Do you know what a paedophile is? Being a paedophile in itself is not a criminal offence. It is a medical term, describing someone who is attracted to prepubescent males or females. Example, a person could be a paedophile and not act on it. This person cannot be charged. of course, in reality this rarely happens. Paedophiles driven by their own desires break laws such a child pornography laws and age of consent laws. So, a paedophile is a paedophile, regardless of which country they live and regardless of the age of consent laws in that country.

There is no social security security system there. In a logical argument you can hardly compare a country where the option maybe to steal or starve with a country like UK where the State (you and I) ensure that no one NEEDS to steal to survive.

Sorry I thought the thread was 'Age of Consent' not clinical definitions of those who, in general, prey on children.

Bil, you really take the biscuit, dude,.... know what I mean ?

Anyway, maybe the guy has a point.

What you said was:

However I realise that's not what you meant.

Of course I think they should be protected but I don't think your proposal would have the desired affect.

[QUOTE=bil;9252391]So, what do we do? Bring back flogging, amputation for theft, up the sentances, build more jails, fill them with recidivists, becuase the harder the punishment, the more likely they are to reoffend.

Have any of the bright sparks who think this way ever asked themselves why every year in the stricter Islamic countries, there are STILL amputations and floggings?

Doesn't stop them all there either.[/QUOTE

there a lot of people who dont mind comiting crimes and only commit them because they know more or less what the penaltys are going to be.first offence.deals for TIC ect.suspended or comunity,you are not going to stop crime altogether

And in the USA, in many states the age of consent laws are set at 18. So, an American could easily come on here and say that there is no protection in the UK for those who are 17-18 and considered paedophiles in the USA.

I did say (if I had my way, I won't I know) I would make the age of consent 18. (NB Sexual contact does not normally include kissing and cuddling).

If the 70 year old ritch man was sleeping with the 14 year old you would not look at it the same as a 15 year old hansom boy sleeping with the 14 year old now is the older man a perv.or is she a little scrubber,it was the girls idia by the way

So your point of view is that anybody who is attracted to a person under 18 years of age is a paedophile?

NO, and Ihave no idea how you settled on that conclusion but I think Adrian in general answered that.

Quote Originally Posted by Adrian:-

Do you know what a paedophile is? It is a medical term, describing someone who is attracted to prepubescent males or females.

So(prepubescent) very rarely would include anyone up to 18).

Absolutely, with Bil's proviso about the age 16 separation criterion. I would add the proviso that they use contraception if they don't want kids. Kids are an unfortunate by product of sex.

Actually, thinking about it I'm not sure about the 16 bit. Something is needed for sure but I'm not sure that a single cut-off point is right. I'm sure that somewhere (in the States maybe) there is something about a 5 year difference in ages. I don't see why a 16 Y/O shouldn't have sex with a 15 Y/O.

On the lounge forum, thread "why aren´t we talking about this" read the link in post 12. It puts so much into perspective.

Graham

That link is:-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.../bi..._n_805689.html

Look at Amsterdam. Education is the way.

The trouble with making anything illegal is that you then drive it underground, and off we go to yet more teen pregnancies and STDs.