age of consent/YOA
grainfedprairieboy @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 7:37 am
dbaker dbaker:
Grain feed plow boy...
if you were concerned about Grain
then how come you donot advocate the replacement of Chemical Paint removers with Wheat Starch..........
if you were concerned about Grain
then how come you donot advocate the replacement of Chemical Paint removers with Wheat Starch..........
I am involved in a project the would see bringing forth several kinds of biolubricants. We looked at plant based paint strippers but the fact of the matter is it doesn't work near as well as good ole fashioned petroleum derivatives.
dbaker dbaker:
In case your wondering about the Mounties actions
perhaps you should familiarize yourself with
the Eddy Haymoor story.
perhaps you should familiarize yourself with
the Eddy Haymoor story.
I've familiarised myself somewhat with the Dennis Baker Story. You're certainly well known on internet forums such as vivelecanada, greenpeace, Odysen, canadiandemocraticmovement and ghostchild just name a few.
Wisely you avoid the rightwing sites and stick to the more accepting left, but even still you are regarded as a flake everywhere you go.
Your first post on On Odysen, the renewable energy site you said
dbaker dbaker:
Givin that there is a real possibility that the Earth will shift ion its rotation to achieve a new position of dynamic balance after the polar ice caps melt
The simple consensus across cyberspace is that Dennis Baker is a nut job. A conclusion the RCMP, the Canadian government and your peers have also come to.
Its not the rest of the world Dennis.....its you.
Lord-Beaverbrook @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:03 am
And you can't drink until you're 19 in Ontario, legally- yet you become emancipated at 18. Weird!
Rita! Lovely Rita, meter maid - Do you suppose she'll ever have time to take some tea with me?
Lord-Beaverbrook @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:03 am
And you can't drink until you're 19 in Ontario, legally- yet you become emancipated at 18. Weird!
Rita! Lovely Rita, meter maid - Do you suppose she'll ever have time to take some tea with me?
ridenrain @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:12 am
Great digging GFPB.
Can we ban these people now?
Zeipher @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:23 am
This law has absolutley nothing to do with stopping kids from having sex. This is quite clear with the 5-year or so exemption that is included. It has everything to do with making it illegal for that creepy 40-year old pedophile from having sex with a 14 year old.
There's a world of difference between someone in grade 9 (14) and someone in grade 11 (16).
Zeipher @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:30 am
It's protection because the law can do nothing if a 40 year-old has sex with a 14 year-old. That is an incredibly immoral and disgusting act which deserves jail time.
dbaker @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:54 am
Grain fed plow boy
The consences of yes folks for the corruption realy does not matter.
I notice you refrain from the issues and slander, thats highly pathetic on your part.
I guessthat since you can not disput the technology, or the abuse in power.....
shoot the messenger
GreenPeace.... a subsidized arm of Shell Oil, does not support any environmental solution, mine or anyone else's
vivelecanada, .. well folks here can witness the Doc 's posts
claims it won't work yet shuts up when I mention trillium and chalk river
canadiandemocraticmovement ..there is no democratic movement in canada...just puppet leadership similar to the industry puppet leadership at the Green Party and the Seirra Club
and ghostchild .... They call me MedicineLeaves..moon figuires I can heal the planet,,,,,,,,and I'm trying , too bad the RCMP hacked the computer system at ghostchild and I now MedicineLeaves has been blocked..yet I can stillpost.
If I'm a flake and my issues are without valisity and meret
How comeI am not prosecuted for Criminal Slander? Because what I say is truth regardless weither you like it or not!
Dennis Baker
dunker @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:59 am
lily lily:
ridenrain ridenrain:
Arctic: That's dumb. It was never about stopping dumb kids from messing about. It was about adults preying on kids. Even if it''s "true love" between folks of bigger age gaps, then some one needs to complain , and the authorities don't know if everyones happy.
But now folks who prey on 14 year old prostitutes can be charged and the kids can be helped. It's only 2 years but that's a life time if we can get these kids off the streets and off the slavery of prostitution.
But now folks who prey on 14 year old prostitutes can be charged and the kids can be helped. It's only 2 years but that's a life time if we can get these kids off the streets and off the slavery of prostitution.
Yes, because we all know the johns are such law-abiding citizens that they'll respect the new age of consent laws, and only hire a hooker that's old enough to drive.
$1:
Lilly.
You have kids ? Mine is 10.
If I have done nothing than she knows that stealing a car or having sex with someone way older is wrong. Hell, she was a bit ticked that a friend burned a dvd for her.
