egafd.com

Hello Mike.

Thanks for clarifying those points.

I must say that your argument has its merits. It might make for some complicated legislation though.

Best regards,

Steve.


eroticartist wrote:

> Steve R,
> No you are right that would not be my intention but as I have
> stated the usual sentence for such crimes would be aggravated
> by the fact that the victim had been forced to have sex against
> her will and this would attract a longer sentence to decided by
> the judge. The finding that violence had been used would be the
> only thing for the jury to consider.
> Mike Freeman.
>
>

MY EYES!

fuck fuck fuck ... didnt realise i could swear :@)

Who you fucking now, Clare?

An exercise in semantics given that you can re-badge & re-write a law and change nothing because it still comes down to Her word against His or vice versa in court

Their will always be unscrupulous people who will use the law of the day to their advantage for a variety of reasons.

You want to avoid becoming a victim,dont put yourself in the situation where thats more than likely to occur.That goes for both side of the equation

Harmonyluvver,

You say:"Our laws need a huge overhaul. Problem is that the job is so huge governments are not willing to tackle it." On the contrary this New Labour government has fond time to pass 3000 new laws I believe! Please correct me if I am wrong because the figure sounds so absurd I may have got it wrong!

You ask:"So are you saying that the violation would carry a set sentence and then be extended or a separate sentence for the violence ?" I am saying that a defendant would be found guilty of rape if found guilty of using violence and charged under the laws of violence, and this would be classed as aggravated violence and attract whatever sentence the judge in all his wisdom thought fit.

You state:"If I am hungry and I eat my desire for food is sated by eating, is hunger therefore an emotion? I think its a desire for sex and as we are all greater than the sum of our parts we are all capable of controlling physical desires and of controlling our emotions rather than them controlling us." I am saying that sex is an emotion sated by a physical act. We are not all capable of controlling our sexual desires and violence used by men too satisfied their sexual drive is all to common. Prostitutes offer a social service and legal brothels should be set up where prostitutes get regular health checks with the business girls and their clients remaining anonymous.

You say "In one respect human beings are animals and animals copulate to reproduce and they do so without age limits. However human beings have the capacity for higher reason which means that we are aware of the physical and mental damage that can be caused by sex at an early age. The 14 year old body is still in the midst of its changes and banging away like a benobo chimp could well cause long term damage, inceasing the risk of cervical cancer and so on." I reply: Human beings are animals and biologically the optimum age to conceive in order to have a healthy child is fourteen and no physical damage is inherent in the normal act of sexual intercourse. Cervical cancer is caused by the HPV and no-one quite understands why some males carry it but personally I think that male hygiene is important, but smoking tobacco is a far more important factor here you will find.

You say:"Yes reproduction is a natural thing in animals. Again though you have to come back to the fact that you cannot simply use animals to rationalise human behaviour. Human beings more often than not do not get together to create a new life, they do it because it's pleasurable, and kids who do it are, in the vast majority of cases, doing it for that reason too. The other reason that kids do it is that more and more often it is the only way they have of expressing what they think is love which to me proves beyond a shadow of a doubt their mental immaturity, thus showing they are not ready for sex." I say that kids do it for pleasure and as Romeo and Juliet says love can be very real and intense when one is young. I merely believe that contraception should be taught in schools and provided to the youth of the UK free. Young girls having children should not be condemned by politicians because they are responsible for the high pregnancy rate of teenage girls in the UK as opposed to the Netherlands for example.

You say :"As I said before the most sinister problem of lowering the age to 14 would be that 14 year old kids would be too open to manipulation by unscrupulous "adults"." But 14 olds are always being exploited by the unscrupulous anyway.

You say:"I do agree that our government is "too much power in too few hands" and that those hands are too often inept or more interested in appearing to be moral than making good decisions too benefit the population and that our sex education programme is next to useless. I do not believe the answer is lowering the age of consent though." I agree with much of what you say especially the "appearing to be moral" bit because they are not so moral when selling weapons for profit, as the second biggest arms dealer in the world, are they? As I reiterate the age of consent should be lowered to the more reasonable age of fourteen simply to stop criminalising millions of our youth."

Thank you for putting forward your points and perhaps that you are real harmony lover?

Mike Freeman

ClareDD,
The age of consent is fourteen is most other European countries and the UK has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe and the Netherlands has one of the lowest. The age of consent should be lowered to 14 if only to avoid criminalising millions of young people.
Mike Freeman.

Steve R,
Thank you but I doubt very much whether the rape legislation will ever be altered the authorities just keep trying to make it easier to convict men of rape in order to get more convictions but get less. This government has passed more legislation than any other government in history!
Mike Freeman