College President arrested - Grindr

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

Why do guys picking up fake teenagers always want to take them to the shittiest restaurants? They should be arrested for sugar daddy failure alone.

 

THIS COMMENT FOR THE WIN.

 

And agreed... No one wants to be taken to The Olive Garden. No one.

[Deadlift1]

You win a gold medal for the most skin-crawling comment of the day. Congrats.

 

Side note: I'd say that it's much less here than the other site that toes the line of sexual exploitation.

You win a gold medal for the most skin-crawling comment of the day. Congrats.

 

Side note: I'd say that it's much less here than the other site that toes the line of sexual exploitation.

It's the same group of men that post on both sites.

[+ quoththeraven]

I think it's a provision of federal law, the Communications Decency Act or some such.

But that only applies to the website. It has absolutely zilch to do with human interaction, which is governed by state age of consent laws.

 

Nevertheless, when it comes to people in positions of authority, like a college president, even more discretion is necessary; otherwise parents are left wondering if the person is apt to hit on a student. Irrespective of the student's age, that's inappropriate, despite the assholes (some of them women!) who argue that bans on faculty dating undergraduate students (aka bans on faculty fucking students) somehow represent untoward repression of sexual expression or something.

[+ quoththeraven]

Just to be clear, it’s against US law for an adult US citizen to have sex with a minor anywhere in the world.

 

Granted, it will be difficult to prove and prosecute, but it is illegal nonetheless.

 

Only advising because I think many are ignorant of this fact.

Illegal how, under what law? I wasn't a criminal lawyer, but US law (other than taxation) is generally not extraterritorial. And whose definition of minor? The US doesn't have a completely uniform definition itself.

 

This would be up there with South Korean law against gambling, which applies to South Koreans anywhere in the world (even though there are gambling facilities in South Korea, which only foreigners can enter), and drug usage (at least as to marijuana), which also applies globally. It also suggests that it's legally impossible to reunite people who have married in a country with lower age requirements until both are no longer minors. It's okay in the US to marry someone who's a minor under some circumstances; does going abroad change this?

 

There are so many circumstances that this makes iffy that I find it difficult to believe this is actually the case.

[+ sniper]

But that only applies to the website. It has absolutely zilch to do with human interaction, which is governed by state age of consent laws.

 

Nevertheless, when it comes to people in positions of authority, like a college president, even more discretion is necessary; otherwise parents are left wondering if the person is apt to hit on a student. Irrespective of the student's age, that's inappropriate, despite the assholes (some of them women!) who argue that bans on faculty dating undergraduate students (aka bans on faculty fucking students) somehow represent untoward repression of sexual expression or something.

Yes it's not the in person activity that is the crime, it's the online discussion. The meet is, I think, just the "proof of intent" because if all someone did was talk online without ever acting on it, they'd have a harder time convicting in the court of public opinion that this was A Bad Person who the state needs to expend resources on putting away.

[+ sniper]

Illegal how, under what law? I wasn't a criminal lawyer, but US law (other than taxation) is generally not extraterritorial. And whose definition of minor? The US doesn't have a completely uniform definition itself.

 

This would be up there with South Korean law against gambling, which applies to South Koreans anywhere in the world (even though there are gambling facilities in South Korea, which only foreigners can enter), and drug usage (at least as to marijuana), which also applies globally. It also suggests that it's legally impossible to reunite people who have married in a country with lower age requirements until both are no longer minors. It's okay in the US to marry someone who's a minor under some circumstances; does going abroad change this?

 

There are so many circumstances that this makes iffy that I find it difficult to believe this is actually the case.

US law is extraterritorial whenever they feel like it. See the US tax code.

[BaronArtz]

I hope they ban you from this forum for making a comment like this. Despicable!

Edited January 18, 2020 by Cooper

[maninsoma]

But that only applies to the website. It has absolutely zilch to do with human interaction, which is governed by state age of consent laws.

 

Nevertheless, when it comes to people in positions of authority, like a college president, even more discretion is necessary; otherwise parents are left wondering if the person is apt to hit on a student. Irrespective of the student's age, that's inappropriate, despite the assholes (some of them women!) who argue that bans on faculty dating undergraduate students (aka bans on faculty fucking students) somehow represent untoward repression of sexual expression or something.

 

https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/extraterritorial-sexual-exploitation-children

[maninsoma]

I hope they ban you from this forum for making a comment like this. Despicable!

 

I would at least think that the comment would be removed. I posted a joke gif (nothing sexual) that had a kid in it and it was removed. This post was a direct suggestion to violate federal law in order to have sex with children. Strange that none of the moderators have yet picked up that it isn't smart to have content posted that suggests people should travel to other countries to sex have sex with minors.

[+ nycman]

Illegal how, under what law? I wasn't a criminal lawyer.....

 

Me either....but I do know how to use Google.

 

18 U.S.C. § 2423(d): Travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct

18 U.S.C. § 2423©: Engaging in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places

18 U.S.C. § 2423(d): Ancillary Offenses

18 U.S.C. §§ 2251© and 2260(a): Production of Child Pornography outside the United States

18 U.S.C. § 1591: Sex Trafficking of children by force, fraud, or coercion

18 U.S.C. § 1596: Additional jurisdiction in certain trafficking offenses

 

https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/extraterritorial-sexual-exploitation-children

 

Thank you for saving me the trouble.

