Jefferson hated religion so much that he curated his own edition of the Bible.

                  1. “Yeah, Jefferson hated religion Christianity so much that he curated his own edition of the Bible.” (without the Resurrection and miracles – just the empty rap)

                    Fixed it for you.

                    1. Yep, leaving only the moral teachings and the constant references to a unitary creator of the universe. Your point is well made.

                2. You’re such a worm. The sort of worm fish would turn away on a hook.

                  “Massachusetts Bill of Rights Massachusetts Bill of Rights, Part the First
                  Categories: Religious Liberty
                  Date: 1780
                  It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly and at stated seasons, to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religion profession of sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship….”

                  “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.”
                  Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774); The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (19 Vols., 1905) ”

                  “James Madison A Memorial and Remonstrance
                  Categories: Religion and Morality, Religious Liberty
                  Date: 1785
                  Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, “that Religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only be reason and convection, not by force or violence.” The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man: and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.”

                  (cont’d)

                  1. “George Washington letter to the General Committee of the United Baptist Churches in Virginia
                    Categories: Religious Liberty
                    Date: May, 1789
                    I have often expressed my sentiments, that every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience.”

                    “John Adams Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law
                    Categories: Religious Liberty
                    Date: 1765
                    Let the pulpit resound with the doctrine and sentiments of religious liberty. Let us hear of the dignity of man’s nature, and the noble rank he holds among the works of God . . . . Let it be known that British liberties are not the grants of princes and parliaments.”

                    “John Leland The Rights of Conscience Inalienable
                    Categories: Religious Liberty
                    Date: Unknown
                    Every man must give an account of himself to God, and therefore every man ought to be at liberty to serve God in that way that he can best reconcile to his conscience . . . . It would be sinful for a man to surrender that to man which is to be kept sacred for God.”

                    “George Washington Letter to Benedict Arnold
                    Categories: Liberty / Freedom, Religious Liberty
                    Date: Unknown
                    While we are contending for our own liberty, we should be very cautious not to violate the conscience of others, ever considering that God alone is the judge of the hearts of men, and to Him only in this case are they answerable.”

                    (con’t)

                    1. “James Madison Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments
                      Categories: Religious Liberty
                      Date: June 20, 1785
                      It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society.”

                      “IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
                      The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
                      When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

                      Just to pick out a few.

                      They were not hostile (they were critical absolutely but not hostile) to religion or God – in fact, they very much held in spirit the idea of God’s power over man; this is where, despite their rebellious spirit and action, we see they were conservative where God was concerned.

                      Now go eat a bag of worthless worms you bottom-feeding squelcher.

                      Here’s my flare to you:

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVyCK70BTUs

                    2. They were not hostile (they were critical absolutely but not hostile) to religion or God – in fact, they very much held in spirit the idea of God’s power over man; this is where, despite their rebellious spirit and action, we see they were conservative where God was concerned.

                      Oh, there’s certainly a degree of hostility in some of the Founding Fathers’ writing on religion, but it tends to be directed at very specific practices or individual that counteract their ideas of faith. Jefferson, for example, tends to be anti-clergy and anti-Catholic, because they’re in direct conflict with his idea of a personal relationship between an individual and ‘the Creator’. He’s not screaming that it’s bullshit, he’s arguing a theological debate in regards to the nature of the divine. It’s nuance, something PB is utterly incapable of.

                  2. “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time”

                    These were rebellious protestants, not representative of Christians as a whole.

                    Christianity for many centuries had preached government by divine authority and sanctioned slavery.

                3. Jefferson and Madison rejected that bullshit you spew.

                  Oh look, Palin’s Buttplug is being a historically ignorant moron again.

                  Madison:
                  …”Because we hold it for ‘a fundamental and undeniable truth’, that religion or ‘the duty which we owe to our Creator’ and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence…

                  …Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign…

                  …The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator.It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him…

                  1. Jefferson:
                    “I must ever believe that religion substantially good which produces an honest life, and we have been authorized by One whom you and I equally respect, to judge of the tree by its fruit. Our particular principles of religion are a subject of accountability to our God alone. I inquire after no man’s, and trouble none with mine; nor is it given to us in this life to know whether your or mine, our friends or our foes, are exactly the right…”

                    …We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

                    (You may be unfamiliar with that second one, it’s just from this thing Jefferson wrote called the Declaration of Independence)

                    Yep, no liberty from God’s authority here, move along.

                    Do yourself a favour Buttplug, have some idea of what the fuck you’re talking about before you come on here and lecture other people on what constitutes ‘bullshit’.

                    1. I was wondering when you’d show up and join in. About time.

                    2. I WAS BUSY. And unlike every red-blooded American I don’t carry my copy of Jefferson quotes in my front pocket and read them facing DC five times a day.

                    3. Holy shit. Not only are you two Canucks conservative – you are the worst kind. Bitter Clinger asshole Bible-beaters.

                    4. Christfags! Haha, got’em!

                    5. Ah.

                      So merely understanding history and posting quotes said by others makes us…conservative and bitter clingers?

                      I see.

                      Man are you remarkably stupid.

                      Other than that, do you have an argument here ignoramus?

                    6. PB proving his brilliant deductive reasoning skills once again. I’m an atheist and technically a member of the Liberal Party (I vote in the leadership races at least). My religious views and party affiliation are completely irrelevant to the historical works or personal beliefs of Madison and Jefferson.

                    7. When you spend your life running scared of the Christian Taliban, everything starts to look like a station of the cross to you.

                      (PB is dumber than most so he actually does believe in a Christian Taliban.)

                4. You are a progressive. A thing that is mutually exclusive with actual Americans. So please don’t confuse/equate yourself with one.

          4. The Nolan Chart is certainly a big improvement over the one-dimensional political “spectrum” that most of the public still thinks in terms of.

            mostly agree. “improvement”; but “better” is neither “good” nor necessarily “correct”.

            The popular conception that libertarianism is a form of conservatism is one we should try to dispel.

            I think this is driven more by concern over being fashionable than it is of ‘helping people understand ideas’.

            Maybe it would make more sense to try and resuscitate the traditional meaning of the term ‘liberal’ than worry about being improperly labeled ‘conservative’

            religious/social conservatives who insist that we are owned by God or society and not by ourselves are our core opponents

            (shrug) i might agree if i thought those people represented any significant political cohort. Most americans are have some sort of religious identification. I doubt any but a small fraction would argue that their beliefs should be forced on everyone as a matter of law. Your point would have more relevance if we lived in Saudi Arabia.

            I think our core opponents are anyone who presume to deny people the freedom to make their own choices.

            1. I think that libertarianism can be conservative or, for lack of a better word, progressive. And probably other things.

              It depends on what you start from. American conservatives are often somewhat libertarian on at least some issues because the country has a tradition of individual liberty (not in every area of life, of course).

              And in a place like this you can see a sort of divide between those who see a return in many ways to older values and traditions and see that as the best way to maintain freedom and those who have a more radical idea of how things need to change.

        3. Actually throughout most of history and in most of the world, those ideas are part of the “left”. The “right” was originally used to describe the monarchists during the French Revolution, which is pretty much the opposite of self-ownership. Yes, it was sometimes used to describe the Gironde (who were reasonably close to libertarianism) as well since they were moderate than The Mountain, but only after Robespierre had the monarchists beheaded. It would be like if Elizabeth Warren had all Republicans and independents and moderate Democrats beheaded, Obama would be considered the right.

