The Pub Discussion Board

Get your favorite beverage, sit back, and join in the discussion

You are not logged in.

#1 2019-10-02 09:59:13

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

What the...?

Taken from the Florida Statutes found online.  Read them both carefully.

Florida Title XLVI, Chapter 796 wrote:

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person with reasonable belief or knowing another person is engaged in prostitution to live or derive support or maintenance in whole or in part from what is believed to be the earnings or proceeds of such person’s prostitution.

Florida Title XLVI, Chapter 826 wrote:

826.04 Incest.—Whoever knowingly marries or has sexual intercourse with a person to whom he or she is related by lineal consanguinity, or a brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, or niece, commits incest, which constitutes a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. "Sexual intercourse"  is the penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ, however slight; emission of semen is not required.

Now, I admit that I am not a lawyer, so my interpretation may be wrong.  However, here are the two observations I'd like to make:

1. The first law appears to make it illegal to be the child of a prostitute, know your parent is a prostitute, and still live at home.  I'd like to point out that this crime is a felony, and the third offense is punishable by a minimum ten-year sentence.  Even when it's NOT the situation I just set up, that's a ridiculous sentence for the "crime" of living off a prostitute's income.  I realize this law was set up to catch pimps, but the way it's written is insane... or appears to be, on its face.  Oh... and the punishment for this is worse than the punishment for the actual act of prostitution  (Which is actually a felony, in Florida, on your third offense).

2. Reading the second law carefully appears to say that it is perfectly legal, in the state of Florida, for a mother to give her son a blowjob, or let him fuck her in the ass.  It says penetration of the sex organ is required to be considered intercourse.  This makes for some... interesting possibilities for people. 

(Just in case anyone doesn't already know, and gives a shit: "lineal consanguinity" means direct bloodline: your children, grandchildren, etc., and your parents, their parents, etc.  Think of it this way: on a family tree, you could draw the relationships from one to the other in a straight line, without branching.)

I don't really have any point to make, it's just that both of these made me stop and go, "What the fuck?"

Eric Storm

PS:  Why was I looking at the Florida Statutes?  Checking on the penalties for assault on a police officer.  There was a new law just passed regarding assault on a K-9, and people were talking about how the penalties shouldn't be different between K-9s and human officers, so I went looking to see what the punishments for assault on human officers was.  But anytime I go to the statutes, something I wasn't looking for catches my attention.  This is because it's almost always a pain to find what I'm actually looking for.

PPS:  I repeat: I am not a lawyer.  This is not to be construed as legal advice.  I do not know what the fuck I am talking about, legally speaking.  If you do something stupid and get caught, you may NOT use anything I've said as a defense.  In other words: Don't do Stupid Shit and then blame ME for it!


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#2 2019-10-05 08:22:38

Elessar
Wasted
Registered: 2009-10-28
Posts: 166

Re: What the...?

I do have to say, that is a very interesting law for them to pass. I can't imagine why they would actually have to pass that kind of a law(second one) but, it is still interesting.

As far as the prostitute bit. Well, That is just fucking stupid plain and simple. A LOT of people survive off of the income of a prostitute, it shouldn't be their fault if their mom is one.

Offline

 

#3 2019-10-05 08:26:17

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

You find it odd that they have a law against incest?  Every state I've ever looked at has a law against it.

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#4 2019-10-05 23:34:32

Elessar
Wasted
Registered: 2009-10-28
Posts: 166

Re: What the...?

I more find it odd, that they HAVE to pass the kind of a law. More specifically, if a child is conceived through incest, there is a high chance of the child being born disfigured or with certain disabilities. That is the PARENTS problem, it shouldn't take the rest of society to decide it is fucked up.

Offline

 

#5 2019-10-06 01:49:45

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

Um... no, the chance of deformities in the first generation is virtually identical to random chance.  Inbreeding takes generations upon generations to occur.  Of course, this also makes the highly erroneous assumption that the only purpose for a sexual relationship is to get pregnant.

And I think, if people were able to speak about this sort of thing openly, you'd find that sexual attraction between family members is a LOT more common than you think it is.  There is nothing inherently "fucked up" about such a thing, only in society's reaction to it.

