you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think you're misunderstanding the article... give it a read

[–]Canbot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

But Anna didn’t know that in New York, there is no law specifically stating that it is illegal for police officers or sheriff’s deputies in the field to have sex with someone in their custody.

I did. You need to read it yourself. The article itself is biased and fallaciously claims that this is a "loophole". Not having a law preventing something is not a loophole. You were bamboozled by a deceitful author.

[–]magnora7[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I never said it was a loophole. I said the law is morally wrong. You're misrepresenting my argument

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The article calls it a loophole. The one you told ME to read. And there is no law.