          1. Actually throughout most of history and in most of the world, those ideas are part of the “left”. [insert history lesson]

            that thought occurred to me after i posted that; i think the point i made in that second-to-last paragraph would have been better left off, because the rest didn’t really need it.

            what i would have added to make that case clearer would have been to say, “in the 20th century…. libertarians have been on the right …”

            I don’t think making long-term historical comparisons makes much sense. Libertarianism as we know it is pretty much a 20th century phenomenon, even if the classical-liberal tradition is much older.

            1. I think it’s best to say they are on the right in the US (though I might still argue with that a bit). Right wing and conservative really only mean anything in context. In Europe the traditional way is largely monarchy and authoritarianism. In the US it is (with some big caveats) more or less individualism and self determination.

          2. But this is the US, not France, so conservative tends to mean someone who wants to conserve American traditions (which tend toward the liberal) and American legal doctrines (which are often explicitly liberal). So, in the US, conservative often means liberal, whereas liberal tends to mean illiberal utopian progressive types.

            1. “So, in the US, conservative often means liberal, whereas liberal tends to mean illiberal utopian progressive types.”

              If you were reading regarding the downfall of communism in Europe and whatever happened in China in the late ’80s, the nomenclature got quite confusing.

              1. I personally get a kick out of Russian politics constantly framing the both the Orthodox socons and old school communists who yearn for the Soviet Union to come back as ‘conservatives’.

      2. Reason is to the right on economic issues and left on social, if you hadn’t noticed that then you aren’t paying attention.

  6. I have a bigger problem with Shawna’s tacky tattoo.

    And how much TV makeup is she wearing?

    1. That’s a photo filter

      1. It’s still creepy the way it softens her features into next to nothingness.

        1. That’s what it’s supposed to do. Welcome to the 21st century. Did you have a nice nap, Mr Van Winkle?

    2. Aren’t all tattoos tacky?

      Put another way, when has a woman looked better because of a tattoo?

      1. No. How can an aesthetic choice on body art be a universal negative when something such as beauty is completely arbitrary and a matter of opinion?

    3. I can’t really read the tattoo.
      It looks like it might say “Hello Kitty”.

    4. People need to stop raging on her. she’s hot, will let out in a threesome, and is up for some kink. Girls like that are a natural resource to be preserved. Not put on some faggot list for baby rapers.

  7. I’m not saying she should wear a scarlet “A,” just that it would be more applicable in her case than in the case of most sex offenders, who should be forced to wear a scarlet “D minus.”

    (Strictly a joke – I’m actually against these registries – serve a definite sentence, not a lifetime ban from society, say I)

    1. What did she do that was wrong?

      1. “Wrong” was a poor choice. What did she do that should have required serving any sort of sentence?

        1. I wouldn’t even have asked the kid how he felt about anything. As a once 14-year-old boy myself, I believe this young man has been victimized and will suffer trauma for his entire life. If this had been me, I would have been carrying around a mattress everywhere I went as a reminder to everyone I know that I totally had drunken sex with this hot older blonde.

          1. What Fist said. A 14 yo boy who has sex with a pretty 19 yo is going to be in hero mode, not trauma mode.

            “Oh no, sister Fox, please don’t throw me in that brier bed again!”

            1. In this new world you can’t separate “genders”. If it isn’t ok for one then it isn’t okay for any.

              1. There’s a double standard here for a reason. Sex for males has a very different effect and possible consequences than for females. The genders aren’t equal in all things.

                1. There’s a double standard here for a reason. Sex for males has a very different effect and possible consequences than for females. The genders aren’t equal in all things.

                  I’m gonna tell Jezebel! Where’s Amanda Mercotte when you need her?

            2. The only proper response is “Nice.”

            3. At 14, we hung out with 16 year-old girls. My first kiss – tongue and all – was with a 16 year-old more ma-tture French-Canadian named Genevieve.

              1. I can only imagine how they screw up French kissing as they screw up the French language.

              2. there are romeo/juliet laws here in most states that if you are within 3 years or so of each other then it’s not statutory.

          2. Eh, I think you’re forgetting that most 14-year-old girls who sleep with older guys are every bit as enthusiastic as you might have been. At that age, female hormones are hitting hard, too, having a boyfriend is a huge status boost, and if that boyfriend is several years older and more mature and has a car and money to spend!? That lucky girl will be bursting with pride and all her friends will be jealous.

            The question really isn’t whether 14-year-olds of either sex are can be enthusiastic about sex with hot older partners — they often are. The question is whether or not it’s bad enough for them that it should be legally banned. I don’t think so — I think all the teen sex panic is ridiculous, but I also don’t think it’s significantly worse for teen girls than teen boys. If anything, it’s the other way around. A teen girl hooking up with an older guy is a more natural pattern that may end up lasting. And I know a couple of married couples where the way they met was that he was her teacher in high school. The pair I know best claim ‘nothing happened’ until after she graduated. Maybe that’s even true, but who cares?

            1. It just needs to be true until:

              1. He quits teaching.
              2. The statute of limitations is up.

        2. I didn’t read the details, maybe she did nothing worth convicting her for.

          I wasn’t following the ages of the parties.

          I was speaking in general terms of sex offenders – I say don’t put them on registries even if they *do* commit a bad offense – give a prison/probation/parole sentence commensurate with the crime, then allow for rehabilitation after they’ve served the sentence.

          So I guess I’d put it this way – even in the worst case scenario, I don’t think the women in this article should be on a “sex offender registry.”

        3. If anyone did anything wrong it was the older woman. But it seems like everyone was pretty happy except the boy’s mom.

        4. Thee should be more chicks like her. Hot chock wants to get naked, mack on another chick and fuck my brains out? Yes please! Fucking faggot ass authorities need to stay out of it.

  8. LOL

    How much do you think this boondoggly piece of shit document cost overall?

  9. In a just world Ron Book would be sentenced to live life on a sex offender list so that he could fully appreciate the everlasting pain he has helped cause.

    On my 19th birthday she said she wanted to have a party and the 3 of us got drunk and played truth or dare. She had us dance naked and kiss in front of her. Him and I had sex that night.

    And now I’m off to my bunk.

    1. *Puts down Crusty under Would and Ted S. under Would Not*

      1. I wouldn’t actually physically engage in any shenanigans like that, but I would’t run away either. I’d sort of hang around and watch.

        So put me down as a Would Eye

        1. Someone has to operate the video camera.

  10. More seriously, there’s a horrendous push to do away with the statute of limitations on sexual abuse.

    Because that would never, ever be misused.

    1. Go get yourself your therapist certification – the memory recovery business is going to be the hottest thing going. I’m pretty sure my mother never got affirmative consent before she’d change my diaper so all I need’s just a little nudge to remember I didn’t like it when she’d strip me naked and wipe my butt.

      1. If I were a religious believer, at least I’d know people like Martha Coakley are going to be burning in hell.

        1. I don’t like to wish ill on another human being. But I’ll make an exception for Coakley. A crippling accident or disfiguring fire….leaving her alive but in agony, might begin to balance the injustice she inflicted on the Amiraults.

  11. All of these lists are unconstitutional, along with any regulation that in any way infringes upon a person’s constitutional rights. The end goal is to expand these lists and regulations so that they remove constitutional rights from all citizens, except of course, for the politically connected for whom there are no laws. And they will succeed because if you weren’t doing anything wrong… when they came for me, there was no one left to speak… The government is now 100% illegitimate, the rule of law is dead. All of the people responsible for this should burn in hell forever.

