Cabinet to discuss lowering age of consent

emmabrighton

From the Irish Times

"Among the arguments for lowering the age is that it would prevent the criminalisation of younger people, while one of the reasons for keeping it at 17 is a lower consent age would encourage inappropriate sexual activity at a younger age"

In my opinion, lowering the age of consent isn't going to make younger kids think its ok to have sex and those that are already doing it aren't really bothered by the legal age of consent. Now I think lowering the age of consent is a good thing for those teenagers convicted of having (consensual) sex with a minor. Say one is 17 and the other is 16. Imagine being on the sex offenders register because you had sex with your boyfriend/girlfriend?

And, I could be wrong here but, I don't think kids have a real understanding of the law. Most of us probably don't. I think they are good citizens because they have learned morals and the difference between right and wrong. I don't think that they don't commit crimes such as larceny because it is against the law.

I would love to know who reports these teenagers at the moment though... Are girls getting reported when they go for their initial scans in the national maternity hospital? Are the boyfriends getting reported when the girl fesses up to the old man?

What do you think boardsies, will it make much of a difference? Are tweens going to be swayed by a new age of consent or are they more likely to stay thinking that "girls have nits" and "boys smell".

?????

So if they lower the age of consent, does this mean they'll actively teach better sexual education in schools? Probably not.

Dravokivich

All I care about right now is that the burden of consent isn't entirely on the young fella.

hfallada

Isn't it the highest in Europe or one of the highest in Europe for no particular reason? But if a 16 year old guy gets done for having sex with a 16 year girl. The girl isn't punished but the guy is.

The dail should be more concerned that most young people never had sex ed and have no idea what safe sex is

mfceiling

You won't see too many 17 and 18 year old lads out protesting for the age to be lowered....however 45-50 year old, bearded men wearing trenchcoats will be lobbying for this alright...

keeponhurling

We should follow the Nepal model, seems to work well

J_E

mfceiling wrote: »

You won't see too many 17 and 18 year old lads out protesting for the age to be lowered....however 45-50 year old, bearded men wearing trenchcoats will be lobbying for this alright...

That's rubbish.

I think if anything this will help stop the likes of statutory rape happening between two consenting parties then it going sour if one decides to tell on the other for whatever reason. It's more common than you think.

Cool Mo D

There is a simple and fair way to do it: set the age of consent to 17 for both sexes AND make it legal for people under 17 to consent if their partner is no more than 2 years older than they are.

That would stop sending teenagers to court for something they're all doing anyway while giving some protection to much older adults taking advantage of teenagers.

Vito Corleone

How will this affect me? A horny 19 year old male.

donegal__road

This is what our government has been reduced to discussing in the Dail.. as well as filling in pot-holes and slinging mud at each other in an effort to gain political points.

gobnaitolunacy

A sideshow to eat up time before the hols imho.

suicide_circus

Vito Corleone wrote: »

How will this affect me? A horny 19 year old male.

It wont, you still wont be getting laid.

Annasopra

donegal__road wrote: »

This is what our government has been reduced to discussing in the Dail.. as well as filling in pot-holes and slinging mud at each other in an effort to gain political points.

When did the Dail discuss filling in potholes?

hansfrei

mfceiling wrote: »

You won't see too many 17 and 18 year old lads out protesting for the age to be lowered....however 45-50 year old, bearded men wearing trenchcoats will be lobbying for this alright...

Basically exactly what I said about this in the past. True.

frag420

Vito Corleone wrote: »

How will this affect me? A horny 19 year old male.

Unless the new laws render your hands and wrists useles then you are free to continue masturbating furiously!!

Seedy Arling

The North American Marlon Brandon Look Alike Association approves!

gcgirl

Cool Mo D wrote: »

There is a simple and fair way to do it: set the age of consent to 17 for both sexes AND make it legal for people under 17 to consent if their partner is no more than 2 years older than they are.

That would stop sending teenagers to court for something they're all doing anyway while giving some protection to much older adults taking advantage of teenagers.