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#6 2019-10-07 05:06:51

Sdragon
Inebriated
From: USA
Registered: 2016-09-09
Posts: 33
Website

Re: What the...?

incest used to be very common, though mostly it was between cousins as their was no direct lineage (the branching off from the straight line). Incest is actually very common to occur between twins (cant remember if its paternal or maternal that is one boy and one girl). On a side note, the last time I saw any statistics on incest, New York state had the highest known concentration, though it has been a little over a decade since I last saw anything about it.

Offline

 

#7 2019-10-07 05:35:13

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

It's "fraternal" twins, which doesn't guarantee different genders, but to get different genders, they must be fraternal twins.

Oh, and fun fact:  Legally speaking, sex between cousins isn't incest.  Read the law from Florida above: it makes no mention at all of cousins.  And in every set of laws I've looked at, even first cousins are legal.

As to statistics on it... none of them would be reliable, because it would be a self-reported stat, and most people aren't going to volunteer that information.

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#8 2019-10-07 09:56:27

JBPayne
Tipsy
Registered: 2015-10-08
Posts: 8

Re: What the...?

Eric Storm wrote:

You find it odd that they have a law against incest?  Every state I've ever looked at has a law against it.

Eric Storm

This is according to wikipedia

In all but two states (and the special case of Ohio, which "targets only parental figures"[1]), incest is criminalized between consenting adults. In New Jersey and Rhode Island, incest between consenting adults (16 or over for Rhode Island, 18 or over for New Jersey) is not a criminal offense, though marriage is not allowed in either state.

Ohio allows incest between consenting adults only when one party is not a parental figure to the other.

Offline

 

#9 2019-10-07 17:32:03

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

Yeah, the whole thing is pretty stupid, when you stop and think about it.

Sex between an adult and a minor is ALREADY illegal (a law I also disagree with, but that's another discussion), so there's no reason to say, "Yes, it's still illegal if you're related".  Likewise, if there's coercion or force involved, that's straight-up rape, so again, relation is irrelevant.

Which means the only point to any of these laws is the government sticking its nose into the business of two consenting individuals.

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#10 2019-10-07 19:02:42

Josh.Bond
Inebriated
Registered: 2014-03-10
Posts: 47

Re: What the...?

JBPayne wrote:

Ohio allows incest between consenting adults only when one party is not a parental figure to the other.

linguistically speaking it would be allowable for a son or daughter to have sex with a mother or father...the son is not a parent to the mother and the daughter is not a parent of the father. It should read Ohio allows incest between consenting adults only when neither party is a parental figure to the other.

Offline

 

#11 2019-10-08 00:06:13

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

Actually, you and Wikipedia both have it wrong.  3dsmile

I went and looked at Ohio's incest statute.  They don't have one.  3dyikes

The crime referenced by Wikipedia is actual listed under "childhood sexual abuse", and it lists this among a whole bunch of other things, but stipulates the victim must be under the age of 18.

So, if I'm reading this right (Again, NOT A LAWYER!  DON'T LISTEN TO ME!), then two adults in the state of Ohio can have sex regardless of their relation.  If one of them is the parent, and the other is under the age of 18, then it is illegal only for the parent, which is why Wikipedia listed it that way.  Apparently brothers and sisters can fuck like rabbits in Ohio: they don't care.

Yay for Ohio! 

I think Wikipedia's article has a bias toward the idea that one party of the act is underage.  *shrugs*

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#12 2019-10-08 00:13:36

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

I'd also like to point out that, unlike a lot of other states (including Florida), Ohio's law prohibits a legal guardian from having sex with their underage charge.  That whole "in loco parentis" thing basically means if you're acting as a parent, that law is going to treat you like one.

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#13 2019-10-13 09:50:31

Cheezes
Tipsy
Registered: 2015-08-16
Posts: 9

Re: What the...?

Eric Storm wrote:

Yeah, the whole thing is pretty stupid, when you stop and think about it.

Sex between an adult and a minor is ALREADY illegal (a law I also disagree with, but that's another discussion), so there's no reason to say, "Yes, it's still illegal if you're related".  Likewise, if there's coercion or force involved, that's straight-up rape, so again, relation is irrelevant.

