There ought to be a law

[Colleen Thomas]

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Having sex with corpses is now officially illegal in California after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (news - web sites) signed a bill barring necrophilia, a spokeswoman said on Friday.

The new legislation marks the culmination of a two-year drive to outlaw necrophilia in the state and will help prosecutors who have been stymied by the lack of an official ban on the practice, according to experts.

"Nobody knows the full extent of the problem. ... But a handful of instances over the past decade is frequent enough to have a bill concerning it," said Tyler Ochoa, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law who has studied California cases involving allegations of necrophilia.

"Prosecutors didn't have anything to charge these people with other than breaking and entering. But if they worked in a mortuary in the first place, prosecutors couldn't even charge them with that," Ochoa said.

The state's first attempt to outlaw necrophilia, in response to a case of a man charged with having sex with the corpse of a 4-year-old girl in Southern California, stalled last year in a legislative committee.

Lawmakers revived the bill this year after an unsuccessful prosecution of a man found in a San Francisco funeral home drunk and passed out on top of an elderly woman's corpse.

The new law makes sex with a corpse a felony punishable by up to eight years in prison.



I remember not too many years ago Maryland realized it didn't have any law prohibiting Beastiality on the books. For all the wierd laws that are on the books, I wonder how many states lack a law barring stuff where there ought to be a law?

-Colly

 

[rgraham666]

For some reason, I think a lengthy stay in prison is unlikely to help a necrophiliac much.

And Ahnie's been governor for what, a year now? This is the first piece of legislation I've heard from him.

He really does believe in minimal government.

 

[The_Fool]

Okay....gonna step out on a limb here. I remember reading somewhere that Queen Victoria did not believe that there was any way two women could have sexual relations. Therefore, there was a law in GB passed outlawing male homosexuality, however female homosexuality was ignored...

Somebody set me straight here...

 

[Weird Harold]

I remember not too many years ago Maryland realized it didn't have any law prohibiting Beastiality on the books. For all the wierd laws that are on the books, I wonder how many states lack a law barring stuff where there ought to be a law?

In response to the thread title: No there hadn't oughta be a law; there are too damn many laws on the books already.

In response to the need for a law against necrophilia and/or bestiality -- Why only ban the sexual aspects of these offenses. Icould understand a push for a law that bans "desecrating a corpse," which would provide an offence to punish necrophilia in addition to any of several other rude and disgusting things that can be done to or with a corpse. Bestiality is animal abuse -- why should it be a separate crime? (If it's not animal abuse, then who cares what people do with their animals -- not me.)

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Re: There ought to be a law

In response to the thread title: No there hadn't oughta be a law; there are too damn many laws on the books already.

In response to the need for a law against necrophilia and/or bestiality -- Why only ban the sexual aspects of these offenses. Icould understand a push for a law that bans "desecrating a corpse," which would provide an offence to punish necrophilia in addition to any of several other rude and disgusting things that can be done to or with a corpse. Bestiality is animal abuse -- why should it be a separate crime? (If it's not animal abuse, then who cares what people do with their animals -- not me.)

But there ought to be a law. If the police are failing to be able to prosecute, then clearly a law is needed. I am totally amenable to a broader definition law, such as desecration of a corpse, but some law that can be prosecuted successfully should be there.

The same with animal abuse.

Some law should cover these actions. I am just amazed, with all the minutiae we cover with laws, that some things which seem to be obvious aren't covered in the various state codes.

-Colly

 

[impressive]

Gonna step even further out on a limb.

The dead can't object. If they're killed for the sex, then a murder wrap would carry a sufficient penalty.

It's already illegal to boink a kid -- and I really don't think that the existing law specifies that the kid must be alive. Plus, again, if they're killed for the sex, then there's a murder to punish.

While necrophilia is abhorrent to me, I just don't see a reason to outlaw it -- and create more taxpayer funded bureaucracy -- for something that would, in most circumstances, have a more serious crime associated with it.

Hell, it could even be considered rape -- as there has not been consent.

 

[Weird Harold]

Re: Re: Re: There ought to be a law

But there ought to be a law. If the police are failing to be able to prosecute, then clearly a law is needed. ...

Some law should cover these actions. I am just amazed, with all the minutiae we cover with laws, that some things which seem to be obvious aren't covered in the various state codes.

