America's sex laws: unjust and ineffective

santry wrote: post #5

How did the illustrator get such an abstract-but-faithful-to-the-original illustration of goatse past the editors of The Economist? That must qualify as a skilled bit of social hacking…

I don't think every illustration involving hands pulling apart something can be described as "faithful" to the original goatse.

Re: America's sex laws: unjust and ineffective

#7

Post by ilyak » Sat, Aug 08, 2009, 2:36 PM UTC

ilyak wrote: post #3

This isn't called 'unjust'. It's caleld 'crazy', 'disgusting' and 'medieval'.

Isn't it?

Re: America's sex laws: unjust and ineffective

#8

Post by jacquesm » Sat, Aug 08, 2009, 2:55 PM UTC

burnninator wrote: post #4

Nice goatse illustration on the heading of the article.

If you see a goatse illustration in the heading of the article (thank you for bringing that even up, HN is read worldwide, it's dinner time somewhere all the time) then you really need help. Apologies for bringing it up again.

It appears there is some comfort for you in knowing that you at least are not alone in this. I have to wonder how long you stared at the subject of your association though in order to develop such a strong likelyhood in seeing analogies in unrelated images ?

Re: America's sex laws: unjust and ineffective

#9

Post by vaksel » Sat, Aug 08, 2009, 3:02 PM UTC

the problem is that the law has such a wide scope that it's pretty useless to figure out who is really guilty. The guy taking a piss outside, gets smacked down the same way as a pedophile who raped a 6 year old.

Let's say you have someone move in next door, who is in the sex offender database. With the current laws...sure the guy may have raped a 6 year old girl. However, he could have just:

a) took a piss outside

b) had sex with his girlfriend, when he was a few months older than her.

c) had a nude picture of his kids taking a bath

d) sent his own nude picture to his girlfriend

etc

Re: America's sex laws: unjust and ineffective

#10

Post by KirinDave » Sat, Aug 08, 2009, 3:04 PM UTC

vaksel wrote: post #9

the problem is that the law has such a wide scope that it's pretty useless to figure out who is really guilty. The guy taking a piss outside, gets smacked down the same way as a pedophile who raped a 6 year old. Let's say you have someone move in next door, who is in the sex offender database. With the current laws...sure the guy may have raped a 6 year old girl. However, he could have just: a) took a piss outside b)…

Depending on which state he's in:

e) Been found with a japanese comic he bought at Barnes & Nobles or Borders.