I was just wondering if anything can happen if you cyber with someone who is underage. I've had some underage girls want to but I have never done it. Could I get in any kind of trouble for it if I do?

Thanks

Don't quote me on this but it's always been my understanding that if you engage in any kind of sexual or lewd activity with someone you know or believe to be a minor, you can get your ass thrown in jail or at least put on probation and fined up the ass heavily, depending on the offense.

Very often police will patrol adult chat rooms posing as underage chatters. If it's made clear to you that someone is underage, and you proceed to cyber or engage in any kind of sexually explicit conversation, there are a whole range of charges that can possibly be brought against you.

If you're chatting with someone who you think is underage, best to play it safe and cut the chat short.

Someone was on jcaht the other day advertising as a 16 yo. I asked him to leave, I said he was too young to be in this adult chat room, and he left.

not saying I condone this at all... but... don't the cops patrol chat rooms to catch guys who want to acutally physically meet up with minors??? I don't see how they could do anything about just chatting. Watch to catch a predator. If the guy never shows up, he doesnt get busted, right?

You can be charged for doing anything if the other person is below the legal age. It doesn't matter if it's cam, chat, phone, whatever, it can all be translated as "grooming a minor".

If there is a person that you believe to be a minor on an adult site propositioning you, report it via that site, block that user and have no further contact. If you do, you risk being prosecuted and added to any number of "lists".

Fact is, in this day and age, there is a witch hunt going on, a kind of pedo-panic where any man is a suspect (and in some cases women too). People seem to think there is a pedophile always around the corner thanks to the scare mongering of nanny states and media propaganda.

Don't risk it, and don't chat to anyone online who you believe could be under the legal age unless you share an innocent interest and it's in a public view.

Watch Dateline NBC: To Catch a Predator on MSNBC. Plus, you're 19 years old. You're an adult and should be looking for women in their 20s, not in their teens.

Witchhunt is right. Try being male and homosexual...

The media are to blame and particularly programs like "To Catch a Predator". I would have thought America would have learned the lesson of the McCarthy era that wild accusations and incompetant invesigations lead to more pain than gain.

The true victims, the children, are forgotten in the grandstanding by adults who are quick to score points and flatter their own egos. Beware the self-righteous "do-gooder" who never speaks words of moderation and care.

Oh, a last thought - what on Earth are you on about, BiPolarFreak? Please tell me your last comment was tongue in cheek? It was, wasn't it? You weren't being serious, surely...

Cya
#:~)

We run this site for adults, and adults only. Having people that are underage poses a huge liability for not only the people that have sexual conversations with them, but it can put the site itself at risk.

If you encounter someone who says to be under the age of 18, do the right thing and let one of the moderators know. If they are all away, join the room #help (you can type: /join #help) and someone there should be able to help out.

Say what? The "media are to blame" for.... prosecution of child molesters? This is a bad thing? I haven't heard of any homosexuals being falsely accused on those shows. The only complaints I've heard are those who think men should be able to boink underage boys--the whole NAMBLA thing.

"Moderation" and "care" when it comes to men who intentionally try to fuck CHILDREN, who, by definition, are legally incapable of consent? Forget it.

News flash: "McCarthyism" [somewhat ahistorically] refers to unfairly prosecuting someone for beliefs. Going after men who are caught in the act of trying to molest children is not "McCarthyism." It's called enforcing the laws and protecting the weak. Got a problem with that?

Bitching about how "unfair" the world is to men who prey on boys does more to reinforce negative stereotypes about gays than anything else.

But please don't stop. Posts like yours remind us parents that it's not all just homophobia and that there actually are homosexuals out there who think that men should be permitted to molest little boys.

I think our society generally abhors pedophiles, and, given our culture and psychological studies, this seems to be a reasonable stance to take.
The laws are clear, and the zeal of enforcement is well known. There is no reason to bitch if you stand on the tracks and get slammed by the train.
America is in the throes of a psychosis of fear, so they feel there is a terrorist and pedophile behind every tree. Again, that is reality.

If you have to ask. Err on the side of caution and say no. Why risk anything when there are plenty of consenting adults to chat with?

My god. How on earth did you put those string of "facts" together Jason from what I posted?

"Posts like yours remind us parents that it's not all just homophobia and that there actually are homosexuals out there who think that men should be permitted to molest little boys."

Where did you read in my post that I said that?

I am really stunned by the self righteous tone of your post "...us parents..." as if heterosexual parents are in any better position than those of us who are homosexual and do not have biological offspring. You are not in my position, you do not live my life, you cannot say with any justification that "...haven't heard of any homosexuals being falsely accused..."

