cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

RichAllen
Grafter
Posts: 805
Registered: 14-09-2013

PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24978730
PM David Cameron rejects government calls to lower the legal age of consent to 15.
Normally I think Cameron's a numpty, but well done to him for this decision.
Thoughts?
11 REPLIES
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,770
Thanks: 33
Fixes: 1
Registered: 08-10-2010

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

I can see both sides of the argument here....
The fifteen year old girl who has a boyfriend and wants to be 'grown-up', but is too frightened to ask for advice about contraception.
The conflicting impressions given by sex education and lowering of consent to 15, could make them feel pressured into sex when they are not ready.
Tough call either way really. Huh
Though to be honest I do think the age of consent is rather impractical as I know women in their twenties ,with children, that I wouldn't trust to look after my cactus for a week.  Roll eyes
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,674
Thanks: 109
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

the whole premise is garbage, kids get given contraceptives at school from the day they turn 13 anyway
they get sexual responsibility lectures at least once every term in school, there given free sexual health check-ups from age 14 at family planning centres and GP surgeries.
the only reason to lower the age of consent would be to stop the rate of prosecution of people banging school kids which to be frank is going in the wrong direction, we should be urging stiffer sentencing for those that prey on the almost legal not giving them a free pass to degenerate them further.
and lets not forget it was only a century ago that the age of consent was raised from 13 to 16 as an attempt to slow down the birth rate, now some idiot is calling for the age to be lowered at a time when the population is already too large the last thing we need is faster population growth!
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
WTF
Grafter
Posts: 673
Thanks: 1
Registered: 14-09-2012

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

I think, in practice one year either way is going to make zero difference.  From what teacher friends tells me, kids are having lots of sex way under 16, regardless of the law.  Personally, I don't see prosecuting two consenting 14 year olds can do much good at all, either.
On the other hand, there is the argument that the age of consent protects youngsters from exploitation by older teens and adults.  Not sure how effective that is as a deterent - if you're the sort of scumbag who would do that, I don't see a law stopping you - but it does at least allow for prosecution.
My guess is that this has come up because kids are engaging in sex so much younger but not being prosecuted which some might think makes a mockery of the law.  An easy fix would be to specify that the law only applies when there's an age difference of maybe 2 years: that would exclude most consenting kids but still target those out to exploit.
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,674
Thanks: 109
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

I cant say how other police forces operate there policy but my local constabulary has adopted the policy that if the age gap is less than 12 months and both parties are consenting they will not pursue criminal charges against individuals otherwise they would need to employ a few hundred thousand more coppers.
I'd say its a practical adoption particularly since they also operate a zero tolerance view of anyone under the age of 13 cannot give consent regardless of the age gap, I would be against increasing the age gap to two years for there policy as well and believe that the age of consent should be raised to 18 as that is when a person can access benefits and will be the age at which they can leave full time education come April, what they should do is prosecute anyone who has a baby below the age of consent without barring them from accessing medical services or facilities.
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
randpwar
Grafter
Posts: 1,308
Thanks: 1
Registered: 01-08-2007

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

Quote from: nanotm
what they should do is prosecute anyone who has a baby below the age of consent without barring them from accessing medical services or facilities.

The idea is to protect young people from abuse and manipulation, though the argument is complicated, not to prosecute them!!!
I think that (fanfare!) the politicians have got this right and that despite the advice, the age of consent moving to 15 will help no one. They need to be better prepared and educated for these situations but sadly Gove doesn’t get it. But how many people would be shocked if Gove got something else wrong?
WTF
Grafter
Posts: 673
Thanks: 1
Registered: 14-09-2012