    1. Here we go with the Connor Cook show.

      Just Win Baby! (yes, I know the likelihood of that today)

      1. Yikes. Well, we’re probably better off with Cook than with McGloin. I finally watched video gameplay footage of Cook today. Here’s my take on it.

        1. Cook has a pretty good arm and he has decent accuracy.

        2. Cook is not Carr level talent and probably never will be.

        3. This is the NFL, boy, not college. And not only that, it’s the playoffs. Just imagine the game speeding up x3 – x5 and there actually being a defense, and plan for that.

        4. Because of 3, you’d best get that ball out of your hands before you get killed.

        That is all.

        1. Watched some of the first half; as expected. But it’s worth asking:
          Oakland drafts highly rated school QB; why sit him on his butt for three years? You mean when they were losing, they couldn’t have plugged him in for a series or so?

          1. “Oakland drafts highly rated school QB; why sit him on his butt for three years? ”

            Derrick Carr.

            1. As expected, that was some desultory play. I think that Cook playing was more the result of McGloin choking last week than the injury. There were a couple bright spots and a few dropped passes that should have been receptions. They are set up to go back to the playoffs next year.

    2. I hate these and the no fly lists. If you think someone should be punished for 30 years then pass a law and be done with it, but once you’re out of prison/parole you’ve done your time. You should have all the rights of a normal citizen and not get stuck on lists to make you a pariah. These just leads to more hate and more crime and more recidivism.

  12. wood

  13. I remember a case, I think in Georgia, where a woman ended up on the sex offender list for something like “contributing to the delinquency of a minor”. If I remember the case correctly it seems that her underage daughter had gotten pregnant by her bohfriend, who was also underage. To keep the couple together and make sure that her grandchild had a father, she invited him to live with them after his parents kicked him out. Those parents then had her prosecuted, so now she is on the list. Her daughter and the guy are married (or were when the story aired).

    This kinds of hits close to home for me. My maternal grandmother was the eldest of seven kids. She was born in 1920 when her mom was 14 and her dad was 20. Both of those great-grandparents lived long enough for me to get to know them and were married until my great-grandfather died in the mid 1970s, but of course he would have gone to prison and been put on the sex offender registry today.

    1. Not if they were married and he had her parents consent he wouldn’t be.

      1. The marriage came later for the young coupe in the story. or are you talking about my great-grandparents? If the latter, I think my great-grandmother’s parents would probably have chased my great-grandfather off due to the age difference. Good thing for me that attitudes were different then.

        1. I’d guess a shotgun wedding would be more likely, if necessary. Back then lots of people, my mother included, graduated from eighth grade and went to work.

  14. On my 19th birthday she said she wanted to have a party and the 3 of us got drunk and played truth or dare. She had us dance naked and kiss in front of her. Him and I had sex that night

    What happened to the 31 year old woman who bought the booze that enabled the 14 year old boy to probably have the night of his life? One size fits all punishments and lists are incredibly stupid.

    Speaking of, “what happened to….”? Is the worlds most famous dick pic publisher for teen girls, Mr Weiner going to be on a list?

    1. Ha ha, to paraphrase Reason (fairly loosely), the campaign last year pretty much jumped the shark when “the investigation into Hillary’s emails was reopened based on an investigation of Anthony Weiner’s computer”…

    2. He’s a regular on local political news roundtables and considering another run for city hall – duh.

      1. Serious?

    3. Without one size fits all punishments, women and minorities will be hardest hit.

  15. She was around 31 at this time and hung out with her friend’s 14-year-old son. I had moved in with her and the 3 of us became close friends. She would always tell me how much he liked me and that him and I could have mixed-colored babies and they would be so pretty.Which got my mind thinking about him in a way that was more than friends.

    On my 19th birthday she said she wanted to have a party and the 3 of us got drunk and played truth or dare. She had us dance naked and kiss in front of her. Him and I had sex that night.

    Sex offender registries are bad news. But this is really fucking weird. All of it. AoC laws are what they are and the author pretty obviously broke that law. But it sounds to me more like this 31 year old should have been charged with all kinds of shit. What kind of 31 year old hangs around with a 14 year old and a 19 year old, anyway?

    Also, He and I had sex. Not him.

    1. “Also, He and I had sex. Not him.”

      There’s the real crime! /sarc

      1. “He and I had sex. Not Hihn.”

        1. Hihn was there in spirit, as Hihn is in all cases of children having sex.

          1. We’re all going to be very sorry when Hihn comes to this thread in a few weeks and posts a devastating rebuttal.

            1. Hes hanging out in the “howd the lp do” article.

          2. I thought he was into lemon parties.

        2. That was wrong. Funny. But very, very wrong.

    2. Also, He and I had sex. Not him.

      I assumed she was as grammatically astute as I is.

    3. It’s perfectly possible for both of you to have sex with him. No need to get jealous

    4. I don’t know. My question is why did the 31 year old tell the kid’s mother?

      1. sometimes being a total cunt just comes naturally.

    5. The 19 year old “broke the law” but had no victim. The 31 year old could be charged with supplying alcohol to a minor… but her offenses were also minor, no pun intended. I’d also say charge the mom of the 14 year old for sheer stupidity. Did her kid come home with a disease? No? Just a shit eating grin? Okay fine, don’t like the influence of the 31 year old, then don’t let him hang out with her. However, bringing up charges is idiotic. Get over it, minors like to fuck just like adults. The quicker society as a whole accepts this the better it’ll be for everyone.

      Also, a lot of people hang out with people of various ages. Only recently have the morons deemed that “bad”.

  16. I thought the defamer did all the sex stuff. Has she been fired? Please tell me she has been fired.

    1. Uh-oh. What has she down now to earn your ire?

      1. She accused some publisher or journalist of not-so-secretly delighting in the deaths of Palestinian children when he’s off-mic. Because the media is so in the tank for teh j00s.

        1. Here’s the tweet and ensuing shitstorm, in case anybody’s interested. I have no idea who Eli Lake is.

  17. OT: “American Unintelligence on Russia” by the Moscow Times

    The most remarkable thing about the government’s assessment released on Friday is that more than a quarter of the report is merely an annex dedicated to the colossal significance of the RT (Russia Today) television network. These seven pages written by the U.S. intelligence community comprise what is perhaps the greatest and most generous Christmas gift in the history of Russian Orthodoxy, which celebrates the birth of Christ on Saturday, Jan. 7…Thanks to the C.I.A., F.B.I., and N.S.A., Russia Today can count on continued, likely expanded, Kremlin funding.

    It’s not insane to look to Russian propaganda outlets and Internet trolls, in order to speculate about the Kremlin’s preferences and plans, but there is much that’s unnerving about just how Washington reads the tea leaves of the Russian media. If these are the outlines of the U.S. government’s guesswork on Russia, that’s scary.

    1. Fake news. Bald eagles do not wear ray-ban’s, they wear Wiley X.

  18. California inmate becomes first US prisoner to receive tax payer funded sex reassignment surgery

    They’re serving a life sentence for kidnapping and murder to boot. And have been moved to a women’s prison now.

