I bet I would get bored pushing her around on her tricycle within minutes.

If guy in the story was found not guilty, fine- he's not guilty. If he was banging a teenager, and he's an old guy, that's just creepy- to me. Maybe some of you like that kind of thing. I also don't like fingernails on chalkboards, snakes, etc.

It's one of those first amendment right of association deals- that's where he and I part company, even if we had agreed on everything up to that point, the fact that some 60 something guy likes poking teenagers is just plain something I don't like. This question is not unlike the DADT thing- you are expecting me to ACCEPT his behavior. Tolerate it- not my business to tell him (or whomever is deemed legally of age) what to do- I don't have a choice. Accept it- that's a whole 'nother deal.

The tall/short thing is kinda weird, but to each his own, provided that the short one isn't a kid- in the legal sense. Which takes me to the next point for those who like that age of consent young– where do you draw that line?

If the line in one locale is too high for you, say, 14, do you go somewhere where it is 12? That's the kind of sick stuff I am referring to- because guys like that are the kind of guys like that NBC reporter sets up to catch on national TV. Yeah– They've NEVER done anything like this before! You were just going to TALK to the kid, even though you brought alcohol and condoms…

Just sayin', GI…

You fall into the second area. I KNOW the comment was meant for "john adams". That is way you fall in the second area. You would jail a man for stating his opinion. Free Speech means nothing to you. Not sure about you, but I'm not living in a Communist Country yet. Not yet.

You refuse to admit that you and the LAW do not agree. You can't admit that under the law a 16yo IS an adult.

Let me tell you what I think is "creepy". When I see a couple and the guy is REALLY tall and the girl is REALLY short. That creeps me out. I don't care about their age.

Any man that enjoys being with a female who is only tall enough to put her head against his lower breast bone, I just don't understand.

He obviously has Pedophile Tendencies. (and she has daddy issues)

Now THAT is indeed "creepy".

Your free speech doesn't offend me. You are free to express your lack of understand of the LAW. Just as I am free to explain how wrong I believe you are.

(I don't get offended.) (angry-mad-displeased-even-sad, but never offended)

Just isn't manly.

When did I object to anyone's free speech? I didn't. You said your piece.

Anyone who (intentionally) gets off on dipping his wick in underage kids should spend time in prison. That comment was for "John Adams", not for the guy who was found not guilty. Yeah- There are some kids who are 14 to 16 going on 35 out there- but there are people who really like those kinds of "kids" too. That's just creepy.

Again, that's my free speech. If that offends you, so be it. Continuing a cycle of abuse and partaking in the same is kinda offensive to me.

YES, you did, and for giving an opinion no less. COMMENT #8

People like me? And what do you know about me? I defended John Adams right to speak freely. What else do you know? I protected one woman, and helped another out of the street when she had been beaten by her man. What else do you know about me? That I looked up the age of consent in the states and found 16 to be LEGAL AGE in 31 states. What else do you know about me?

#17 Now you're just trying to make yourself feel better.

"it's about wielding power for him." No it isn't. You think females are such victims. I give them more credit than you do. Females use sex as a weapon and they learn early. She was on the street for TWO YEARS. If you think she had not learned by that time, I feel sorry for you. More likely she was using sex to secure a place to live. But you likely don't think she is that intelligent. I give her more credit for intelligence that you do.

Basically you don't think much of a 16yo female giving her legal consent under the law. That may be why you call her a child. She would likely laugh at you if she knew. Then she would put on her make-up and some revealing clothes, place her hands on her hips, give you a grin and taunt you by asking if she looked like a child to you. Then laugh in your face.

"Gratification at someone else's expense", Yea HIS expense. He payed for the food and shelter. With naive bleeding hearts around like you, he almost lost his freedom — for feeding and providing shelter to a homeless person. She didn't want to leave. So that tells me that she was intelligent enough to know when she had a good deal going.

Six MONTHS. You don't keep someone around for that long for mere sex. Not in Korea — the land of the red-light at every subway stop. Something tells me she was doing other things to earn her keep. Maybe cooking and cleaning. All to secure a roof over her head. Something her parents had not done.

"Seen this before more than once." How do you manage to do that. You have a "special interest"?

"Usually resulted in an apprehension and prosecution." How would that be possible when they are of LEGAL AGE?

"And victims." Oh, VICTIMS. Like the guy in the story who almost lost his freedom? For feeding and providing shelter to a homeless street person. For SIX MONTHS. Like I said, you don't keep a female around for that long for mere sex. Got to be something else to it. Not that you would even imagine something like that.

After all, she doesn't have the ability to REASON for another two years, right? Or for you maybe another five years?

I guarantee you that she had the ability to reason out that she had a good deal going on and didn't want it to end until she found a BETTER deal. That is just being logical on her part.

"Might as well join in the fun!" I fail to see anyone having "fun". She had a need. He had a solution. She took advantage of the situation. That only makes good sense. She likely didn't have to think about it twice either. I don't blame her.

And to repeat the verdict: He was found INNOCENT. But that means nothing to you. You know better. Yea, right.

You would have been right there at the Salem Witch Trails screaming — "BURN HER — BURN THE WITCH!"

Speaking of the LAW, a 16yo is NOT a child in those 31 states nor in Korea. But you love to say the word. Gives you a feeling of being righteous I assume. But also points out that you don't care about what the Law says.

In summation: you don't care about the law. You don't care about freedom of speech. You believe that no person under the age of 21 has the ability to think and reason — if they are female. You pass judgment without facts. You think sex is the only possible reason a man would allow a homeless female to stay in his home for six months. You think men are evil.

Perhaps you are a bitter divorced woman. That's what it sounds like to me. Who lost her husband to a YOUNG woman too.

Seen this before more than once. Usually resulted in an apprehension and prosecution. And victims.

But that's OK– it's all about gratification at someone elses' expense- HEY- you didn't CREATE the world's problems. Might as well join in the fun!

As for 16 being the age of consent- Did I say anyone should go to JAIL?

I hope you aren't so much sickened by me as you are afraid of me. But if you are sickened by me, that's fine. People like you repulse me.

Rage? No. Not at all. Revulsion? Hell yeah- I am stunned that people who consider themselves civilised would bang children.

Life sucks. Got it. But you don't have to add to the suck factor.

If you want to nail some chick, is nailing an ADULT chick too much to expect from an adult?

Jeebus— just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.

That's MY first amendment right, too.