If the DA can't prosecute, then he's not doing his job -- Lawyers are trained and paid to intepret the law and if they can't find a law that applies they're just not looking hard enough:

For example, the person who had sex with the corpse of a four-year-old is guilty of statutory rape or just plain rape because she was underage and unable to give consent -- the wording of the rape laws do NOT say anything about whether the victim was alive or dead at the time.

It's illegal to have sex with a person who is unconscious (as part of most rape laws "unable to give consent" clause) and you can't get muchmore unconscious than being dead.

If that logic doesn't suit you, then how about vandalism i.e. damaging another person's property? A corpse belongs to the family.

But the main point is that Necrophilia and Bestiality don't really harm anyone so why should a law cover those actions? Sure, they're disgusting and immoral (by most moral standards), but they're not actions that actually threaten or harm others.

If we outlaw everything that is disgusting annd/or immoral, -- along with everything that should be (and already IS in most cases) illegal because it's harmful to others -- then what's left that's legal?

 

[Aaron Dazer]

While necrophilia is abhorrent to me, I just don't see a reason to outlaw it -- and create more taxpayer funded bureaucracy -- for something that would, in most circumstances, have a more serious crime associated with it.
.

That is the Point. Why it hasn't yet. The Push was because of the Corpse of a 4 year old.

I think there should be a common decency law. Where if someone commits a Crime against common decency they go before a judge and it gets ruled on. The Accused could accept the Judges ruling or prior to being ruled request a Jury of peers. With an clause that severely punishes abuse of the law.



Off the wall question. Is Fucking a Steak Bestiality or necrophilia
. Or is it a food fetish. If a Food Fetish where do you draw the line between Bestiality and food?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

The last thing I expected when I opened this thread was that it would become argumenative. Naively, I was expecting people to bing forth intersting little tidbits about laws in their state, both the whacky things that are illegal and the equally strange twists that leave wierd things legal.

I have enough arguments in the politics threads to make anyone sick to their tummy. So I'll bow out of a thread I started, because frankly, I was hoping to get away from arguments with this thread.

-Colly

 

[impressive]

I have enough arguments in the politics threads to make anyone sick to their tummy. So I'll bow out of a thread I started, because frankly, I was hoping to get away from arguments with this thread.

Sorry, Colly. Not arguing -- just discussing.

 

[TheEarl]

The last thing I expected when I opened this thread was that it would become argumenative. Naively, I was expecting people to bing forth intersting little tidbits about laws in their state, both the whacky things that are illegal and the equally strange twists that leave wierd things legal.

I have enough arguments in the politics threads to make anyone sick to their tummy. So I'll bow out of a thread I started, because frankly, I was hoping to get away from arguments with this thread.

-Colly

Here you go Colly:

In the US state of Alaska, it is illegal to look at a moose from an aeroplane.
Perfect example of over-regulation: In Ohio they have deemed it necessary to have a law specifically prohibiting anyone from detonating a nuclear weapon.
And to prove that these things aren't just Yankisms: In England, if you are within the old city walls of York, then it is legal to kill a Scotsman with a crossbow.

And my personal favourite: In Australia, it is legal to have sex with a kangaroo, as long as you're drunk. Quite apart from the mind-boggling mental picture and the thought that a kangaroo's kick can kill a man, it raises some interesting points for the lawyers. If you get caught having sex with a kangaroo, should the police give you a breathalyser to prove that you're drunk? Just what is the legal limit for kangaroo sex?

I collect these little titbits of information. Worrying, when my brainpower could be more usefully used on stuff like my uni course.

The Earl

 

[Guest]

Thank you, Earl. I was getting a bit undone with all the discussion of raping corpses and pedophiliac necrophilia.

Keep up the good work.

Pear

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Sorry, Colly. Not arguing -- just discussing.

Not you at all luv, nor anyone else who posted. Just caught me off guard is all.

Thank Earl

 

[TheEarl]

Jack!

JOOI: Is it "titbit" or "tidbit"? Just reading over Colly's and my posts and noticed we spelt it different ways.

The Earl

 

[Guest]

Re: Jack!

JOOI: Is it "titbit" or "tidbit"? Just reading over Colly's and my posts and noticed we spelt it different ways.

I've only ever known 'tidbit'. TITbit sounds yummy though.

