Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

age of consent

Read a random definition: damnosa hereditas

A quick definition of age of consent:

Age of consent: The age at which a person is considered old enough to say "yes" to something. This could be saying "yes" to sex or other activities. In most places, the age of consent is 18 years old. But in some places, it can be as low as 16 years old. If someone is under the age of consent, they cannot legally say "yes" to sex. If someone over the age of consent has sex with someone under the age of consent, it is called "statutory rape" and is against the law.

A more thorough explanation:

In family law, the age of consent refers to the age at which a person is considered legally old enough to give meaningful consent. This means that they are able to make decisions for themselves and understand the consequences of their actions. In most states, the age of consent for sexual activity is between 16 and 18 years old.

For example, in New York State, the age of consent is 17 years old. This means that individuals under the age of 17 are not legally able to consent to sexual activity. If someone who is 18 years old or older engages in sexual activity with someone under the age of 17, it is considered statutory rape.

It's important to note that even if someone is over the age of consent, they may not be able to give meaningful consent if they lack the capacity to do so. This could be due to a developmental disability, illness, or duress.

Overall, the age of consent is an important legal concept that helps protect individuals from being taken advantage of in sexual situations.

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) | age of majority

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
texaslawhopefully
22:30
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That all sounds great. It sounds like it has fairly diverse cuisine for a smaller city
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.