With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". any other school or community activity, because he or she perceives such an offer to be a kind and prudent gesture under the circumstances, would potentially run afoul of Section 2910 simply by virtue of the fact they extended the offer, and did not have the opportunity to obtain parental consent. Likewise, any parent or neighbor who makes a similar spontaneous offer of a ride to school to their children’s friends or acquaintances may, again, be subject to prosecution, in the absence of express or implied parental consent, solely because of their offer of the ride. The plain language of Section 2910 does not support a conclusion that the legislature intended such a result. See 1 Pa.C.S.A. § 1922(1) (legislature does not intend a result that is unreasonable or absurd); Gallagher, supra, (<HOLDING>). As the Figueroa court’s interpretation of

A: recognizing that kidnapping under oklahoma law is a felony
B: holding that a kidnappers motivation is not an element of the federal kidnapping offense
C: holding that kidnapping is a continuing offense because the crime by its nature involves unlawful seizure and detention and the perpetration of the offense and harm to the victim continues throughout the duration of the detention
D: recognizing that the offense of luring was enacted to further the important and salutary goal of preventing child kidnapping
D.