MrSmith Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 You've had SEX???? Yes, you should try it sometime, you might find it enjoyable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Yes, you should try it sometime, you might find it enjoyable. Doesn't matter what her/his age was..that is quite simply sexual abuse...poor things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Doesn't matter what her/his age was..that is quite simply sexual abuse...poor things. ............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mobileweb/2013/05/10/barbara-hewson-age-of-consent_n_3250890.html?utm_hp_ref=uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mobileweb/2013/05/10/barbara-hewson-age-of-consent_n_3250890.html?utm_hp_ref=uk Worth reading. Particularly this part by Jon Brown the NSPCC's Head of Strategy & Development for Sexual Abuse - MrSmith et al take note - "Let's get one myth out of the way. The age of consent is not there to criminalise young people who have sex with each other - it exists to protect them from sexual predators like Savile. "The implication here is that a reasonable defence for committing minor offences is that the person didn't do something even worse. Following that line one could argue that it's ok to go shoplifting because you could have committed an armed robbery, but didn't. "So it's sad to see these outdated and simply ill-informed views that would be shocking to hear from anyone, but coming from a highly experienced barrister simply beggar belief." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Worth reading. Particularly this part by Jon Brown the NSPCC's Head of Strategy & Development for Sexual Abuse - MrSmith et al take note - "Let's get one myth out of the way. The age of consent is not there to criminalise young people who have sex with each other - it exists to protect them from sexual predators like Savile. "The implication here is that a reasonable defence for committing minor offences is that the person didn't do something even worse. Following that line one could argue that it's ok to go shoplifting because you could have committed an armed robbery, but didn't. "So it's sad to see these outdated and simply ill-informed views that would be shocking to hear from anyone, but coming from a highly experienced barrister simply beggar belief." That would be fine if it protected them, but it doesn't, they still get abused. Chief Constable Simon Parr gave the example of a 15-year-old boy who touched his girlfriend’s breast during a teenage petting session and was put on the sex offenders register. The Cambridgeshire teenager, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was found guilty of indecent assault by a court, and placed on the register for five years. It means he must inform the police within three days if he changes his name or address, and disclose if he is spending seven days or more away from his home. But even after five years the offence will continue to show up during CRB checks. Mr Parr said: “Two 15-year-olds – a boy and a girl – went off into the woods for a kiss and a cuddle. The boy placed a hand on the girl’s breast. It was not unusual or ridiculous behaviour. “The girl went home and told her mum. The mum decided this was out of order. Legally, under 16 that young lady is not allowed to consent to that, and so that 15-year-old was found guilty of an indecent assault and he is on the sex offenders register now for five years. Don't criminalise young sex Like it or not, people under the age of 16 have sex – the current law of consent doesn't protect them, it persecutes them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 ^^^^^totally agree. How on earth would the age of consent have stopped Saville and Co. It didn't. Seems to me that point made by the NSPCC is totally irrelevant. Why were these tweenies bopping around these dirty old men in the first place? Why did the parent let these tweenies go to a saville house party/dressing room/backstage unaccompanied in the first place? There is a lot of grey area that is not going to get answered because the culprit is dead. He APPEARS to be guilty of lots of hideous crimes and absuse. It seems to me (if there girls were not encouraging it at the time) that what Saville & Co were doing is more in the rape category none of it would have been stopped by the age of consent. If these girls were 16 and over (which may of them were) would it have made it any better? Can it be argued that if a 16 year old girl (therefore legal) and a 60+ year old man had consentual sex it is any of our business to be prosecuting the older party for "abuse". If the answer is yes, then what good would an age of consent do to prevent it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 That would be fine if it protected them, but it doesn't, they still get abused. Chief Constable Simon Parr gave the example of a 15-year-old boy who touched his girlfriend’s breast during a teenage petting session and was put on the sex offenders register. The Cambridgeshire teenager, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was found guilty of indecent assault by a court, and placed on the register for five years. It means he must inform the police within three days if he changes his name or address, and disclose if he is spending seven days or more away from his home. But even after five years the offence will continue to show up during CRB checks. Mr Parr said: “Two 15-year-olds – a boy and a girl – went off into the woods for a kiss and a cuddle. The boy placed a hand on the girl’s breast. It was not unusual or ridiculous behaviour. “The girl went home and told her mum. The mum decided this was out of order. Legally, under 16 that young lady is not allowed to consent to that, and so that 15-year-old was found guilty of an indecent assault and he is on the sex offenders register now for five years. Don't criminalise young sex Like it or not, people under the age of 16 have sex – the current law of consent doesn't protect them, it persecutes them What you are presenting there is not an argument for reducing the age of consent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 What you are presenting there is not an argument for reducing the age of consent. nicely sidestepped the question there now how do you feel about the boy being prosecuted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 nicely sidestepped the question there now how do you feel about the boy being prosecuted It is ridiculous and terrible if there was no abuse, coercion or exploitation. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 does state that it is not in the public interest to prosecute underage teenagers for sex where it was mutually agreed and the guidelines state that it should only happen where there is abuse and/or exploitation. http://www.fpa.org.uk/professionals/factsheets/lawonsex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.