The Legislature is back on session......

CAJUNLAWYER

CAJUNLAWYER

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
19,153
Reaction score
63,347
Location
On da Bayou Teche
First off, I despise any abuse of a child and thinks it deserves the very worst kind of punishment. That being said, I ponder what prompted this bill...

https://legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=1349288

I suspect it will pass, but I do see the idiocy in it nonetheless. What is next??? Blow up sheep dolls???
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
CAJUNLAWYER said:
First off, I despise any abuse of a child and thinks it deserves the very worst kind of punishment. That being said, I ponder what prompted this bill...

https://legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=1349288

I suspect it will pass, but I do see the idiocy in it nonetheless. What is next??? Blow up sheep dolls???
Click to expand...

I'm not going to hash this out here, but I can see a problem with the definitions they use, don't they need to be pretty specific. How do you determine the age of a doll?
 
I abhor child abuse of all kinds and have personally investigated for family court (privately, as a PI when parents couldn't get a PD to take it seriously) the issues. They're terrible.

However, this, I don't know how to view it. Inanimate object... it's pushing it. Gross as it is, it's not a person or child...

It's a slippery slope issue.
 
Last edited:
I did not read it in detail, but I have read a lot of police reports in which child sex predators have such dolls. I can't say it is a direct correlation, but it is sure close. For those of you lucky enough to have no direct knowledge of such things, you would be amazed at the level of awful behavior we see.
 
Apparently 7 states already have a law like this. Apparently the representative got a phone call from customs on the west coast who found one of these addressed to someone in Metairie, LA. Which begs the question "Well, who was it addressed to??". Bill has been reported favorably .
Just when you think you've seen it all.....WOW!
 
CAJUNLAWYER said:
........I suspect it will pass, but I do see the idiocy in it nonetheless......
Click to expand...

On the contrary; the "supreme guiding principle" of the modern "justice system" is revenue enhancement. Some poor dipstick is inevitably going to be schlepping a "junior size mannequin" from Texas to Louisiana for a storefront display and the HiWay patrol will run him in. It'll put a dent in his life, film at 11, not to mention the dinky Dillard's storefront Christmas display of kid's Winter duds. Joe
 
pharmer said:
On the contrary; the "supreme guiding principle" of the modern "justice system" is revenue enhancement. Some poor dipstick is inevitably going to be schlepping a "junior size mannequin" from Texas to Louisiana for a storefront display and the HiWay patrol will run him in. It'll put a dent in his life, film at 11, not to mention the dinky Dillard's storefront Christmas display of kid's Winter duds. Joe
Click to expand...

A store mannequin is not same as the "toys", lacks certain features.
 
Breathtaking. I thought the Massachusetts legislature had cornered the market on idiocy, but I guess there is no floor for any politicians. The thought police know no boundaries. I know first hand how horrible child sex exploitation can be but this is way over the top. I'm not sure it could survive a 1st amendment challenge.
 
Why is the top age of the "toy" not to exceed looking like it is 12? I understand the age of puberty issue and what makes a true pedophile, but a kid is a kid.

Is that the age of consent in LA?

Also, who determines how old the toy looks?

This is one that I understand and agree with the spirit but the drafting could use some work.
 
I have seen the "dolls" as described here.

Think "Stepford Wives".

Some are so realistic that if you were to see one laying on the side of the road, you'd make a dead body call to the police. As a matter of fact, one was found this way not too far from where I live a few years back...with the expected response from the Sheriff.

They are dolls. Nothing more and nothing less. Although to use them as described IMHO borders on necrophillia more than pedophillia.
 
Rule3 said:
Perverts do very strange things with "dolls" they also use them to groom real children. They are sick and deserve the death penalty.!:mad:
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but that sounds a bit like the logic anti-gun people use. Yes, you are a pervert to want a child sex doll but to automatically make the leap that the owner of one would violate a child is a bit like saying gun owners will eventually murder someone.

What people do behind closed doors is none of my business so long as it doesn't hurt anyone. And if it's none of my business, it's none of the government's business either. Do child molesters deserve the death penalty? In extreme cases, yes. Does someone molesting a Barbie doll deserve the same? I don' thin so Lucy!
 
Tom S. said:
I'm sorry but that sounds a bit like the logic anti-gun people use. Yes, you are a pervert to want a child sex doll but to automatically make the leap that the owner of one would violate a child is a bit like saying gun owners will eventually murder someone.

What people do behind closed doors is none of my business so long as it doesn't hurt anyone. And if it's none of my business, it's none of the government's business either. Do child molesters deserve the death penalty? In extreme cases, yes. Does someone molesting a Barbie doll deserve the same? I don' thin so Lucy!
Click to expand...

When we start legislating what inanimate objects a person can have based on how we think people should behave, we start heading down a slippery slope from which there is no return. No matter how repulsive you think it may be, the thought process which drives this kind of thing can be applied to any object. If we adopt that thought process, what stops them from applying it to religious items or artistic expression? And this is even worse because it seeks to control what someone does in private. No matter what you might think about this, it needs to be challenged. Back in the pre woke day, the ACLU would have been all over it. You are right, This smells like the whole anti gun toy gun argument.
 
A lady's sister from my last employer worked in a dept. store and she found one of those half-mannequin "models" in a dressing room that had been violated. I don't know the outcome of that one, but she said it made her sick. And frightened this person was actually walking among the living. "Strange and Sick world we live in." Dave.357......."It's a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack..."
 
Fundamentally decent people have no idea the level of disgusting behavior we in the system see. I spent years in the criminal side of our office and then another one nearby before I came back to the civil side of ours. It is frankly a miracle of self-restraint that people working on this kind of stuff do not go bananas/full vigilante. I still sometimes assist our criminal division as much of my work is CJ civil stuff (SO, Probation (both adult and juvenile),the courts and de facto our criminal division). The biggest single piece of my work is public records stuff, so I read a lot of reports that no one else in my division sees.

We have a fairly new receptionist, nice youngster who is about the right age to be my grandkid. One of her jobs is to get all the inbound reports and route them to the right parts of the office. She will never look at people the same way again. She is also developing the same sense of humor the rest of us have. She free admits that she laughs at stuff now about which she would've been appalled just a few months ago.

When one considers the types of people who get prosecuted as "diaper snipers" (a term JD Delay uses), they do not often match the stereotype of a dirty old man (or woman). They look like normal decent people until ones learns of their behavior.
 
Doug M. said:
Sometimes well-meaning elected officials feel as though they have to "do something"...
Click to expand...

Ah yes, do-something-itis, it's a major pandemic in the 21st century.

I agree with the other comments that such a bill needs to be extremely tightly defined lest it become a vehicle for more bills on other subjects nearer to our hobbies.

There is nothing as dangerous as badly written law. Trouble is, in my 25+ years in this country, I've rarely seen any legislation written at any level of governance that didn't have openings for the legislators' lawyer buddies to make money. Sorry, Caje.;)
 
Last edited:
Judge Gideon J Tucker, in 1886, wrote in a decision on a legal malpractice claim against a deceased lawyer's estate:

"No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature is in session."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
Call a lawyer!
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
Inusuit
Inusuit
ddeanjohnson
  • Locked
sweeping gun-confiscation bill moving fast in Maryland legislature
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
ditrina
ditrina
two-bit cowboy
Winter life in the suburbs
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
Skeet 028
S
geoff40
The man who didn't speak, a true story.
Replies
27
Views
1K
tomf52
T
walkin jack
Live and Die on the Beach
Replies
6
Views
923
walkin jack
walkin jack

Latest posts

Back
Top