So you wouldn’t have the hump if your daughter who was 15 was taken to France.
kr79:
So you wouldn’t have the hump if your daughter who was 15 was taken to France.
My daughter of 15 wouldn’t have been taken to France because firstly I’d have brought her up long before that age to stay away from married/divorced blokes and if she wanted to set up home with a single bloke,of whatever age,wether he was 15 or 50 +,I’d have just reminded her (and him) of the age of consent and a few months isn’t that long to wait if they really love each other.So no need for anyone to run anywhere.Which really wouldn’t be any different to how the church that then marries them would see it. 
Obviously in this case her father/s don’t see it my way.Not suprising in a world where fathers these days seem more interested in who their daughters or step daughters are dating than just looking after their own wives. 
The more I read your posts on these subjects I get the impression you think all young girls are home recking scrubbers and all married men are shaging them.
The more I read them and your other posts I think it’s your persona that stoped you getting the girl.
And so he goes on and on and on. I think he has just be a wind up, I fear for humanity if someone as stupid as him can use a computer. Not to mention the underage girls of the country which he so enthusiastically ■■■■ after.
Give my regards to your mum Carry old bean.
I’d say his persona stopped him getting most things he wanted, if indeed he’s not just a wind up.
switchlogic:
I think I’m done with this debate, he’s like a stuck record.
Never a truer sentence has been said in a while, I won’t bother reading this thread again.
kr79:
The more I read your posts on these subjects I get the impression you think all young girls are home recking scrubbers and all married men are shaging them.
The more I read them and your other posts I think it’s your persona that stoped you getting the girl.
Not at all I just apply the test if the cap fits wear it to them.In my personal experience I’ve known at least three birds who could have given me one chance instead of a married/divorced bloke another chance in life.In addition to seeing girls prefer being chatted up by married blokes than single ones and loads of other cases involving married and divorced blokes getting second or more chances in life with single girls,instead of single ones getting one,that have been in the news and that I’m aware of amongst friends and family.
The fact is single blokes are looked down on as creeps while married and divorced blokes are seen as a better catch by the single girls for some reason.
That’s all about zb morals and nothing to do with my persona because they’ve never even given me the chance to even get to know them so that’s just bs.
switchlogic:
And so he goes on and on and on. I think he has just be a wind up, I fear for humanity if someone as stupid as him can use a computer. Not to mention the underage girls of the country which he so enthusiastically ■■■■ after.
You seem to have some reading and understanding problems concerning the words age of consent.That’s not my fault.
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
And so he goes on and on and on. I think he has just be a wind up, I fear for humanity if someone as stupid as him can use a computer. Not to mention the underage girls of the country which he so enthusiastically ■■■■ after.You seem to have some reading and understanding problems concerning the words age of consent.That’s not my fault.
No I dont. You regularly defend older men who have relations with under age girls. As I said previously I think the age of consent means nothing to you and you only defend yourself saying your only interested in girls over because if you made clear your true intentions regarding underage girls people would rain a sihtstorm down upon you.
Carryfast:
The fact is I’m looked down on as a creep while normal blokes are seen as a better catch by the single girls for some reason.
Fixed that for you 
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
And so he goes on and on and on. I think he has just be a wind up, I fear for humanity if someone as stupid as him can use a computer. Not to mention the underage girls of the country which he so enthusiastically ■■■■ after.You seem to have some reading and understanding problems concerning the words age of consent.That’s not my fault.
You seem to have some too, or you are not reading the posts.
Of course Jimmy Saville wouldn’t have been, or the school teacher will not be done for ■■■■■■, unless it is his own bloodline. He will be done for either child abduction or possibly having under age ■■■. It isn’t me who makes the rules up, but I do think they are there to protect young impressionable girls from dirty old men who think the world owes them an existence.
As an ACU motorcycle official I occasionally get asked to be Child Protection Officer at a motor sporting event. In law the definition of Children are those who are still under the age of 18 years of age. We have to protect them from physical, ■■■■■■ or emotional harm and from neglect or bullying. We are also responsible for data protection issues in the media.
The Age of Consent is not a fixed point. A 16 year old girl can give her consent, and two fifteen year olds having ■■■ would probably only get a backward glance, even in a magistrates court.
However a teacher, guardian, youth worker etc. cannot have ■■■ with a legally consenting 16 year old until she is 18
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
And so he goes on and on and on. I think he has just be a wind up, I fear for humanity if someone as stupid as him can use a computer. Not to mention the underage girls of the country which he so enthusiastically ■■■■ after.You seem to have some reading and understanding problems concerning the words age of consent.That’s not my fault.
You seem to have some too, or you are not reading the posts.
Of course Jimmy Saville wouldn’t have been, or the school teacher will not be done for ■■■■■■, unless it is his own bloodline. He will be done for either child abduction or possibly having under age ■■■. It isn’t me who makes the rules up, but I do think they are there to protect young impressionable girls from dirty old men who think the world owes them an existence.
