I think people should in general have a problem with laws that would obviously be perverse if actually enforced but where we just muddle on through with "prosecutorial discretion" I mean it obviously makes selective enforcement incredibly easy
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Shatterface and
"Two 15-year-olds fucking, and they seem happy and fine, but *legally* they're both guilty of a heinous crime, and uh oh one of them just made the Crown Prosecutor really mad over something unrelated"
2 replies 1 retweet 22 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Shatterface and
In the US all laws like this are enforced on racial grounds Like how jaywalking is technically illegal but white people think of it as a dead letter because they've never heard of anyone getting a ticket for it, because they're not Black or Latinx
1 reply 4 retweets 36 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @rivkaehh and
Prosecuting people who have sex with children isn’t remotely the same as racism.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Shatterface @arthur_affect and
The racism is in the inconsistency with which that law would be applied, not the law itself.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This is exactly how laws like this are used, as a stalking-horse for racist or otherwise bigoted harassment Ranging from extremely mundane laws like "obstructing the sidewalk" (it is, technically, illegal to stand on the sidewalk talking to someone in New York) to this stuff
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likes
Of course I don't think @Shatterface even has a coherent model in his head of how, exactly, the prosecutorial discretion that means any teen couple could be arrested at any time if they put a foot wrong "protects children"
Most likely he hasn't even thought about it
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.