It fits the definition of kidnapping. So at this point we will simply have to agree to disagree. I ran into a similar situation with Whooter a few years ago. He refused to accept the difference between a legal definition, and what comes out of a dictionary. He claimed that because ASR fit the dictionary definition of a school it should be considered as such, even though it did not fit the legal definition of one. I am simply using his own standards now. The situation kids who were taken by escorts are describing fits the dictionary definition of the word kidnapping. The fact that it may notfit the legal definition (still arguable) is moot.
That being the case it is apparent these kids are not lying when they say they were kidnapped. Since that has now been settled what other subjects do you feel they have lied about?
Robert, there is no "agree to disagree" because you don't make laws and you were not the parent that authorized the escort. I am not going to argue with you at all. Because what you have to say about this subject has little credence, it would not hold up in any court in America, what the heck are you going to say to the judge, Websters Dictionary says this, like Websters has more authority then our laws.
(The fact that it may not fit the legal definition (still arguable) is moot.) Robert this sentence does not even make sense. All your doing here is showing your stubbornness.
Solution, change the law and change parents minds.
Which is not going to happen because some children do become overly aggressive to the point parents can not control them, hence, in comes the escort service.
Robert, you are not lying by definition, you are misrepresenting the facts of this subject. We could settle this if your unyielding attitude would change a little.
