Suffragette1 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 You keep telling yourself that. You think you care but in realty you care only about your own opinions. I don't need to because you are telling it not me (about your priorties), it is writ large and screen capped should these threads disappear. Written words come back to haunt people, remember that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 No you haven't, and it clearly doesn't when young people are being criminalised for having sexual contact. For gods sake man..no matter what you do in regards to the laws there will still be injustices..always have been always will be. To change a present system which regrettably has let down 1, maybe 20?..who knows could be 50 is a pretty safe system when you apply numbers. As Chris says..if you move the ages around all you do is quite simply that..move them around. And has been proved..by numbers alone the current does work...the system actually cooperates with young in sexual relationships. You're using one tragic case to undermine the whole system. Why? ---------- Post added 11-05-2013 at 21:34 ---------- Exactly. And it would affect how the law looks at grooming. I'm thinking particularly of the teacher who ran off with a 14 year old. As long as it was different schools they wouldn't be breaking any laws - you couldn't groom anyone over 13 if the age of consent is 13 can you? Exactly..The pervs barrister would have a field day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Exactly. And it would affect how the law looks at grooming. I'm thinking particularly of the teacher who ran off with a 14 year old. As long as it was different schools they wouldn't be breaking any laws - you couldn't groom anyone over 13 if the age of consent is 13 can you? Yes you could. To protect vulnerable 16 and 17 year olds, the offences of 'abuse of a position of trust' prohibits sexual contact between adults and children under 18 in schools, colleges and residential care. On Monday January 21st, five men appeared in court charged with 21 sexual offences following a police investigation into the sexual grooming and exploitation of a 16-year-old girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Yes you could. To protect vulnerable 16 and 17 year olds, the offences of 'abuse of a position of trust' prohibits sexual contact between adults and children under 18 in schools, colleges and residential care. On Monday January 21st, five men appeared in court charged with 21 sexual offences following a police investigation into the sexual grooming and exploitation of a 16-year-old girl. Ah, so you are acquainted with the Sexual Offences Act 2003 but wilfully choose to ignore it when it suits. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted May 11, 2013 Author Share Posted May 11, 2013 Yes you could. To protect vulnerable 16 and 17 year olds, the offences of 'abuse of a position of trust' prohibits sexual contact between adults and children under 18 in schools, colleges and residential care. On Monday January 21st, five men appeared in court charged with 21 sexual offences following a police investigation into the sexual grooming and exploitation of a 16-year-old girl. What if he works in a different school? Or a call centre? Just get on Facebook and you're away groom a 14 year old, perfectly legally with a 13 age of consent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 For gods sake man..no matter what you do in regards to the laws there will still be injustices..always have been always will be. To change a present system which regrettably has let down 1, maybe 20?..who knows could be 50 is a pretty safe system when you apply numbers. As Chris says..if you move the ages around all you do is quite simply that..move them around. And has been proved..by numbers alone the current does work...the system actually cooperates with young in sexual relationships. You're using one tragic case to undermine the whole system. Why? ---------- Post added 11-05-2013 at 21:34 ---------- Exactly..The pervs barrister would have a field day. I already disproved all the points you make, and this is just a discussion so obviously nothing we say will change the law, I've proposed a better system would you care to comment on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Ah, so you are acquainted with the Sexual Offences Act 2003 but wilfully choose to ignore it when it suits. Interesting. Bingo! ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Ah, so you are acquainted with the Sexual Offences Act 2003 but wilfully choose to ignore it when it suits. Interesting. Yes it a floored act which needs improving to better protect young people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 What if he works in a different school? Or a call centre? Just get on Facebook and you're away groom a 14 year old, perfectly legally with a 13 age of consent. No it isn't and my post just demonstrated that it isn't. You can be charged now froor grooming a 16 year old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 <Dilusional> I've proposed a better system would you care to comment on it. Yes..but I'll let you do the talking.... this is just a discussion so obviously nothing we say will change the law Amen to that, considering I'm not proposing a change and you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.