[+ Gar1eth]

Does anyone know if police departments set up fake profiles to lure people? I've seen profiles recently that offer services but seem sketchy. One guy's pictures looked similar but they weren't all of him so I suspected the profile was fake.

While not in the know, it does happen sometimes. But in the large majority of the cases, fake profiles, such as Rentmen ads, are non-police fakes-just people trying to run scams to get money.

 

Gman

[Deadlift1]

You win a gold medal for the most skin-crawling comment of the day. Congrats.

 

Side note: I'd say that it's much less here than the other site that toes the line of sexual exploitation.

Thanks! It was meant to be shocking and disgusting. It is how I felt when I read it. It was written by a member not myself.

[Deadlift1]

I hope they ban you from this forum for making a comment like this. Despicable!

I hope they ban you for not taking a stance when someone actually used it on this forum. I was just repeating it. And the author never mentioned an age of one of his hires. My last sentence was just a statement of fact. Sometimes it is helpful to think before you speak.

[Walker1]

The first gay President -oh well.

[BaronArtz]

I hope they ban you for not taking a stance when someone actually used it on this forum. I was just repeating it. And the author never mentioned an age of one of his hires. My last sentence was just a statement of fact. Sometimes it is helpful to think before you speak.

 

You ARE an idiot and an absolutely DESPICABLE human being.

Edited January 18, 2020 by BaronArtz

[BaronArtz]

I would at least think that the comment would be removed. I posted a joke gif (nothing sexual) that had a kid in it and it was removed. This post was a direct suggestion to violate federal law in order to have sex with children. Strange that none of the moderators have yet picked up that it isn't smart to have content posted that suggests people should travel to other countries to sex have sex with minors.

 

Thank you. You are right. Even the Fetish Forum here has a warning about not posting about children. Did the moderators fall asleep? This could be the end of this forum and of THEM.

[Deadlift1]

I would at least think that the comment would be removed. I posted a joke gif (nothing sexual) that had a kid in it and it was removed. This post was a direct suggestion to violate federal law in order to have sex with children. Strange that none of the moderators have yet picked up that it isn't smart to have content posted that suggests people should travel to other countries to sex have sex with minors.

Why should it be removed?

I would at least think that the comment would be removed. I posted a joke gif (nothing sexual) that had a kid in it and it was removed. This post was a direct suggestion to violate federal law in order to have sex with children. Strange that none of the moderators have yet picked up that it isn't smart to have content posted that suggests people should travel to other countries to sex have sex with minors.

It was never flagged when the OP

You ARE an idiot and an absolutely DESPICABLE human being.

There ready for your close up Ms. Desmond.

[Guy Fawkes]

Did you bother to report the post? It time for you to stop being so agressive.

 

Thank you. You are right. Even the Fetish Forum here has a warning about not posting about children. Did the moderators fall asleep? This could be the end of this forum and of THEM.

Edited January 19, 2020 by Guy Fawkes

[spider]

Some people don’t get it. When you reach a certain point in your life keep your zipper zipped and your dick in you pants.

[+ FreshFluff]

Some people don’t get it. When you reach a certain point in your life keep your zipper zipped and your dick in you pants.

 

When men reach a quite power and status, their sex drive and sense of entitlement increase dramatically.

[maninsoma]

Some people don’t get it. When you reach a certain point in your life keep your zipper zipped and your dick in you pants.

 

I'm not sure how to interpret your comment. Are you saying that men should stop having sex entirely at a certain age? If so, what's the fatal number?

[MikeBiDude]

Some people don’t get it. When you reach a certain point in your life keep your zipper zipped and your dick in you pants.

I'm not sure how to interpret your comment. Are you saying that men should stop having sex entirely at a certain age? If so, what's the fatal number?

I don’t understand either? Is this an ageist comment by @spider

[+ sniper]

I took it as the time of life for "reckless" sex is when you're younger and a nobody and don't really have anything to lose as a result. But the fact remains that THE major motivator for many(not most, but a significant fraction) men, whether conscious or not, is sex. If they didn't think doing certain things would lead to increased opportunity to get laid, they simply wouldn't do it. Let's be real, in most fields, climbing the ladder SUCKS. I'm pretty sure I would be just as happy flipping burgers once my basic needs were met as office donkeying and churning out TPS reports.

[rvwnsd]

I took it as the time of life for "reckless" sex is when you're younger and a nobody and don't really have anything to lose as a result...

I interpreted it similarly. No one at any age should pursue sex with someone who is less than 18 years old. Period. Full stop. However, as we get older and more experienced the bar rises and there is an expectation that we know not to do these things.

[maninsoma]

I took it as the time of life for "reckless" sex is when you're younger and a nobody and don't really have anything to lose as a result. But the fact remains that THE major motivator for many(not most, but a significant fraction) men, whether conscious or not, is sex. If they didn't think doing certain things would lead to increased opportunity to get laid, they simply wouldn't do it. Let's be real, in most fields, climbing the ladder SUCKS. I'm pretty sure I would be just as happy flipping burgers once my basic needs were met as office donkeying and churning out TPS reports.

 

I would say a younger man would have a lot to lose if he has "reckless" sex. If anything, he might have more to lose in the sense that he has more of his life to live and that wouldn't be fun to do that in prison or with a sex offender registry hanging over one's head. Yes, a younger man might not yet have a career to lose but I'd say that's the least of one's worries if one is going after underage guys on Grindr.