As an ACU motorcycle official I occasionally get asked to be Child Protection Officer at a motor sporting event. In law the definition of Children are those who are still under the age of 18 years of age. We have to protect them from physical, ■■■■■■ or emotional harm and from neglect or bullying. We are also responsible for data protection issues in the media.
The Age of Consent is not a fixed point. A 16 year old girl can give her consent, and two fifteen year olds having ■■■ would probably only get a backward glance, even in a magistrates court.
However a teacher, guardian, youth worker etc. cannot have ■■■ with a legally consenting 16 year old until she is 18
So now we seem to be getting somewhere based on reason not madness.It’s that issue of the age of consent not being a so called ‘fixed point’ which is the argument which I’m making.Previous precedent,and the laws related to marriage, show that it is a fixed point in law.All that so called ‘guardian’ has to do in the case of falling in love with one their charges is to admit the fact to their superiors and resign.Simples.
Just as Clive Richards did and I think in the case of Jeremy Forrest,running off to France,with the girl he loves,who was old enough to know what she was doing,although as I’ve said the totally wrong way of fixing the problem,instead of turning up for work,is as resigned as resignation gets.Added to the fact that he was supposed to have been sacked as of that day anyway and certainly doesn’t fit the description of ‘child’ abduction in any common sense meaning of the word.
His crime was just stupidity and adultery and hers was just being a stupid,possibly scheming,homewrecker.
The idea of anything other than the legal age of consent at 16,not being relevant to everyone,regardless of age is just bs.Or at least it has been so far.You seem to be confirming what I’ve said in that the law is moving ever closer to the situation in the States of one law for over 18 blokes being with under 18 women and another law for under 18 blokes being with under 18 women.
Possibly,which if I’ve read it right,in your view,even means turning a blind eye in the case of what is actually paedophilia involving under age girls with same age blokes 
.
Which effectively means that it’s only blokes under 18 that can have had a ■■■■■■ relationship with a girl under 18 who’s of the age of consent .Also possibly even an under age girl and be let off for the crime of being a zb ■■■■■■■■■■.Whereas a bloke over 18,having a decent relationship,with a girl over the age of consent,will be treated,or at least seen,differently at least in the eyes of those like you,and possibly in the eyes of the law . Which is blatant ageism. 
So why does the so called need to ‘protect’ girls under 18,from so called ‘■■■■■■ harm’,in the case of it being a relationship with an over 18 bloke,suddenly not need to apply so long it’s a bloke of her own or close age .
Effectively what you’re saying is just a licence for blokes of the same age to do whatever they want while anyone over the bs age of 18,wanting to have a decent relationship with a girl,subject to the age of consent being complied with,is now classed as a zb ■■■■■■■■■■.
If girls under 18 are ‘children’ then they shouldn’t be being shagged by anyone,regardless of age,which means raising the age of consent to 18 which should apply to everyone not just blokes over 18 in just the same way that the old age of consent at 16 applies/d.
The whole thing is a load of bs federal US law being imposed here in Britain by the back door.
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
The fact is I’m looked down on as a creep while normal blokes are seen as a better catch by the single girls for some reason.Fixed that for you
So ‘normal’ blokes in that case would obviously include blokes like Jeremy Forrest in the case of Megan Stammers then.
Intelligence obviously isn’t one of your strong points is it. 
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
The fact is I’m looked down on as a creep while normal blokes are seen as a better catch by the single girls for some reason.Fixed that for you
So ‘normal’ blokes in that case would obviously include blokes like Jeremy Forrest in the case of Megan Stammers then.
Intelligence obviously isn’t one of your strong points is it.
Nice try you muppet
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
The fact is I’m looked down on as a creep while normal blokes are seen as a better catch by the single girls for some reason.Fixed that for you
So ‘normal’ blokes in that case would obviously include blokes like Jeremy Forrest in the case of Megan Stammers then.
Intelligence obviously isn’t one of your strong points is it.
Nice try you muppet
Hopefully this one is over 18 or he’s in the zb under federal law. 
youtube.com/watch?v=jg6xpBtU … re=related
0-0.16
What a side splitting attempt at humour. The more I think about it the more I think you are Rikki on a wind up to get more hits on the threads.
kr79:
What a side splitting attempt at humour. The more I think about it the more I think you are Rikki on a wind up to get more hits on the threads.
No just showing Megan Stammers what she’s missing by going for a married bloke who shouldn’t have been going after her in the first place.Instead of doing the job properly if she was really serious and not just out to wreck her teacher’s marriage because she doesn’t like school.
I bet there are quite a few well known so called celebrities sweating now that this Jimmy Saville witch hunt is gathering pace !!
Dave the Renegade:
I bet there are quite a few well known so called celebrities sweating now that this Jimmy Saville witch hunt is gathering pace !!
Some say the age police are going to send a mass extradition warrant through to the other side to get all the dead ones back using a spiritualist medium.
I thought the silly ■■■■■■■■ liked the US states 
Geoffrey you are a dangerous prick
CC to Ricki
Night Night.