If you're kids can't tell right or wrong by 12 or even 14, who's fault is that? Who's kids are they?
You have kids ? Mine is 10.
If I have done nothing than she knows that stealing a car or having sex with someone way older is wrong. Hell, she was a bit ticked that a friend burned a dvd for her.
If you're kids can't tell right or wrong by 12 or even 14, who's fault is that? Who's kids are they?
My daughter is almost 10, my son is 12. Yes, they know right from wrong, but that wasn't my point.
Once again.... why is a kid old enough to stand trial at 12, but too young to have sex for another 4 years?
It always amazes me when I see parents in the video store vetoing movies and games because of sexual themes, but okaying graphic violence.
Blowing up people... good.
Seeing nekkid wimmin... bad.
[/quote] Once again.... why is a kid old enough to stand trial at 12, but too young to have sex for another 4 years?
Thinking back to my youth..as a 12-13-14 yr old growing up in small town Ontario...and being a male..
Sex was the unknown and fascinating and exciting. I would say that most boys this age, sex was the taboo thing that wasn't discussed openly but was experimented with...stealing cars didn't give me a woody. I wonder if my parents had anything to do with this; the ability to tell right from wrong, or was it the school system, who would introduce us to mr policeman who in turn would tell us that it was bad to steal or hurt people. We were not as fortunate as today's kids in that we didn't get sex education at an early age, more like when we got into highschool.
Society has evolved since I was a kid, my kids were made aware of alot of things that I was never made aware of or learned later in life.
I think what I am having a problem with here is associating the two together, crimes commited by youth, and youth and sex and how you can lump them together.... I think a 12 yr old in either circumstance is too young to understand the consequences involved if they steal (1st offence types) or have sex period...
Good thread Lilly and has me confused all to hell
Tricks @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:28 pm
lily lily:
Grade 6 is 11-12.
Well seeing as I will be 17 when I am in grade 12, but I am a late birthday.$1:
Are you seriously suggesting that the ages were decided because of what our schools teach? Is that where you learned "all that shit"... in school?
LOL Hell no. But they can't assume that kids are going to learn it on their own. They have to make sure the kids have a basis of knowledge.$1:
My kids started learning right from wrong the first time they heard the word "no"... probably when they bit me while nursing. 
They started learning about sex at bath time. (names for body parts, differences, etc)
Again, the Government can't assume this, and have to go by what they know for sure. They started learning about sex at bath time. (names for body parts, differences, etc)$1:
Both subjects involve an on-going process of learning. It's not just one class taught in grade 6, 7, or 9.
No but that is when the government knows they have learnt something.$1:
How would raising the age of consent be a good protection from pedos?
It would protect 14 and 15 year olds. $1:
Children as young as newborns get molested - how does raising the age protect them?
There is no way we can protect them further, except killing pedos. But if you raise the age, it will protect 14 and 15 year olds.
dbaker @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:32 pm
Raising the age of concent will only result in the prosecuting young teens for having concentual sex.
Didlers don't get restrained by legal age requirements, they attack children. and its never concentual
Dennis Baker
kal @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 3:35 pm
$1:
except killing pedos
Not a bad idea!
Tricks @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 3:46 pm
kal kal:
$1:
except killing pedos
Not a bad idea!
dbaker @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 5:14 pm
Ask yourself this question
(please do not tell me)
have your sexual desires every changed?
Me no!
Didlers create more didlers
therefor LIFE first offence
Dennis Baker
Hardy @ Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:09 pm
Tricks Tricks:
$1:
How would raising the age of consent be a good protection from pedos?
It would protect 14 and 15 year olds. Just to clarify, pedophilia, by clinical definition, can only occur between an adult and a prepubescent child.
There are many measures of puberty, so the line is a bit blurry. It is considered as normally starting in girls at around 10, and in boys at around 12. The clearest dividing point would probably be when puberty was advanced enough for the person to be able to have offspring, and the average ages for this are (in the US, I couldn't find Canadian figures) 12.6 years in girls, and around 14.0 years for boys. By 14.0 years, 97% of girls have experienced menarche (started their period).
So, by their 14th birthday, only about 1/4 of the population (nearly all of them boys) could still be called pre-pubescent. Raising the age of consent, at least in the case of girls, would have virtually no effect on pedophiles. You might think that a 20 year old who sleeps with a 15 year old is sick and disgusting, but they aren't a pedophile.