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

CAJUNLAWYER

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
19,147
Reaction score
63,328
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
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???

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!
 
........I suspect it will pass, but I do see the idiocy in it nonetheless......

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
 
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

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.
 
Perverts do very strange things with "dolls" they also use them to groom real children. They are sick and deserve the death penalty.!:mad:
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!
 
Back
Top