    1. Sounds like you’re having one of those transgender panics. /sarc

    2. Wow. 57 yo murderer. California, don’t ever change.

    3. Lucky lady!

    4. So a prisoner can change his identity just by wishing, and he wastes that wish on becoming a woman?

      He should change his identity to “some other guy,” as in “some other guy did this, you have the wrong person.”

      And then I presume that the prison would accomodate his new identity as an innocent man…by releasing him.

      1. I mean, he could be anyone he wants, and he decides to become a woman who was convicted of the same crime as him?

        He could at least have identified as a woman *without* a criminal record.

        1. I’ve got it, he could identify as the Invisible Man so the guards have to pretend not to see him as he makes his escape.

          1. You’ve probably noticed my error.

            The Invisible Man would make too easy a target…he’d look like a walking prison uniform. The guards would know it was him and would know where to shoot.

            This guy needs to identify as the Invisible *Girl,* she can make her costume invisible as well as her body.

      2. OK. Imma splain this one to you.

        Men prison is rough. There is sex, but it is all rapey and stuff.

        Women prison is much nicer. Women in prison pair up and form families. There is sex, and it is not all rapey.

        Soooo…… if you were staring down a life sentence without parole and had another 40 years of life expectancy….. do you serve it out in a violent and rapey men’s prison, or with all of the lonely chicks over in the women’s prison?

        Seems to me someone’s been doing some thinking….

        1. Why did he have to have surgery? Why didn’t he just declare he was a woman?

    5. Hey, it’s the first time in recent memory that California has decided to cut something with my tax money. Progress!

      1. California bureaucrats are cutting into top-quality steaks on your tax dime every night.

    6. In a very ironic way, if Trump sent in troops to CA, rounded up the state assembly, Jerry Brown, etc. and had them all summarily executed, it would be one of them ost libertarian things he could ever do.

  19. Yes not everyone deserves to be called a sex offender but you do. Whether there should be lifetime punishment is another matter. I’d just leave the country.

    1. I’ll bite. What possible reason would justice demand that this woman be called a “sex offender”?

      1. An adult having sex with a child.

        1. Yeah, way to obscure what actually happened.

          1. How is that obfuscation? She was over 18, he was under 18. Adult and child.

            1. A child is a human who has yet to reach puberty. A 14 year old male is well into puberty, near the end of it. Take your “FOR THE CHILDREN” rhetoric elsewhere. Also… fun fact… kids have genitals that feel pleasure and can achieve orgasm. Time to hate evolution and biology I suppose right? Moron.

              1. All manner of species eat their own young as a biological imperative. If strict biology were the only thing we went on, we’d still be swinging from trees with a significant percentage of our offspring as the product of forcible rape.

                Fuck off.

                1. Fuck off? You just conflated biologically different species with humans. You can kindly fuck off. This is mere definition. Want to argue action? A 14 year old and 19 year old had consensual sex. Who gives a shit?

        2. No ‘child’ was involved’. when I was that age I would have fucked any half decent older chick given the opportunity. Only a fagu would not.

          1. Child:
            a young human being below the legal age of majority.

            1. That’s the legal definition for minor. Please keep your mouth shut (or rather, hands in your pockets) until you learn basic biology/law.

              As we know, legal definitions are often completely moronic.

    2. Be glad there is not an idiot registry or you’d be on it for life.

    3. Yes not everyone deserves to be called a sex offender but you do. Whether there should be lifetime punishment is another matter. I’d just leave the country.

      I’m with you ‘Trey.

      First, IDK what punishment the 31 yr. old received. The crowd is getting excessively libertine on this/these issues as though sex has no consequences and sexually capable = sexually responsible or competent.

      I agree with the forum at large that this was a pretty harmless incident, but it seems no one had even the slightest bit of conscious regard for the law or other consequences for themselves, let alone anyone else. Some might say that they weren’t even in their right minds and pretty much everyone’s description is testament to it.

      I *know* sex isn’t intrinsically a violent crime but there’s little indication here that this wasn’t merely coincidental. Moreover, it’s not like they all knowingly violated the law for some higher cause or purpose. They got drunk and everyone, pretty universally, fully acknowledges they made a mistake. Sex offender registry for life is pretty onerous, but some seem to be bordering on the notion that 31 and 19 having sex with a 14 yr. old is de facto a-ok. Others, paradoxically, seem to be indicting the 31 yr. old while giving a pass to the 19 yr. old asserting that one level of manipulation is taboo while another is completely acceptable.

  20. “The next morning she took him to his mom and she filed charges against me. I was sentenced to 6 months jail, lifetime probation and lifetime registry as a sex offender.”

    I wonder if she plead out or went to trial.

    I’d like to think a jury would have acquitted her. It just takes one person out of twelve to decide that something doesn’t pass the stink test, and this case definitely stinks.

    1. The problem is that the judge and the DA would go on and on about how the jurors can only vote on the facts in the case. They cannot vote on the law.

      My stint on jury duty had me get into it with a judge on that point. She got very mad when I said that I didn’t agree that I was bound by oath to only vote on the facts. I was kicked out of that jury selection pool.

      Sadly, I think many juries might agree that the facts don’t pass the sniff test, but would convict anyhow because all the important people down at the courthouse told them that the law is the law.

      1. I’m not even that subtle.

        “I am here to, with 11 other slaves, rubber-stamp the guilty verdict already decided by the prosecutor and judge in this case.”

  21. They still don’t get it, volume 88,253:

    ABC just ran a promo for Blackish. This upcoming episode is about Election 2016. Tracee Ellis Ross, the matriarch of the sitcom’s featured family, is strongly supporting Hillary. Apparently, at her workplace (or is it at her husband’s? I don’t remember and I don’t have DVR to review), guest star Maureen Ponderosa declares that the voted for Trump. Everyone at the table is appropriately aghast. She then defends herself as not racist, adding, “I have black friends.”

    Pretty bold of ABC to have a white woman portraying a Trump voter, but here again: a Trump supporter is just another closet racist. And the good people vote for Hillary.

    I don’t watch Blackish, but I hope the episode turns the promo on its head. I suspect that it won’t.

    1. The absolutely last thing you want to do is be defensive.

      “Oh, so you want to call me a racist, you lying sack of shit?” is a good opening gambit.

    2. Just saw that too. Every. Single. Thing. Is politicized. I haven’t seen a TV show in recent memory that didn’t randomly approach politics in some unnecessary and ham-fisted way.

      1. Never mind that’s what got Firefly cancelled in the first season.

    3. I’ve never seen it but that doesn’t sound like comedy to me.

      1. My proggy roommate: “Hahahaha. You wouldn’t get that joke. I really need to start watching that show”

        Seriously all the racist people I know are all of the SJWs. They just convince themselves they are not racist, because something something white people.

    4. My understanding is that the Carmichael Show had David Allen Grier as a Trump supporter, though I think that show is NBC, not ABC. I’ve heard Blackish can be pretty fair, but then this episode would have been written shortly after the election, so the writers room may have been in fully crazy mode.

  22. Bratfart – the fake news site founded by Andrew Bratfart published more fake news:

    German police quash Breitbart story of mob setting fire to Dortmund church

    goo.gl/pu1KX5

    1. German media and politicians have warned against an election-year spike in fake news after the rightwing website Breitbart claimed a mob chanting “Allahu Akbar” had set fire to a church in the city of Dortmund on New Year’s Eve.

      After the report by the US site was widely shared on social media, the city’s police clarified that no “extraordinary or spectacular” incidents had marred the festivities.

