E-mail Scott
Scott's Links
About the Author
Opinion Archives
Social Media:
Facebook
Twitter
Tumblr
Google Plus
YouTube
Flickr
PhotoBucket
Monthly Archives:

January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
September 2014
October 2014
November 2014
December 2014
January 2015
February 2015
March 2015
April 2015
May 2015
June 2015
July 2015
August 2015
September 2015
October 2015
November 2015
December 2015
January 2016
February 2016
March 2016
April 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016
November 2016
December 2016
January 2017
February 2017
March 2017
April 2017
May 2017

Powered by Blogger
Subscribe via RSS

Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Killing a spider with a twenty pound sledgehammer

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 4:00 AM (#)

When an adult man has sex with a 14-year-old girl, there needs to be some sort of legal sanction on his behavior - even if she misrepresented her age and he believed she was 17 years old. We have age of consent laws for a reason, the primary one being to protect young teenagers from being sexually exploited by adults. But in seeking to combat these crimes, we should not do the legal equivalent of killing a spider with a twenty pound sledgehammer.

This brings me to a case I mentioned on Twitter, of an adult man who is facing harsh legal sanctions for "hooking up" with a 14-year-year-old girl. Specifically, he will now spend the rest of his life on the sex offender registry, is prohibited from using the internet (thus obliterating his career in information technology) and will face harsh restrictions on where he can live and work. Is this really the best way to solve this problem?

First, we need to be very specific about the words we use. Zachery Anderson is 19 years old, but it is misleading to call him a "teenager." It would be more truthful to refer to him as an adult man (as I did above) because that is exactly what he is. Anderson could fight, kill and die in a war for at least a full year before he committed the crime. It is especially important when the girl he had sex with is 14 years old, two years under the age of consent. In describing Anderson as a "teenager," the New York Times biases the coverage of the case in a manner that is almost certainly intentional.

But while some criminal sanction is appropriate, this particular punishment - forcing him to register as a sex offender and severely limiting where he can live and work - is an extreme and unnecessary solution. Anderson is not a sexual predator or a pedophile. He is not a threat to society or to abuse others in the future. If we are serious about helping people like him re-integrate into society, become productive citizens and not be in and out of the justice system, then this level of punishment should be illegal in situations like this.

I understand, appreciate and sympathize with the judge's moral revulsion to what Anderson did. That should not be what drives the punishment in this case, however. This case shows we need to reform how we deal with sex offenders.

(3 Comments)

Note: All posts must be approved by the blog owner before they are visible on the blog.

Comments:

At July 15, 2015 at 6:42 AM , Blogger Mike Newton said...  

"It is especially important when the girl he had sex with is 14 years old, two years under the age of consent..."

Which you earlier cite as 17. Is 17-14 = 2 Republican math? It would explain Reaganomics!


At July 15, 2015 at 6:04 PM , Blogger Scott Tibbs said...  

The problem is not my math, the problem is your lack of reading comprehension. I did not say the age of consent is 17. I said the girl misrepresented herself as 17 years old. The New York Times reports that the age of consent in Michigan is 16 years old, and she was two years under that age.


At July 15, 2015 at 9:06 PM , Blogger TableTopJoe said...  

I agree with the point of your post, Mr. Tibbs.


Post a Comment


Below are the rules for commenting on ConservaTibbs.com.

  1. A reasonable level of civility is expected. While it is expected that controversial political and social issues may generate heated debate, there are common-sense limits of civility that will be enforced.

  2. This blog is a family-friendly site. Therefore no cursing, profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, etc. will be allowed. This is a zero-tolerance rule and will result in automatic deletion of the offending post.

  3. Anonymity has greatly coarsened discourse on the Internet, so pseudonyms are discouraged but not forbidden. That said, any direct criticism of a person by name cannot be done anonymously. If you criticize someone, you have to subject yourself to the same level of scrutiny or the comment will be deleted.

  4. Please keep your comments relevant to the topic of the post.

  5. All moderation decisions are final. I may post an explanation or I may not, depending on the situation. If you have a question or a concern about a moderation decision, e-mail me privately rather than posting in the comments.

Thank you for your cooperation.