Who hasn't done that on here?

The big risk here, and I suspect this may be the case with one or two other recent news stories, is that in 30 years time someone in a similar situation to your mates sister may recall the events differently and report wrong doing. Especially if the fellow she had an under age relationship with becomes wealthy and she sees an opportunity to grab some compensation.

There have been a few cases like that recently with other UK celebrities who have been cleared of all charges.

Absolutely ....... Right if I ever become single again, dating includes ID checks.

Really? I would have said the majority view whenever this topic comes up is, "Cut their balls off with a rusty knife."

I doubt people are cowering in silence afraid to express themselves over it.

And if people were afraid to say what they really think they'd simply say nothing at all, no one is forced to comment. The accusation of being scared to say what you really think, otherwise known as being in 'the PC brigade' is just an incredibly tedious comeback that's used ad nauseam now...you don't agree with me, well you must be hiding what you really think.

Does this just apply to Paedos ?

The 'PC Brigade' are all in cahoots and gather to form an intimidatory presence preventing these cowering ones from speaking...somehow...

Yes, very tedious.

No, it applies to absolutely everything it seems.

And of course you wouldn't be guilty of anything like that would you Sally?

Please don't do this. Who is attempting to bully him out of his opinion? I see discussion with people who are all of the same mind whilst not using the same language as him. He has come quite close to accusing people, who are simply posting facts, of possibly being paedophiles themselves. That is out of order imo. People are simply suggesting that the language he's using is stronger than they'd use for whatever reason.

Also the idea that he is the only person posting who has personal knowledge of abuse is laughable (not literally obviously). No one knows what anyone else has gone through or dealt with unless they actually say so and many probably don't want to but are happy to discuss the subject in a relatively calm manner.

It's a good discussion imo, let's keep it that way and not a) make assumptions or b) get sidetracked with negative personal comments.

I'm rarely in the PC brigade on BE ..... just have a look at the "Apology to Asylum Seekers" thread.

But for mine, I believe tarnishing every peodo with the same brush on this is a bit out of order. A full blown single digit child rapist is slightly different to a dude dating a 14 year old who he thought was 17.

I don't even think there's a clear-cut 'PC' position.

Here in the US the age of consent is 18 and people can go on the sex offenders register for what most would consider trivial matters like public urination.

I think common sense dictates that there are degrees to this.

I agree

Although both terrible crimes, there is a difference between a peedy that looks at kiddy porn and one that actually molests kids

I have publicly urinated in the US before. In fact a few times.

I suspect that the real reason that this topic has occupied such a large amount of discussion is that children are involved, and as they are very vulnerable members of society we, rightly, need to be protected, but also other vulnerable members of society need to be protected, the elderly, those with learning difficulties, disabled people, all of which have been, and almost certainly are being, abused, if fact Jimmy Saville has been implicated in most of those categories. ALL vulnerable members of society need to be protected, and discussions should not be limited just to children. Perhaps the ongoing investigation into abuse in the H of P will focus the law makers minds, and they are now talking of making covering up of abuse a crime itself. Personally I think abuse of vulnerable people of any kind should be treated in an equal manner.
There are. of course, been many additional safeguards put into place for people working with children and other vulnerable people, and now to work with them you have to get enhanced police clearances, I know I did and that was only so I could do medical tests on children to help diagnose diseases. I hope that all entertainers who work with children, like Blue Peter and others also have to be chaecked, perhaps if these were available and used at the time Harris, Hall and Saville were performing they MAY have thrown up some concerns.