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

Quote from: nanotm
I cant say how other police forces operate there policy but my local constabulary has adopted the policy that if the age gap is less than 12 months and both parties are consenting they will not pursue criminal charges against individuals otherwise they would need to employ a few hundred thousand more coppers.
I'd say its a practical adoption particularly since they also operate a zero tolerance view of anyone under the age of 13 cannot give consent regardless of the age gap, I would be against increasing the age gap to two years for there policy as well and believe that the age of consent should be raised to 18 as that is when a person can access benefits and will be the age at which they can leave full time education come April, what they should do is prosecute anyone who has a baby below the age of consent without barring them from accessing medical services or facilities

That sounds emminently sensible to me - the zero tolerance bit included (I hadn't thought of that).  Not sure I agree with prosecuting anyone who has a baby below the age of consent, though: if you're not prosecuting them for having sex you can hardly prosecute for its consequences.  If whoever got them pregnant is over the age of consent and more than a year older, prosecute them by all means.
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,674
Thanks: 109
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

yeah maybe but teaching them safe sex and then enforcing failure to act accordingly would IMHO be a far better carrot/stick approach than legalising anything be changing the law, it also allows policy to be changed regionally to allow for local concerns to be addressed, so if one area starts to lack for young you could suspend the prosecution policy in order for local identity to be preserved, but also if in a certain area there were to many sex related crimes you'd be able to instigate a zero tolerance on all "discovered" incidences instead of turning a blind eye to it.
a flexible approach governed by councils and police forces in conjunction with the minister for local governance that meets the needs of the country as a whole (but then again its far to sensible an idea to be actually used by anyone)
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Community Veteran
Posts: 13,926
Thanks: 515
Fixes: 8
Registered: 01-08-2007

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

For once I agree with RichAllen. This issue is a minefield and cameron has done well to avoid it and leave it as it is.
If the age of consent was lowered it would be something that would then no doubt be adjusted with again and again by successive governments. At a time when the world is suffering a plague of child abuse and peadophilia, we don't need to be giving the pervs any signs of encouragement.
I think the age of consent is fine as it is. Granted you're never going to stop school kids from having underage sex, thats always going to happen but the law does set a standard for authorities to work to for protecting our young from older sexual predators.
I personally wonder if it should be raised to 18 to be honest. Sure, kids of that age will still be at it but it will make it far harder for child abusers and it will be easier to get them locked up.
I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
randpwar
Grafter
Posts: 1,308
Thanks: 1
Registered: 01-08-2007

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

It’s a long way from straight forward and I think every case of a person having sex with an underage person should be looked at individually. Officially, I guess, a 16 year old having sex with a 15 year old has committed a child sex crime and (probably) registered as such. That is completely wrong and a whole world away from a 40 year old grooming a minor by posing on social media as the same age and then coercing them to have sex; the law has to recognise the difference and I’m not sure it does
WTF
Grafter
Posts: 673
Thanks: 1
Registered: 14-09-2012

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

Quote from: randpwar
It’s a long way from straight forward and I think every case of a person having sex with an underage person should be looked at individually. Officially, I guess, a 16 year old having sex with a 15 year old has committed a child sex crime and (probably) registered as such. That is completely wrong and a whole world away from a 40 year old grooming a minor by posing on social media as the same age and then coercing them to have sex; the law has to recognise the difference and I’m not sure it does

Absolutely - where's the 'like' button when you need it?
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,674
Thanks: 109
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

Quote from: randpwar
It’s a long way from straight forward and I think every case of a person having sex with an underage person should be looked at individually. Officially, I guess, a 16 year old having sex with a 15 year old has committed a child sex crime and (probably) registered as such. That is completely wrong and a whole world away from a 40 year old grooming a minor by posing on social media as the same age and then coercing them to have sex; the law has to recognise the difference and I’m not sure it does

yeah well that's why the +/- 1 year policy is such a clever thing, it allows for that crossover between kids without criminalising them for it, I would like to see every single one of them that takes and posts explicit material of themselves get locked up for crass stupidity though (not necessarily charged with creating and distributing underage porn, but that would need to be a case by case differentiation rather than en masse one if any such allowances were to be made)
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you