Bill toughens law on visual sexual aggression against children in Maine

They haven't filled in all those loopholes? God forbid people are allowed to think bad thoughts while looking in places you don't want them to look! We might actually have freedom of thought! I think the next step in correcting this horrible epidemic of unpopular thoughts is banning creepy people.

But seriously, a fucking FELONY for LOOKING AT SOMEONE WRONG?! Eye for an eye? More like death by bodily dismemberment for calling someone an asshole. Someone, please tell me this is a joke or that I'm reading this incorrectly.

If I'm reading that correctly, since this is "strengthening" the law, there was apparently already a law banning this on private property.

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

Until I see them put the bill out for people to read I'm going to have to say Orwell's calling. I'll probably still have to after that. As an arcade attendant(my last job) I've spent a lot of time watching kids doing things wherein many of the kids their age were watching with sexual interest. And yes, I've even noticed the same interest in myself from time to time. Granted, anyone attracted to prepubescent kids needs to be watched closely, but they still haven't done anything harmful simply by being interested. And of course, sexual attraction to a fourteen year old is usually a matter of having a healthy sexual appetite and most still won't pursue said fourteen year old because they recognize it as inappropriate considering the way we raise our children.

__________________
During the journey we commonly forget its goal. Almost every profession is chosen as a means to an end but continued as an end in itself. Forgetting our objectives is the most frequent act of stupidity.
-Friedrich Nietzsche, The Wanderer and his Shadow

All good socialists have villas in Southern France. That's not the point.
-Eurosocialist

Huh?

Sorry, but that's sick.

I never look at a 14 year old and feel a sexual attraction.

Your mileage may vary...

LD 2079, item 1 , An Act To Strengthen the Crime of Visual Sexual Aggression against a Child
Title 17-A, §256: Visual sexual aggression against child
That is what I could find. Hopefully it is not quite as bad as mentioned in the article.

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

We're discussing laws and whether or not they should exist. How does this contribute to that discussion?

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

This isn't a "thought crime" law. If everyone keeps their clothes on there shouldn't be a problem.

If I'm reading it correctly, the bill says a person over the age of 18 isn't allowed to expose him or herself in private or public places to children under the age of 14. In addition, a person over the age of 18 cannot view for sexual pleasure the "uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area of another person" under the age of 14 in a public or private place. Unless I missed something, the wording of the law hasn't changed at all except that these acts are now illegal in public areas as well as private ones.

__________________
"Some years ago I had a sobering realization about women, which was that there are just too many nice ones. One simply can't fall in love with, sleep with, or marry all the nice women...One of the saddening facts of life is that there is always going to be a delightful woman somewhere who, for whatever accident of timing or attraction, simply slips by and recedes to return only in a dream."
-Larry McMurtry in Roads

That's what I got out of it.
Anyone watching children pee should be arrested...what possible reason other than to get their jollies would one do that?

I was responding to the comment that it was normal to feel a sexual attraction to a 14 year old.

Odd you were unable to decipher that, especially since I quoted it in my post...

So if a 14 year old decideds to streak the Super Bowl who's going to arrest the 70k people in the stadium?

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

I'd have to think nobody would be arrested unless a guy pulled his pants down in response. The actual phrasing says "intentionally engages in visual surveillance." The example wouldn't seem to qualify as intentional surveillance.

__________________
"Some years ago I had a sobering realization about women, which was that there are just too many nice ones. One simply can't fall in love with, sleep with, or marry all the nice women...One of the saddening facts of life is that there is always going to be a delightful woman somewhere who, for whatever accident of timing or attraction, simply slips by and recedes to return only in a dream."
-Larry McMurtry in Roads

If the 14 yr old is pubescent or post-pubescent - then every heterosexual man on earth is sexually attracted to her, given she is attractive.
Our DNA and genes dictate that we, as men, are attracted to females who have obtained the physical ability to have children - regardless of age.

It is our advanced reasoning and a civilized society that realizes that a grown man seducing her is wrong, it is not our desire that is tampered - it is our realization that to pursue her is clearly harmful to her well-being and future.

Keeping in mind - I am a staunch child advocate.

....calling the attraction "healthy" is, I hope, a bad choice of words by him.
Perhaps he would care to clarify.

WHAT WHAT WHAT?!?!?!?!

No. Not even close.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

C'mon Pram - your taking the comment out of context by not including the rest of the comment that explains that sentence....that is bad form.

My first question is, why should it be illegal to take off one's clothing? Has it been proven that doing so harms others?Which has two implications. First, that you would be getting arrested for simply LOOKING at someone (nothing else is within your hands as the other party can undress without your interference). Second, that you would be charged for having bad thoughts, or thoughtcrime. Neither looking at someone nor thinking bad thoughts harms the other party.

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.