Which means the only point to any of these laws is the government sticking its nose into the business of two consenting individuals.

Eric Storm

i think you are missing something, an adult relative having sex whit a minor would qualify for both crimes, not just the incest crime. Along the lines as DUI and driving without license would be 2 crimes even though you you only committed one "act" (ie. driving when not allowed, whether that be due to no licence or due to under the influence) at least that is my understanding of US law. Which arguably, due to me not even being a resident, is probably less then that of many other here

i think it should be seen sort of as an aggravating circumstance. or similar to the different degrees under the category of homicide. And begin similar as to why sex between a teacher and student is illegal in most cases even if both are consenting adults.

Offline

 

#14 2019-10-13 18:35:33

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

No, YOU have missed something.

You can commit the crime of DUI without committing the crime of driving without a license.  You can commit driving without a license without committing DUI.

You CANNOT commit incest on a minor without committing an already otherwise-illegal act.  You cannot commit coercive incest without committing an already otherwise-illegal act.

Look at it this way:  Most DUIs happen coming home from the place where you were drinking.  But how did you get to the place you were drinking?  Since we are stating that you are DUI, you have a car with you, which means you drove there... without a license.  In other words, you've made TWO choices to break the law:  You drove without a license, just to get to the bar (or wherever), and then, after you were drunk, you drove under the influence.  Two separate crimes, for which two separate charges apply.  In the case of incest, you made one choice: to have sex with your relative.  But that single choice can result in at least two, possibly more, charges, depending on the state you live in.

I would accept your concept of making incest an "aggravating circumstance" to the OTHER laws, but I will never agree with incest itself being illegal.  Then again, I also don't agree with "statutory rape" laws, either.  I am NOT a member of the group that believes that people magically become capable of consent on a specific day on the calendar.  It's an idiotic concept on its very face.  If two people consented to have sex, and there was no force or coercion, then that is THEIR business, and the government needs to fucking mind its own.  If a complaint is filed against the adult, the teen can simply be evaluated for maturity level, to determine whether they were capable of consent.

The REASON I have a problem with these laws is that, in every state I've looked at, it is NOT illegal for a teenager to have sex with another teenager, which means the issue isn't teenagers having sex, it's teenagers having sex out of their age group... which is just stupid.  "Well, the adult can be more coercive and persuasive" is usually the argument you hear, along with "the adult should know better."  Two things:

1. Know better than WHAT?  Than to have sex?  Sorry, we are animals: evolutionarily, we have an almost irresistible drive to have sex.  That we would choose as our partners the group seemingly most interested in having sex is NORMAL, naturally speaking.
2. Anyone who thinks an adult is more persuasive to a teen than a teenager of the same age has completely forgotten what it was like to be a teenager.  This particular argument is complete bullshit from start to end.  Also, teenagers, lacking the self-control of (most) adults, is also more likely to escalate from verbal coercion to physical coercion... it's no "safer" for teens to engage in sex with each other than with adults, yet most states allow it.

"A land without laws is thrown into chaos."
"A land with stupid laws is also thrown into chaos."

I wrote it.  I believe it.

Also, nowhere that I know of is it illegal for an adult teacher to have sex with an adult student.  It is usually frowned upon, and will probably get the teacher fired, but as far as I know, it is not illegal.

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#15 2019-10-13 21:27:45

Cheezes
Tipsy
Registered: 2015-08-16
Posts: 9

Re: What the...?

My post was looking at it from a legal perspective as i understand the laws in case. it did not reflect my personal opinion on whether i agree with said laws. as i completely agree with the statutory rape being BS. also i agree with you that Incest in and of itself should not constitute a crime. (brother and sister having consensual sex i do not see an issue for example) where i am concerned about is Parental or other adults who are in a caretaker or otherwise trusted or authoritative relation towards a minor. my fear lies not so much in direct or indirect coercion, as you pointed that also happens among teens, but in subtle manipulation.