Plus a million but you know the government they are actually clueless

mfceiling

mfceiling wrote: »

You won't see too many 17 and 18 year old lads out protesting for the age to be lowered....however 45-50 year old, bearded men wearing trenchcoats will be lobbying for this alright...

Pretty empty throw away comment. Teenagers are rarely seen out protesting for - or against - any laws of any type. It is generally adults that try to change the law(s) to ensure a better world for society and the children they intend to leave in it.

It is a kind of round-about ad hominem attempt you are making. Rather than address the merits or demerits of the proposed changes in a law - you instead comment on who in your own opinion might want the law changed.

I think it is a set of laws that we genuinely should be discussing and if a Cabinet wants to discuss it then I am all for that. Thats sorta how democracy works and progress is made is it not - even if people want to stiffle discourse with throw away comments about trenchcoats.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

mfceiling wrote: »

You won't see too many 17 and 18 year old lads out protesting for the age to be lowered....however 45-50 year old, bearded men wearing trenchcoats will be lobbying for this alright...

hey, dont forget about all the sexy blonde female teachers who would benefit from a lower age of consent too

Holsten

Does it really matter? I mean.. will it affect anything? I don't think teenagers will care at all.

They will do it whenever they want.

Annasopra

Holsten wrote: »

Does it really matter? I mean.. will it affect anything? I don't think teenagers will care at all.
.

It's not about whether they care!
It's about whether they get treated as criminals!

Nodin

Holsten wrote: »

Does it really matter? I mean.. will it affect anything? I don't think teenagers will care at all.

They will do it whenever they want.

...it would help keep a few off the sex offenders register, which I'd imagine would be useful in life.

GarIT

IMO the age needs to be raised to 18, Gender completely removed from the equation and a 2 year rule added. Maybe then a one year rule for under 15s and no tolerance for under 13s because it does happen and kids shouldn't become registered sex offenders for something that happened while they were a child and the other party was giving consent but was just too young to legally consent.

Holsten

I would love to see the statistics of how many people actually get convicted for having sex with their teenage girlfriends.

I doubt it's very high.

GarIT

Holsten wrote: »

I would love to see the statistics of how many people actually get convicted for having sex with their teenage girlfriends.

I doubt it's very high.

I heard it was something like 3 since the last change in that law.

Frank Lee Midere

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

hey, dont forget about all the sexy blonde female teachers who would benefit from a lower age of consent too

Sweet.

Holsten

GarIT wrote: »

I heard it was something like 3 since the last change in that law.

Exactly, even with that number I'm kinda shocked.

How is it even brought to light? How is that proven in a court?! Madness.

catallus

Maybe it has something to do with the parents of minors under their protection being defiled?

gobnaitolunacy

Holsten wrote: »

Exactly, even with that number I'm kinda shocked.

How is it even brought to light? How is that proven in a court?! Madness.

Relationship goes tits up and/or parents get wind of it and don't like it?

GarIT

Holsten wrote: »

Exactly, even with that number I'm kinda shocked.

How is it even brought to light? How is that proven in a court?! Madness.

Parents of the girl in the two cases I know anyway. It's a criminal case not a civil one, so even if the female participant denies everything the male can still be prosecuted.

Holsten

I would think that to prove that ever happened without a confession would be close to impossible.

GarIT

Holsten wrote: »

I would think that to prove that ever happened without a confession would be close to impossible.

That is why there are rarely any convictions.

Mother of one of the girls walked in on them. Under 16's can also be tested for DNA with consent of the parents only. When they are 16 they can refuse the DNA test.

EDIT: Actually I believe the HSE can give consent for an under 16 to be tested for fluids if they believe the child to have been sexually assaulted.

Holsten

Oh wow... I didn't know that.

Now that is something that should be looked at... jesus!

GarIT

Holsten wrote: »

Oh wow... I didn't know that.

Now that is something that should be looked at... jesus!

Why? When someone is under the age of being able to make their own medical decisions is it not right that the parents or legal guardian has the right to decide what is best for them.

Holsten

An example of why these laws are so hard to legislate for.

I'm sure that 16 year old was fully able to make her own decision if she wanted to submit to a DNA test. I mean obviously for a very young children but at 16, you've had sex with your 17 year old boyfriend, parents get pissed off and force you to take a DNA test... that's a bit messed up, no?

catallus

Holsten wrote: »

An example of why these laws are so hard to legislate for.

I'm sure that 16 year old was fully able to make her own decision if she wanted to submit to a DNA test. I mean obviously for a very young children but at 16, you've had sex with your 17 year old boyfriend, parents get pissed off and force you to take a DNA test... that's a bit messed up, no?

What's messed up is having your 16 year old daughter deflowered by a sweaty teenager who is practically a walking hard-on! To the gallows!!

GarIT

Holsten wrote: »

An example of why these laws are so hard to legislate for.

I'm sure that 16 year old was fully able to make her own decision if she wanted to submit to a DNA test. I mean obviously for a very young children but at 16, you've had sex with your 17 year old boyfriend, parents get pissed off and force you to take a DNA test... that's a bit messed up, no?

It's under 16 if that makes any difference, one you are 16 you can make your own medical decisions, I don't think it is too unreasonable for parents to make a medical decision for a 15 year old. What age do you think the cut off should be I hardly think a 15 year old knows enough to make their own medical decisions.

I'm not saying that a case like this happened, I'm just saying it can in theory. The only case I remember fully was where the mother witnessed it. I think the male used the defence of the laws being wrong rather than claiming he didn't do it and that's what got him on it.

Mammanabammana

Cool Mo D wrote: »

That would stop sending teenagers to court for something they're all doing anyway while giving some protection to much older adults taking advantage of teenagers.

I don't think giving out free condoms is gonna help...

donegal__road

mango salsa wrote: »

When did the Dail discuss filling in potholes?

the 2011 budget postmortem.. I'll get you the link if you want

Daqster

mfceiling wrote: »

....however 45-50 year old, bearded men wearing trenchcoats will be lobbying for this alright...

Edward Woodward is dead. Show some fecking respect would ya.

The Diabolical Monocle

emmabrighton wrote: »

From the Irish Times

"Among the arguments for lowering the age is that it would prevent the criminalisation of younger people, while one of the reasons for keeping it at 17 is a lower consent age would encourage inappropriate sexual activity at a younger age"

In my opinion, lowering the age of consent isn't going to make younger kids think its ok to have sex and those that are already doing it aren't really bothered by the legal age of consent. Now I think lowering the age of consent is a good thing for those teenagers convicted of having (consensual) sex with a minor. Say one is 17 and the other is 16. Imagine being on the sex offenders register because you had sex with your boyfriend/girlfriend?

And, I could be wrong here but, I don't think kids have a real understanding of the law. Most of us probably don't. I think they are good citizens because they have learned morals and the difference between right and wrong. I don't think that they don't commit crimes such as larceny because it is against the law.

I would love to know who reports these teenagers at the moment though... Are girls getting reported when they go for their initial scans in the national maternity hospital? Are the boyfriends getting reported when the girl fesses up to the old man?

What do you think boardsies, will it make much of a difference? Are tweens going to be swayed by a new age of consent or are they more likely to stay thinking that "girls have nits" and "boys smell".

?????

YEEEEEEESSSSSSSS!!!!






... i mean, oh really, terrible weather lately.

ivytwine

I would imagine most teens think it's 16 anyway?

I always did, because of all the English magazines I used to read...

Greenmachine

ivytwine wrote: »

I would imagine most teens think it's 16 anyway?

I always did, because of all the English magazines I used to read...

16 is what we were told in school. It was in the religon book so it was gosped. Stories in the media tended to give the correct age of consent most of the time. Think 16 is about the right age to set consent. With a close in age rule of 1.5-2.0 years. Equality b4 the law. Not to many prosecution for girl where one or both parties are below the age of consent. At that age there is as much chance that the girl you are sleeping with is older than you than she is younger.