      The local newspaper, Ruhr Nachrichten, said elements of its online reporting on New Year’s Eve had been distorted by Breitbart to produce “fake news, hate and propaganda”.

      The justice minister of Hesse state, Eva K?hne-H?rmann, said that “the danger is that these stories spread with incredible speed and take on lives of their own”.

    2. HA HA HA HA Bratfart! FUCK that’s funny! HA HA HA!!

      What else ya got, Plug? Douche Limpballs? FAUX News? Drumpf??

      I’m dying from the funny!

      1. This is a libertarian site. Mocking our opponents is SOP.

        Free Republic is thataway –>

        1. I don’t care who you mock; I care that it’s terribly unfunny.

          1. I don’t give a fuck what you think is funny – I like mocking anti-liberty assholes like Andrew Breitbart who choked on his own fucking bloated artery like he deserved to. Karma – bitch.

            1. Block Insane Yomamma, amirite?

              1. MikeM was calling the outgoing president “Mofobama” on another thread. I wish he could have delivered the official Yokeltarian response to the State of the Union speech over the past 8 years

            2. There’s the class leftist assholes are long noted for.

            3. Hey, do the one about how Thomas Sowell is an uppity nigger again too. You don’t have to bother switching socks.

              1. The depth and severity of Weigel’s mental illness can’t be measured. They haven’t yet invented the drug that can give him the help he needs.

        2. Palin’s Buttplug|1.7.17 @ 5:36PM|#
          “This is a libertarian site”

          WIH are you doing here, turd?

        3. A) You aren’t part of any “we” here, unless it’s you and your alts.
          B) If you can’t mock better than Dumbasstic Dipshitdent, don’t whine when people mock your mockery like they do to Dyke Phlegm.

          1. He’s got tapeworms.

  23. She should be able to get beyond that part of her life, like Dame Judy Dench put her Playboy photo shoot behind her.

    1. Did *anyone* fall for that? Or am I getting too obvious?

      1. Rickrollers go to hell.

  24. “Jamie Oliver to shut 6 UK restaurants in tough Brexit market”
    […]
    “Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver is shutting six of his 42 Jamie’s Italian restaurants in Britain amid tough trading conditions and a lower pound following Britain’s vote to leave the European Union.
    […]
    The Bank of England’s chief economist, Andy Haldane, conceded Thursday that forecasters got it wrong when they predicted a sharp economic downturn in the event of a vote to leave.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/wor…..839379.php

    The second quote tells me they’re looking for a boogey-man to blame in the first quote. What’s ‘tough’ about a market that’s pretty much exactly where it was before the event?

    1. Maybe the spigot of cheap eastern labor dried up. Oh god, this probably means he’ll come over here and start lecturing Americans some more.

  25. Well, this is why we have juries.

    I wouldn’t mind hearing what Lenore’s idea for a replacement to sex offender registries should be. I’m not interested enough in wasting my time to pull up actual cases and the time served for them, but there are plenty of rapes where the guilty person has served anywhere from 6 months to 5 years. You’re damn right I want to know who those fuckers are if I’m an employer, a parent of school-aged kids, or anyone else who has interests at stake or leverage if the brilliant idea of having a rapist in close proximity to me and mine goes south.

    Outside of obvious categories of behavior that shouldn’t even be crimes in the first place (public nudity/urination and the like), we are talking about violations of NAP that no one forces the guilty to commit. Maybe AoC laws should have a different age limit, and that should be talked about. In the meantime, some insane 31-year old offers you booze and plays truth or dare, and you end up serving time for fucking a minor? That’s on you. Sex offender laws shouldn’t be overturned on account of the one or two sympathetic cases, any more than laws against petty theft should be abolished on account of the starving man who stole bread for his children. If the law is bad or violates NAP, I’m open. If there’s a better way to prosecute violations of NAP, I’m listening. Until then, fuck you if your “solution” is to eliminate our compromise between locking up sex offenders and losing the key, and a slap on the wrist.

    1. So you’re ok living next door to a murderer?

      1. If someone is a danger to society, or to you as a neighbor, they shouldn’t be out of prison in the first place

      2. It depends on who the murderer is.

    2. Hey, Lenore’s no hypocrite, she once had some 40 year old guy who molested his sister when he was a kid over to her house, right there with her children… for a huge publicity event with 200 other people. If she can take that leap of faith, then certainly you can trust somebody who’s served their debt to society for boning a minor to, say, teach at your kid’s school.

      Actually though, sex offender registries are basically redundant for the class of crimes you’re talking about. Convict those who’ve committed violence of felonies and you accomplish the same thing.

    3. They should probably just add a 4 or 5 year age gap rule in addition to the age of consent; basically saying that if there isn’t any massive disparity in maturity, there isn’t a statutory rape. It would solve these cases, anyway.

    4. I wouldn’t mind hearing what Lenore’s idea for a replacement to sex offender registries should be.

      Even if you think there should be a registry, the really stupid part of the existing system is the size of the list. The study cited showed that out of 17,000 people registered, 100 were really classified as sex offenders. Half of one percent.

      That leaves the current registry as far too big a haystack. You can’t adequately track 17,000 people, much less protect anyone from them. Removing the other 16,900 registrants leaves a list of the 100 that you really need to worry about.

      Then you can remove the restrictions on those real offenders who can no longer cause problems. That way you wouldn’t have to have 90-year-old people who can’t physically get out of bed moved to a different nursing home, because a bus stop gets built too close to the first facility.

    5. I wouldn’t mind hearing what Lenore’s idea for a replacement to sex offender registries should be.

      Why repeal and replace, when you can just repeal?

      Is there any reason to believe that registries reduce the actual commission of crimes? I don’t recall seeing anything. Without some basis for believing they are having their so-called intended effect of keeping children safe, why have them at all?

  26. We (by which I mean media and the Left) make fun of chastity and give out birth control to minors, but minors sexting or having sex are still illegal, which puts kids on the offender registry. A 16 yr old with a 15 yr old girlfriend–offender. Yet we have wiped away chaperones and the tradition of a boy coming courting and asking parents for permission to date the girl. It is the worst of worlds as far as sweeping up horny teenagers.
    And of course on college campuses, asking a girl for a date or pinching her bottom are sexual assault.

    1. That’s certainly something that bugs me a lot: The simultaneous & opposing ways society increasingly treats sex activity by or w kids. It really seems like the world around them is goading them into something the world around them says is good-bad for them. But it’s consistent w the push to not make disapproved things safer, even if the disapproval is ostensibly mostly about the danger of those things.

  27. Hey postal customers, fuck you. Sincerely, the postal union.

    http://www.mygovcost.org/2017/…..consumers/

    1. FTA: Had they not done so, said APWU president Mark Dimondstein, all Staples stores “would have had full-blown post offices, not staffed by postal employees but rather Staples employees, and the Post Office also would have used that model to spread to other major retailers.”

      I thought Jooz associated themselves with successful ventures. What’s this asshole doing running the postal workers union?

      1. He’s courageously fighting against the “model minority” stereotype.

        1. Just to show that I wasn’t coming out of left field, here’s an example of an article deploring the “model minority myth” as a tool of the white cis corporate oppressors.

          1. I notice them and other proggy site are turning off comments on articles. Is that so readers can’t call you out on your brain-dead fucking arguments?

          2. So Sahra Vang Nguyen writes an extensively researched, well-written article complaining that we shouldn’t think of Asians as smart. Got it.