18 is not a magical boundary and you don't magically overnight change into a fully grown adult but your statement that a "teen can simply be evaluated for maturity level, to determine whether they were capable of consent" is also just as magical a fiction.  for it would require a legal definition on how to determine someone as "mature", and i hope you can see the problems that would lie in trying to define that concept in writing without also having the same grey area issues as the current age limit faces.
To me the idea of establishing Maturity in a reliable and repeatable manner as to be legally usable is just not feasible. And if if it were, most times these "crimes" are found out many months if not years after the fact, how would you then be able to establish the individuals maturity at the time of the sex act? 

as for your statement that you know of "nowhere where it is illegal for an adult teacher to have sex with an adult student" a simple google would have sufficed to find those places.

a little old and likely has been changed in several places but unlikely that it has changed in all the states that are mentioned but it shows there are quite some places where it is even specifically mentioned regarding for Teachers in the relevant laws.
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0710.htm

and for a more recent case:
https://www.al.com/news/2017/08/teacher … abama.html
where the law was indeed overruled, but purely as it is too general(ie any teacher with any student regardless whether they have any student-teacher or position of authority relation). The judge specifically states some examples of these laws in states that are not too general and do prohibit teacher student sex. see the last paragraph of the link. named are Texas, Arkansas and Kansas.

Last edited by Cheezes (2019-10-13 21:31:32)

Offline

 

#16 2019-10-14 04:04:46

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

I agree that a maturity evaluation would be problematic for cases where the complaint is significantly delayed.  On the other hand, if the "victim" wasn't mature enough at the time of sex, and that much time has actually passed, then some sort of mental trauma should be evident to a psychotic... er, ahem, I mean a psychological professional...  3dangel

As to a legal definition of maturity: given that they have a legal definition of the mentally impaired, I don't see that this presents an insurmountable hurdle.  Many laws prohibit sex with someone who is too mentally impaired to consent, and thus that term is defined, legally.  Maturity can be defined in a similar fashion.

Yes, gray areas will always exist.  That is the nature of human existence.  Despite the current trend of "zero tolerance policies", life is not a black and white situation.  That's supposed to be why we have judges: so that there's someone in the loop who can say, "Yeah, this isn't what this law was intended to prevent." (NOTE:  I'm not talking about judicial activism here, I'm talking about someone who is legitimately looking at the law, and its intent, and coming to the conclusion that the intent of the law doesn't match the situation in their court.)

As to the teacher/student thing:  Just... wow.  Just take away the rights of adults to make their own decisions, why don't you?  Just... wow.  That floors me, it really does.  "Now that you're 18, you can have sex with whoever you want... except her.  We trust you to go fight in our wars and to pick our national leaders, but you are STILL too fucking stupid to know whether or not you want to get laid."  This just makes my head hurt, and I want to hit somebody.  Preferably a politician.

Oh, and as to the idea of subtle manipulation:  Parents who are predisposed to this are already damaging their children, anyway.  The sexual activity isn't really going to make things worse.  This kind of mental abuse screws people up all by itself.  Again, my point is, SEX is not the evil thing.  We have outlawed the sex because we are still a hopelessly puritanical nation where the subject is concerned.

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#17 2019-11-04 21:53:50

MDH1969
Inebriated
Registered: 2019-01-08
Posts: 24

Re: What the...?

I think the teacher/student thing is to stop someone using their position as a teacher to coerce someone into having sex with them.  It's to do with having a position of trust over someone.

Offline

 

#18 2019-11-04 23:36:56

Eric Storm
Pub Owner
From: New Port Richey, FL
Registered: 2006-09-12
Posts: 4475
Website

Re: What the...?

coerced sex is already illegal through other laws.  There is little point to adding this specific instance of coerced sex into the legislation.

Eric Storm


Please Remember:  The right to Freedom of Speech does not carry the proviso, "As long as it doesn't upset anyone."  The US Constitution does not grant you the right to not be offended.  If you don't like what someone's saying... IGNORE THEM.
----
Please don't be an asshole to me, because then I'll have to be an asshole to you... and I'm MUCH better at being an asshole than you are.

Offline

 

#19 2019-11-18 10:09:16

nightsecho
Wasted
Registered: 2006-12-04
Posts: 165

Re: What the...?

okay i'm a little late to the conversation but

Ohio not having an incest statute 

i live in ohio and i had no idea

not sure how i feel about that


looking at you with wide eyes from the darkness

Offline

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson