1995-01-12 - Re: Reefer madness

Header Data

From: Mark Grant <mark@unicorn.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 8b8b5e465679a390fa3d4a8764034d338106395391b0835339f17530226855c0
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9501122157.A13935-0100000@unicorn.com>
Reply To: <9501122019.AA14798@pilot.njin.net>
UTC Datetime: 1995-01-12 21:12:58 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 13:12:58 PST

Raw message

From: Mark Grant <mark@unicorn.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 13:12:58 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Reefer madness
In-Reply-To: <9501122019.AA14798@pilot.njin.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9501122157.A13935-0100000@unicorn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Thu, 12 Jan 1995, Frederic Halper wrote:

> Any person no matter their age should be wary if someone solicits them 
> for sex.

I agree, however it does seem to be a bit much for a horny geek who
propositions a supposed 21-year old who turns out to be 14 to be sent to
jail and forever marked as an EVIL PEDOPHILE, rather than just being told
to get a life. Particularly if, say, the girl in question was posting to
alt.sex.wanted or something.

But the main point I was trying to make here is that with laws like this
proof of age would be required in both directions. Of course, a system
that stamped each users age on outgoing messages could well lead to more
real-world abuse by the real crazies, not less... 

			Mark






Thread