  28. So if the 19 year old woman was drunk, how could she have consented to the sex? Could she ask for an appeal based on her inability to consent to sex due to inebriation? After all, every time a woman on a college campus had more than a beer and gets laid, her partner is risking a rape charge or dismissal under Title IX.*

    *Because, you know, that’s what a Title IX was made for: dismissing males from school who drunkenly have sex with drunken females who later regret the hit to their reputation.

    1. Laws are applied differently to poor regular folk who don’t go to college than they are to precious little snowflakes living on campuses.

    2. Due process doesn’t exist on a college campus.

  29. Er, a 19 year old having sex with a 14 year old seems like a sex offense to me and IMHO, it makes sense she’d be on a list, to prevent her from doing it again. .

    1. I don’t think she’s going to be a 19 year old having sex with anybody, so that problem, at least, is solved.

    2. That’s your moral opinion which has no place in law, justice or punishment of a state. Sex offense? What is sex, let’s go back to basics. Sex is an interaction between humans that feels really good for both. If both mutually went into it then please explain the offense to me without moralizing about “well he was 14!”

  30. OT: Someone’s looking for a legacy… of blackouts and huge electricity bills. I can’t wait.

    1. Petition of the Candlemaker II doesn’t sound as promising as the original.

    2. Gov. Cuomo has long called to shut down the 2,083-megawatt nuclear plant that provides about 25 percent of New York City’s electricity

      What’s the plan to make up the electricity supply shortfall?

      1. LOL “plan”.

      2. What’s the plan to make up the electricity supply shortfall?

        Perhaps he should dam up a scenic river valley, one favored by backpackers, for hydroelectric power. That should be the kind of trade-off his greenie friends would appreciate.

        1. Fuck New York City for taking our water and being a shitty neighbor about it.

          1. Problems with muddy water releases from the Shandaken Tunnel have been the focus of lawsuits since 2001. The environmental watchdog group Riverkeeper, which has described the Esopus as “Yoo Hoo Creek

            Yoo Hoo Creek? Nice. Maybe tell NYC they are surrounded by water. Use that.

      3. Who needs 25% of electricity?

  31. If I ever own a bot, I want it to be by a Foxbot.

    I really enjoyed the comments. The Bernie crowd is strong there.

  32. If she were a he no one would listen to a word he said. Also, would.

  33. Obama is a muslim. Trump is a Russian spy.

    Obviously, Trump wants to preserve the narrative that he won fair and square. And, clearly, claims of Russian interference would muss his ego. But is that it? Ego and narrative?

    Consider further: Trump would rather make common cause with our fiercest geopolitical adversary (hat tip Mitt Romney) than take the word of our best people. Moreover, he has said he won’t receive daily security briefings and reportedly plans to reduce our security agencies.

    Pray tell, whose side is this man on? When was the last time you had to ask that question about a president-elect?

    1. “When was the last time you had to ask that question about a president-elect?”

      When someone you didn’t like got elected? Just guessing…

      1. Didn’t people ask the question about Obama, and get told that dissent was evil?

    2. Consider further: Trump would rather make common cause with our fiercest geopolitical adversary (hat tip Mitt Romney) Moreover, he has said he won’t receive daily security briefings and reportedly plans to reduce our security agencies

      Is she saying Romney would have been a more aware President? And it is my understanding, President Obama did not receive daily briefings in person as often as the guy who inhabited the office before him . It seems we are recycling talking points with that one.

      1. The last Republican is always better than the one Dems run against this time. Interesting how the Repubs become less racist and misogynistic the more time goes by. Except Goldwater. He set the high water mark for the racist gold standard.

    3. “Pray tell, whose side is this man on? When was the last time you had to ask that question about a president-elect?”

      I like the qualifier ‘president elect’. The question has been asked constantly for the last 8 years about the sitting president and we still don’t have an answer.

      *clicks link*

      Oh. The WaPo.

      1. *clicks link*

        Hover is your friend.

        “our fiercest geopolitical adversary”

        They’ve really latched on to that talking point like grim death.

    4. At first, it was quite entertaining watching the left and progressives slowly go unhinged. But now? It’s no longer funny if not downright troubling.

      It’s almost as if they couldn’t care less about intellectual filters. They just spew and babble like retarded goats.

    5. But Obama is probably also a Russian spy. I mean, we know the Russians have been at this for at least 7 years, and Mitt Romney was very anti-Russia while Obama was less aggressive — and was caught telling Putin how he would have more flexibility (to do what, one wonders) after the election. So it’s not unreasonable to assume Russia also tipped the last election toward Obama.

    6. For the past nine years, a smattering of Americans, most recently led by our now president-elect, have insisted that Barack Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya

      I never got the whole “born in Kenya” thing. It is my understanding, that the requirement to be President is to be a, “natural born citizen”, which I understand to be, someone who did not have to go through a naturalization process to become a citizen. If one of your parents is an American, you are a natural born citizen. Whether you are born in Manhattan, or on the dirt floor of a Tukul in Nigeria. It does not matter. The kid gets a blue passport without going through a naturalization process. I do think that President Obama has shown favoritism to some pretty shifty Islamic States though. Iran for example. Maybe backing Hamas. I don’t know.

      1. He may be an American but he seems to resent it.

    7. Trump would rather make common cause with our fiercest geopolitical adversary (hat tip Mitt Romney) than take the word of our best people.

      Pretty sure the “word of our best people” is that Russia had no effect on the outcome, but they do have a propaganda arm that tried to influence it with, you know, free speech.

  34. When I was 14 a really hot MILF ( she was 32 ) threw me on a pool table and screwed my brains out. I loved every minute of it, went back for more a few times and never suffered any emotional distress of any kind. Back in the day nearly everyone breathing would have been on the sex offender registry.

    1. Under which sink were the condoms?

      1. I have told this story before a couple of times in the comments for stories like this. It was my girlfriend’s mother. GF wasn’t home when I went to visit so….we passed the time. The pool table was in the living room..game room, whatever.

        1. “Mrs. Girlfriend, are you trying to seduce me?”

          1. She got me a glass of lemonade and sat on the couch next to me in those 70’s very short cutoff jeans. I could have cut glass with it at that point and she noticed. Since this is a wholesome family site I won’t go into more detail.

            1. Since this is a wholesome family site I won’t go into more detail.

              HAHAHAHAHA!

              Spill it!

              1. The felt on a pool table can give you a hell of a friction burn.

                Is that enough detail?

                  1. She claimed she never felt this way before?

                    1. [Mark Felt and Deep Throat joke deleted]

                1. You had me at 70s short cutoff jeans

    2. “I never thought I’d be posting a story like this on Hit & Run, but one day…”

      1. ALTERNATE JOKE: [too offensive to publish]

    3. 32 and 14? 17 or 18, maybe even 16, but 14? If I found out my 14 y/o son had sex with a 32 y/o MIlf, I’d be irate. Probably wouldn’t call the coppers, but I’d keep her as far away from him as possible.

      1. Bullshit straffin, you would be after her yourself. Poonhound.

        1. That’s why I’d be irate and keep him away from her.

    4. Ya, well good for you. The rest of us at 14

  35. The announcement comes on the heels of numerous other conservative personalities being hired by major news networks in the age of President Donald Trump ? for example, Fox News’s Megyn Kelly joining NBC News and former Fox News anchor Greta Van Sustern getting an MSNBC show.

    Megyn Kelly and Greta Van are “conservative personalities” who’ve parlayed their celebrity into jobs at “major news networks”? Me-yow, what a catty little bitch!

    (It’s some vomitous nonsense claiming any friend of a friend of Trump is no doubt a baby-strangler and a puppy-raper. I wouldn’t bother if I were you.)

    1. I thought it was already established that at least Megyn Kelly is not a “conservative”. Not sure about the other one.

    2. Van Susteren was anything but conservative prior to landing at Fox, and only then did she become fairly middle-road.
      We’ll see what Kelly is like at NBC; word is that she isn’t all that conservative in real life, either, but was always just playing to her network at Fox. But NBC has become so super-lefty that even if she just acts like a moderate Democrat there, she’ll seem like the John Birch of their news department.

      1. Someone posted some butthurt comments about how these interlopers are going to ruin “their” network; “Help us Rachel Maddow, you’re our only hope”; the works.

  36. Hot milf action.

    The 31 year old should be in jail.

    The mom was a bitch for selling out the 19 year old.

    But the 19 year old has no excuse for fucking the 14.

    1. Yes. That ^.

  37. Teen?

    She was an adult.

    The rest of the story is a tragedy, but smart folks were not distracted by the “mistake as a teen” nonsense.

  38. When I kick the bucket, this is my request.. You’re welcome.

    1. That is a proper send off.

    2. Wait a minute:

      “‘He told us he wanted this through a dream two days before the funeral,’ his brother Tung Mao-hsiung told Taiwanese broadcaster CTS.”

      1. also

        “Tung’s son said his father appeared in a dream and told him he wanted his memorial to be ‘hilarious,’ according to CNN affiliate SET TV.”

        Wow, that could really have sent Hamlet in a different direction.

  39. Fourteen will get you twenty.

    1. Fourteen will get you twenty life on a registry.

  40. Pelosi doubles down:
    “Pelosi and other Democrats fight GOP effort to dump health plan”
    […]
    “”I don’t want this to be partisan, but the fact is (Republicans) have talked about ‘repeal and replace,'” Pelosi said. “They have no replacement and even among some of their own members, they’re saying unless we have a replacement, we can’t do this. They’re not particularly concerned about the 20 million-plus who have gotten health care through the Affordable Care Act.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/politics…..842432.php

    Pretty sure the last go-round under the knife prevents here from breaking into howls with horseshit like that.

    1. …..enacted in 2010 and has provided health insurance to 28 million Americans nationwide.

      Why is this figure never “fact checked”? How many of those people had insurance prior to the act, then lost their insurance because of the act, and had to repurchase? How many of the 28 million are new medicare/medicaid recipients? Medicare is not insurance. It is government health care. I am not making a judgement that medicare is right or wrong, but they should not get away with calling it, “health insurance”.

      1. How many of those 28 million actually have increased access to health care?

        1. Well, since I got maternity coverage, I guess I did.

    2. “”I don’t want this to be partisan…”

      Oh NOW you say it.

      I have no more words.

    3. Just pass a law saying, “The Affordable Care Act of 2010 is hereby repealed”, and let the former status quo replace it. It really is that simple.

      1. This. Unfortunately, now that “replace” has been associated with “repeal” for the last few years, it will be political suicide to do the latter without doing the former.

        I’m trying to imagine what, exactly, would happen if this was simply repealed. Everyone who got a plan even though they had a preexisting condition gets a letter in the mail 3 days later saying “Your plan has been revoked. Sorry not sorry. Love, Insurance Company.” That’s not going to sell.

      2. Don’t replace it with anything. Just say in 2 years the government is out and let the private sector work it out.

    4. So now she’s curious about what is in these bills? She’s such a lousy piece of shit. She and Harry Reid are two of the biggest lowlives to ever hold office.

    5. From the story, we have noted medical/economist lying through her teeth:
      “Before passage of the Affordable Care Act, close to 40 percent of S.F General’s patients were uninsured, said Dr. Susan Ehrlich, the hospital’s CEO. The number now is about 3 percent.”
      Bull
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      shit.
      Even counting medicaid/medicare.
      SFG gets the gun-shot wounds, the drunken bums, abusers of every chemical you can imagine, and I’m to believe 97% ‘have insurance’.
      Lady, don’t lie so transparently. Makes you look like a lefty twit.

      1. Makes you look like a lefty twit.

        But she is a lefty twit.

    6. I don’t want this to be partisan

      Says the woman who jammed it through on a party-line vote.

      They’re not particularly concerned about the 20 million-plus who have gotten health care through the Affordable Care Act

      Maybe they are concerned with the fact that the number of people insured is far less than was projected, and that private insurance participation is much less than projected?

  41. Kevin Williamson channels his inner Walt Whitman

    “Farming America is, indeed, part of the real America.

    “But so is Broadway. So is Wall Street. So is Hollywood and Malibu and glorious Big Sur, and Chicago and Detroit and Miami and all the weird old places in America that don’t even feel like America at all, like New Orleans and Aroostook County, Maine. So is Muleshoe, Texas, and the campus of Harvard. America is a big, splendid place.”

    1. So? He’s large, he contains multitudes.

        1. Come on, you chicken, it’s a YouTube video, how bad can it be?

      1. And platitudes!

    2. So is Muleshoe, Texas

      How about camel toe wranglers?

    3. Nice rebuttal to all the region-war bullshit.

    4. “the proliferating variety and mystery of human existence, as opposed to the narrowing uniformity, egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems.”

      Since that piece was about pickups, and written in Texas, I have a Texas pickup story: There was a time I kept my truck and camper in Texas and stayed there when I was not working. I pulled the trailer out on the beach outside of Corpus Christi one weekend. One morning there was a knock on my door, and when I opened it there stood a skinny version of Pat from SNL. It told me they were stuck and asked if I could pull them out of the sand. No problem. I backed my truck up to a Ford Focus that was buried about half way up a sand dune. A fat guy got out of it of the back seat. The guy had the state of Texas tattooed on his forehead and looked like he just been released from prison. As I got my tow strap out of the truck I conceded myself that these two meth heads were going to kill me, steal my stuff, and bury me in the dunes. I figured the least I could do was yank the rear axle off their car prior to my death, so that is what I attempted to do. The Focus flew about three feet and then was free of the deep sand. They thanked me, and drove away. Seems they were just some of, “the proliferating variety and mystery of human existence”, but it did not stop me from packing up and going to the RV park.

  42. RIP Nat Hentoff. Awesome person who managed to be a paragon both for civil rights advocacy and jazz music.

    1. 2016 is still killing notable people, even in the new year.

    2. SHIT
      I read his Giants of Jazzout of my elementary school library in the early/mid 1970s. I began reading his Village Voice column in the mid/late 1970s and for a couple of decades after. I think one particular Nat Hentoff column tipped me from abortion-tolerant to pro-life. If I start counting individual writers whose influence is central to who I am and what I believe I have at least one finger left over on my first hand after Hentoff.

      RIP

      1. Hell, Studs Terkel wrote Giants of Jazz. I associated it with Hentoff as he was probably the second person I read writing about jazz music and musicians.

    3. Juvenile Bluster|1.7.17 @ 10:00PM|#
      “RIP Nat Hentoff.”

      He showed up as a columnist in the Skeptical Inquirer not long before it capsized to port and I thought ‘OK, one more Village Voice lefty’
      Nuh, uhn:
      “which is what happens when a bunch of people who think the same way get into the same room and congratulate one another endlessly on being right. (“Herds of independent thinkers,” as columnist and author Nat Hentoff so beautifully puts it).”

    4. Nat Hentoff, Memory Eternal.

      As the saying goes, he may not have believed in God, but God believed in him.

      1. Reason better post an item on this.

        It need not be Lou Reed level coverage, but something respectful.

  43. I’m still smarting from that missed face mask in the end zone in the Lions-Seahawks game.

    1. Seattle seems to get every call there is. To beat them, you either have to throw them down the stairs (Carolina last year) or force them to beat themselves (New England two years ago). When it’s close, shit just goes their way.

    2. Like it mattered.

      1. It *could* have. Momentum and all that. But yeah, S-Hawks had this one. But as MT jr. pointed out, shit goes their way. It’s eery.

  44. Robby Soave Verified account
    ?@robbysoave

    Robby Soave Retweeted Robby Mook

    Your time is over, there is only one Robby who matters now

    Robby Soave added,
    Robby Mook @RobbyMook
    What is stopping PEOTUS from accepting intel community’s findings? Until he accepts them, he is effectively siding w/ Putin over U.S.

    It’s rare I have anything positive to say about Soave but I can respect this.

    1. Wow. Really on point.

  45. Matthew Stafford was the Mike Tirico of this game.

  46. “What is stopping PEOTUS from accepting intel community’s findings?”
    People of the US? And, what, specifically, are those findings?

    “Until he accepts them, he is effectively siding w/ Putin over U.S.”
    Tell us what they are and maybe I’ll buy that conclusion-jumping.

    1. I believe their findings were that Russia has a propaganda arm that engaged in pro-Trump free speech, and that there was discernable effect on the outcome.

      Also, they did us the favor of documenting Russia’s long-time support of leftist movements in the US, especially OWS.

  47. i guess a 19 year old girl shouldn’t be having sex with a 14 year old boy. hehe. probably can find her on the backpage.

  48. You want to get good income at home? do you not know how to start earnings on Internet? there are some popular methods to earn huge income at your home, but when people try that, they bump into a scam so I thought i must share a verified and guaranteed way for free to earn a great sum of money at home. Anyone who is interested should read the given article..
    Click this link.

    ===========http://www.joinpay40.com

  49. You want to get good income at home? do you not know how to start earnings on Internet? there are some popular methods to earn huge income at your home, but when people try that, they bump into a scam so I thought i must share a verified and guaranteed way for free to earn a great sum of money at home. Anyone who is interested should read the given article..
    Click this link.

    ===========http://www.joinpay40.com

  50. Doesn’t sound like she was much of a friend.

  51. She was around 31 at this time and hung out with her friend’s 14-year-old son. I had moved in with her and the 3 of us became close friends. She would always tell me how much he liked me and that him and I could have mixed-colored babies and they would be so pretty.Which got my mind thinking about him in a way that was more than friends.

    On my 19th birthday she said she wanted to have a party and the 3 of us got drunk and played truth or dare. She had us dance naked and kiss in front of her.

    You were 19 and you’re talking like you’re 3 and being told by adults you had to put away your toys. Such infantalism is likely why the creepy older broad started grooming you in the first place. She is the one who really looks like the predator to me.

    1. ^^^This^^^

    2. The Mom should be charged as well for encouraging her minor child to have sex.

    3. 1) If mom was 21 first when S was 12, when mom was 31, S would have to be 22, not 19.
      2) How does one “[have] us dance naked and kiss in front of her?”

      I’m rating this three shovels of BS.

  52. I bought brand new RED Ferreri by working ONline work. Six month ago i hear from my friend that she is working some online job and making more then 98$/hr i can’t beleive. But when i start this job i have to beleived herNow i am also making 98$/hr if you want to try just check this out…..

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

  53. Such a tragedy that Baldwin has to spend her life on the sex offender registry while the Democrats who operated a pedophile ring out of a pizza parlor go free! Sad!

  54. if the sexes were reversed, there wouldn’t be an article.

    1. I for one would support an article no matter the sexes involved.

  55. The point of this article is that children should be able to consent to sex?

    Idiot.

  56. 1) I have little confidence in studies. A lot of people have passed through the system & committed horrible crimes. Take the recent FL airport shooting.
    2) If cool lady was 21-22 when Shawna was 12, how could Shawna have been 19 when cool lady was 31?

    I don’t know. Sad eyed victim in the water: WE HAVE TO BRING IN TWENTY MILLION REFUGEES NOW!!!

    Single stories… they’re for suckers.

  57. Whether the story is real or not, what I find interesting is that the intended effect is to show the injustice and provoke a sympathetic response. Reverse the genders of all the people involved; how do you feel now?

  58. As much as I feel for Shawna, I gotta ask, if she was male, and as such had participated in getting a 14 year old girl drunk for the purposes of clearly depraved sexual exibitionism to a 31 year old friend, would we be having this conversation? Would this article have been written? Shawna is branded as such because as an adult she sexually abused a child in her care. Motherhood does not erase that. The laws must be applied equally. Cute little blonde Mommy’s don’t get a special “kid diddling” exemption.

    While I agree that the Sex Offender Registry is flawed in every way possible, this is the worst example to use for trying to change it. The argument is we can’t possibly hold cute white chicks to the same legal standards because “Magical Mommy’ness”? “Oh won’t somebody think of her children!” If you want to do away with Sex Offender Registries, or set reasonable rational limits on them, argue showing actual miscarriages of Justice. Don’t hold up one of the few exceedingly rare examples of the law being applied equally to all.

    1. As a legal and biological adult she broke a moral law with a legal minor but biological adult. Please don’t use purposely emotionally charging terminology.

      If the genders were reversed, yes, it likely wouldn’t even be an article. The answer is not to destroy women with men, but to push for acceptance of teen sexuality and consensual transactions.

      I will agree that, “but she is a mom” is not an argument. The registry is moronic because it is unconstitutional, not only that, but it has the opposite effect.

      1. Forca since when are 14/15 year old kids “Biologically” adult? That is absurd, development occurs in earnest until 25. Simply due to procreation? How brutish.

  59. I see Reason is becoming a site of advocacy for even more degeneracy. For one, when I was an 18 year old guy I would never have had relations with any girl under 16 and that was pushing it. What goes through your mind as a 19 year old adult that it is acceptable to drink alcohol with a 14/15 year old kid? Obviously this girl’s family failed her, but at some point you need to have some self-awareness, my parents did not agree between themselves what was moral and while I had a solid parents I developed my moral compass on my own.

    I personally don’t care much about her problems, for one you had sex with a drunk 14/15 year old black kid, so you know what they say? Burn the coal you pay the toll. lol.

  60. Nevaeh. I agree that Richard`s storry is shocking… last wednesday I got a great BMW M3 from earning $5318 this-past/4 weeks and just a little over 10/k lass month. without a question it is the most comfortable job Ive ever had. I began this 10-months ago and pretty much straight away got me at least $83, p/h. see here now

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

  61. Ella . although Margaret `s article is super, on friday I got a new McLaren F1 after having earned $4887 this-past/four weeks and just over ten grand last-month . this is actually my favourite-work Ive had . I actually started six months/ago and right away began to earn minimum $82 p/h
    . Read more on this site…..

    ================= http://www.homejobs7.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.