Tell me something - do you have people look at you strangely when you hug your children in public? Do you wonder if someone who overhears your conversation with your children when you tell them that you love them, that you think they are beautiful, wonderful, amazing that they may be assuming something less than pure? Have you ever had to endure the gut-wrenching reaction you feel when someone tells you to your face "...I had better watch my sons around you..."?

I have two god-children whom I adore. One is female and 14, the other male and 5. He has a brother who is 11. I enjoy spending time with them, treating them as adults and not talking down to the them and assuming that because they are chronologically younger they have to be treated as infantile.

You have totally misread and misrepresented my post. Let me make it crystal clear for you and anyone else who believes the same thing that you seem to believe. I do not support the notion or the practice of pedophilia. I do not support the contemporary mania for trial by media. I do not support mindless mob action, something which is easy to unleash and impossible to halt without dire consequences. In a civilized society, there are laws and legal conventions and structures to maintain a balanced perspective. Those that offend can be dealt with appropriately and more importantly dealt with in ways that can understand why they offend and prevent them from reoffending on an ongoing basis. (Incaceration without rehabilition is not a workable solution.) Help, understanding and protection of those who are most vulnerable is paramount, yet, destroying the foundations of a civilized society by descending to witchhunts and guilt by association will not serve our future generations at all. Surely the one thing each generation MUST do is to bequeath a more tolerant, liveable and advanced society to the generations that follow. To live in a climate of fear is as irrational as believing that the world is flat and that mental illness is caused by demonic possession.

Thank you for posting, Jason. It reminds me that not everyone can see the future the same way.

There's no "witchhunt" of homosexuals in this country. Your cry of "McCarthyism" is completely inapposite, and it shows a lack of understanding of both McCarthyism and the state of law enforcement in the United States.

Perhaps there is a witchhunt in AUS, where you apparently hail from. Here, there is zealous prosecution of pedophiles--of both sexes and with respect to victims of both sexes.

If I misread your post, then my response does not apply to you personally and I apologize for any offense. However, I don't think my reading was unreasonable or a "misrepresentation." Others can read both posts and decide for themselves.

Perhaps inadvertently, the themes you sounded are those that are repeatedly raised by apologists for pedophilia in this country.

And, for the record, heterosexual men have to be careful around children, too. I think it's a good thing.

Finally, my reference to parenthood had nothing to do with you in particular or homosexuals in general. In any event, I don't assume that homosexuals are childless, especially in this country. My point was that parents of small children have less patience for law-school debates about imagined "witchhunts" than those who do not have children.

Again, sorry if I misread your intentions, but my response to what I thought I read stands.

PS: Of all classes of offenders, child molesters have been proven to be the ones the least susceptible to "rehabilitation." They have something like a 90% recidivism rate. So, incarceration is the ONLY option other than execution, it seems.

Jason:
I accept your apology. However, I am saddened that it is surrounded in words that deflect the intention.

I know which country I live in, thank you.

I read magazines, news articles, books and watch documentaries which are produced in various countries by people from various backgrounds and form my opinions from a wide variety of sources.

Shame that you stand by your misreading of my posting... However, I don't think my reading was unreasonable or a "misrepresentation." Others can read both posts and decide for themselves. and but my response to what I thought I read stands. That saddens me even more that you still don't understand or appreciate my point of view.

However, I can see that nothing further that I say will impress anything more upon you and I strongly disagree with your comments about incaceration and execution. We believe two entirely different things and I am not about to change my viewpoint to one that I believe is narrow, critical and harsh. (As I would not expect you to change your beliefs to ones similar to mine, which you would probably identify as "flaky" etc etc.)

I wish you well in your world and with your life.

Thanks, Perkin. I bear you no ill-will. I just hope you remember that our distaste for witch hunts should not blind us to the fact that there are witches out there.


Recently, a jury of twelve in the state of Florida deliberated for only one hour before handing down a 10-2 recommendation that convicted rapist and child murderer John Evander Couey be sentenced to death for the 2005 abduction, rape and murder of 9 year old Jessica Lunsford.

For those of you who aren't familiar with the case, Couey, a previously convicted sex offender, abducted the little girl from her bedroom, brutally raped her, then buried her alive in garbage bags a few yards away from her home and let her suffocate while neighbors searched the woods and nearby areas frantically.

They later found the young girl bound and dead, having been put into the ground alive next to her favorite teddy bear.