3 ms·

If a person has sex with a minor without knowing they are a minor it is a crime. But should they lose their livelihood and reputation if they didn’t know the p

If a person has sex with a minor without knowing they are a minor it is a crime. But should they lose their livelihood and reputation if they didn’t know the parts that make it a crime or didn’t commit the coercion themselves? If I buy a car cheaply at auction that was seized as part of a drug-dealing crime and then get busted for having drugs still stashed in the doors, I am now a drug offender. I did not knowingly do it nor did I mean to hurt people with drug trafficking so should I lose my livelihood and reputation? If buy a unknowingly stolen Gucci handbag on the street for a cheap price (thinking it could be a knockoff).... you get the picture. I’m not defending drug traffickers, child rapists, or appropriating stolen goods, I am wondering if knowingly participating in the moral violation that defines the crime should make the reputational difference... or should you be persona non grata regardless? Is that Stallman’s question?

cannonedhamster 7y ago
In every case you suggested, yes you would be charged as described, except the theft unless there was evidence you were not involved. In the first two you would go to court to prove your lack of guilt. We're talking about grown adults going to the house of a convicted sex offender finding young women who are held against their will in a harem and then having sex with them because they were told to make you happy. If you cannot understand why your defense wouldn't hold up in this case then you'll never be convinced. Stallman, a man I've met and had a very nice conversation with, holds views that literal children have the intellectual and emotional capacity to engage in sexual relationships with adults on equal footing. This is just plainly untrue. A child cannot fully understand the consequences, they aren't even fully developed yet. This is not the middle ages, this isn't the neolithic. We know the proper development is required for children to become proper adults. Stallman has repeatedly made statements and actions that are inappropriate, blatantly sexist, and has himself abused his position within the community for personal gain and satisfaction. As much as he has given to the FOSS community, it's time for him to step back as being the face, if he's not willing to do so then it's up to the community to police itself lest we all be considered supporting his positions.
DanBC 7y ago
At some point recklessness takes over from lack of mens rei. If someone is so reckless as to have sex with a 17 year old without making very sure that she consents and isn't coerced then they're so reckless that it doesn't matter if they know or not.
mindslight 7y ago
Let's say you knowingly stash the drugs in your car doors and are then arrested, convicted, serve your sentence, and are released. Should you then have the rest of your life extrajudiciously ruined by a group of people who have dedicated their lives to harassing drug dealers because their own kids died of drug overdoses? Because applying metered justice and preventing ongoing escalating feuds is the entire point of the justice system. We're in this clusterfuck because people don't feel it is working, and they are not wrong. Specifically here, we all expect Epstein's close associates to reliably quash deeper investigation - investigation into their guilt went cold with Epstein's body. And I'm generally for grassroots direct action, but this frenzy doesn't seem directed towards making up for the failings of the system, but rather scoring points against easy targets for the thrill of it. RMS himself was nowhere near this island, rather he simply had the audacity to question the lynch mob's narrative! With a reaction like this, how can it be said that these pitchforks are in the service of justice?

cannonedhamster 7y ago

In every case you suggested, yes you would be charged as described, except the theft unless there was evidence you were not involved. In the first two you would go to court to prove your lack of guilt. We're talking about grown adults going to the house of a convicted sex offender finding young women who are held against their will in a harem and then having sex with them because they were told to make you happy. If you cannot understand why your defense wouldn't hold up in this case then you'll never be convinced. Stallman, a man I've met and had a very nice conversation with, holds views that literal children have the intellectual and emotional capacity to engage in sexual relationships with adults on equal footing. This is just plainly untrue. A child cannot fully understand the consequences, they aren't even fully developed yet. This is not the middle ages, this isn't the neolithic. We know the proper development is required for children to become proper adults. Stallman has repeatedly made statements and actions that are inappropriate, blatantly sexist, and has himself abused his position within the community for personal gain and satisfaction. As much as he has given to the FOSS community, it's time for him to step back as being the face, if he's not willing to do so then it's up to the community to police itself lest we all be considered supporting his positions.

DanBC 7y ago

At some point recklessness takes over from lack of mens rei. If someone is so reckless as to have sex with a 17 year old without making very sure that she consents and isn't coerced then they're so reckless that it doesn't matter if they know or not.

mindslight 7y ago

Let's say you knowingly stash the drugs in your car doors and are then arrested, convicted, serve your sentence, and are released. Should you then have the rest of your life extrajudiciously ruined by a group of people who have dedicated their lives to harassing drug dealers because their own kids died of drug overdoses? Because applying metered justice and preventing ongoing escalating feuds is the entire point of the justice system. We're in this clusterfuck because people don't feel it is working, and they are not wrong. Specifically here, we all expect Epstein's close associates to reliably quash deeper investigation - investigation into their guilt went cold with Epstein's body. And I'm generally for grassroots direct action, but this frenzy doesn't seem directed towards making up for the failings of the system, but rather scoring points against easy targets for the thrill of it. RMS himself was nowhere near this island, rather he simply had the audacity to question the lynch mob's narrative! With a reaction like this, how can it be said that these pitchforks are in the service of justice?