Pear

 

[Lauren Hynde]

There was an attempt in Portugal, earlier this year, to pass a law prohibiting female genital mutilation. At first sight, it wouldn't have any problem being passed, but it wasn't.

There have been exactly zero cases of female genital mutilation registered in the country since ever, despite the relatively large immigrant community from African countries where it is a traditional practise. There is already a law that punishes crimes against the physical integrity of an individual with 2 to 10 years of incarceration. Had it gotten approved, the law would not only be more clearly seen as discriminatory against a minority's traditions, but the penalty would be substantially inferior to the maximum already set by the existing law.

So, what was the point of spending more money and more time creating more laws?

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

California is a good place to look for bizarre and interesting laws that never really affect anyone. It's almost as if state congress knows it's messed up enough to get any real work done and so it serves mainly to entertain.

Or is that Hollywood?


And is there a difference?

-Msr. SoCal Daemon

 

[Vincent E]

While necrophilia is abhorrent to me, I just don't see a reason to outlaw it -- and create more taxpayer funded bureaucracy -- for something that would, in most circumstances, have a more serious crime associated with it.

The moment the lack of a prohibition against necrophilia is pointed out in front of some double-digit IQ judge who is looking to make new laws or to expand the comcept of civil rights where no other sane human being would, the case would be tossed out. The fact is that the law has to be spelled out in crystal clear, undeniably accurate, and comprehensively presice language; sadly, even then it gets argued about.

Let's face it, there have been some pretty asinine justifications from the "twinkie" defense (San Francisco) to the "black rage" defense (New Jersey) to the "my dad never hugged me as a kid" defense (pick a place.) The "there isn't even a statute outlawing it" defense doesn't seem unreasonable against that kind of history.

Ironically (I hope it is irony, Perdita) enough, I started a Halloween story last yar that dealt with this exact topic. So maybe I'm the sicky here after all.

 

[Weird Harold]

The last thing I expected when I opened this thread was that it would become argumenative. Naively, I was expecting people to bing forth intersting little tidbits about laws in their state, both the whacky things that are illegal and the equally strange twists that leave wierd things legal.

Sorry, you pushed one of my hot-buttons by using examples of "legislating morality."

Almost every example in the book series "There Oughta Be a Law" and the syndicated comic strip of the same name (if it's still in syndication) are laws that should neverhave been passed or that made sense when they were passed but have long ago been outstripped by technology.

I can understand, if not agree with, the rsons for the laws you cited.

I can't understnd the logic or circumstances that resulted in laws against carrying an ice-cream cone in your pocket (oddly enough still on the books in about three different places I've heard of,) or requiring an elephant's owner to feed the parking meter when leaving it on the street.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Sorry, you pushed one of my hot-buttons by using examples of "legislating morality."

Almost every example in the book series "There Oughta Be a Law" and the syndicated comic strip of the same name (if it's still in syndication) are laws that should neverhave been passed or that made sense when they were passed but have long ago been outstripped by technology.

I can understand, if not agree with, the rsons for the laws you cited.

I can't understnd the logic or circumstances that resulted in laws against carrying an ice-cream cone in your pocket (oddly enough still on the books in about three different places I've heard of,) or requiring an elephant's owner to feed the parking meter when leaving it on the street.

No need for apology, threads wander where they will, as I said, just caught me off guard

-Colly

 

[Wicked-N-Erotic]

In Ohio it is also illegal to throw dish water out the window, hitch a horse in front of the court house and to jump out of a moving airplane.

As soon as I run across more I'll post em up

Wicked

 

[Guest]

Ironically (I hope it is irony, Perdita) enough, I started a Halloween story last yar that dealt with this exact topic. So maybe I'm the sicky here after all.

Nope, not irony, only coincidence. Sick? Yep.

Perdita

 

[minsue]

Nope, not irony, only coincidence.

I think that needs to be a bumper sticker.

 

[Guest]

I think that needs to be a bumper sticker.

Ha! I like that, hadn't looked at it separated from the rest of the post. Yea! now I have my own irony line to go with Gauche's "Shit happens is not irony."

P.

 

[minsue]

Ha! I like that, hadn't looked at it separated from the rest of the post. Yea! now I have my own irony line to go with Gauche's "Shit happens is not irony."

P.

LMAO

Glad I could help