But 18 isn't always an adult, as you've said, it is sometimes. It's not absolute. But I see your point, one single, omnipresent consent age for all would make a lot of sense.
When did I say 18 was not an adult? 18 is a legal adult. Consent laws are for minors not for ADULTS. There is a difference between that. Adults are not influenced by consent laws since the laws are not made for them. If an adult is 18 they have the right to make there own decisions and have full rights to consent to whatever they with whoever they wish. Long as both parties agree upon it and it does not go against any other laws. Without the consent laws the law just says minors can not have sex with anyone 18 and up period. The consent law says depending on what country you live in you might be able to get away with certien things a few year earlier. You are mixing up legal adult and consent laws. They are not the same thing. LEGAL ADULT IS WHEN YOU ARE LEGALLY AN ADULT. Consent laws gives a MINOR the right to CONSENT despite the fact they are UNDERAGE and normally would not have that right. They are not the same thing so don't confuse them.(*eliminate*computer word checked this and put illuminate) Consent law does not automatically bring you up to legal adult status. People under legal adult age still go to juvi so not the same thing at all.
Well, you said that courts sometimes try children as adults and to quote: 'since overall most areas consider 18 adults'. Both of these things you said show that you are aware that the age at which someone is an adult is not an absolute and very much a grey area. If this were not the case then 18 would be considered adulthood everywhere, and not just in most areas and children wold never be tried as adults.
I accept your point that consent laws are not put in place for adults, but are there to protect children. However they do affect adults. They are there to ensure that adults do not have sex with children, by law. The consent law is there to apply to both children and adults.
I am not mixing up anything. If anything I'm untangling the confusion.
If the court tris them as an adult that does not mean they are an adult. It means they did something so awful that they deserve to be tried as such. Please learn the law before you start making stuff up its really annoying.
Also when someone is tried as an adult they go to juvi till they are 18 and are at that point transferred to an adult prison to finish out the term. A 12 year old could be tried as an adult. IT DOES NOT MAKE THEM AN ADULT.
If a 12 year old slaughters and eats his parents he might be tried as an adult.
Though he might also go to an institution. Even if you go to an institution you are there till you are sane enough and after which transferred to a prison. Children also get less harsh sentences.
However generally when these people get out they are already adults. It does not mean getting tossed in prison magically changes your age. Going to prison is not magic.
Wow, you're pretty condescending!
You are really missing so many valid points and trying to see this as black and white, when it's clearly not. If a court can try a child as an adult then the definition of what an adult is, is clearly not as black and white as you make out, whether they are 'legally an adult' or not. That's obvious and is a fact, whether you like it or not.
I imagine it is the blurred line between what constitutes an adult and a child, which makes age of consent so important.
Yes, I get it, to you, you are an adult when the state declares you legally an adult. But that's not a the same everywhere, it varies throughout the world,, as does the age of consent.
To put it most simply, consent age exists for a reason. And I very much doubt your idea is original or innovative and has no doubt been raised by someone else and then denied due to its several flaws.
Consent law in its most basic form has nothing to do with age, it is just the law that says you can't have sex with someone without their prior consent. But what is relevant is that an age must be decided upon at which someone is capable of giving consent. A child, for obvious reasons can't consent to sex.
Like I said, I'm not disagreeing with you, an omnipresent age consent would be much more appropriate, even if (as I think you're trying to say) the age of consent was changed to suit the age at which someone is legally an adult, the age of consent would still be there, as it would have to be. Your 'only have sex with adults' approach is basically a simpletons way of saying 'have the age of consent that same as the age of legal adulthood'. But scrapping the age of consent entirely, is completely idiotic and would be open to numerous abuses.
No the reason they do this is that adults get harsher sentences and they can only legally do so much to a child. So no a 12 year old going to prison tried as an adult in court does not make them adult. Like I said going to prison does not magically change your age. You are still 12 and put in juvenile detention till age 18 when you finish out your sentence. Meaning you are in fact an adult when you get out but it does not mean you were an adult going in. I just explained this. Also I am saying we get rid of consent laws period. Its not a simpleton way of saying it. Its what I was saying. If thats too difficult for you to understand I will try to explain it again but I already said this and am just repeating myself. We have the law saying "I CHILD CAN NOT CONSENT TO SEX WITH AN ADULT" and we also have we have adults which can have the ability to consent to everything themselves, and we have the consent laws saying "Minor of this age may consent to certien things". Removing this means that it would be left at 18 and no minor would be able to consent. Also what exactly do you find stupid about adults being with adults, drinking and being able to vote and smoke?
Is it normal I think we should get rid of consent laws?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
But 18 isn't always an adult, as you've said, it is sometimes. It's not absolute. But I see your point, one single, omnipresent consent age for all would make a lot of sense.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
When did I say 18 was not an adult? 18 is a legal adult. Consent laws are for minors not for ADULTS. There is a difference between that. Adults are not influenced by consent laws since the laws are not made for them. If an adult is 18 they have the right to make there own decisions and have full rights to consent to whatever they with whoever they wish. Long as both parties agree upon it and it does not go against any other laws. Without the consent laws the law just says minors can not have sex with anyone 18 and up period. The consent law says depending on what country you live in you might be able to get away with certien things a few year earlier. You are mixing up legal adult and consent laws. They are not the same thing. LEGAL ADULT IS WHEN YOU ARE LEGALLY AN ADULT. Consent laws gives a MINOR the right to CONSENT despite the fact they are UNDERAGE and normally would not have that right. They are not the same thing so don't confuse them.(*eliminate*computer word checked this and put illuminate) Consent law does not automatically bring you up to legal adult status. People under legal adult age still go to juvi so not the same thing at all.
--
jimrichy
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Well, you said that courts sometimes try children as adults and to quote: 'since overall most areas consider 18 adults'. Both of these things you said show that you are aware that the age at which someone is an adult is not an absolute and very much a grey area. If this were not the case then 18 would be considered adulthood everywhere, and not just in most areas and children wold never be tried as adults.
I accept your point that consent laws are not put in place for adults, but are there to protect children. However they do affect adults. They are there to ensure that adults do not have sex with children, by law. The consent law is there to apply to both children and adults.
I am not mixing up anything. If anything I'm untangling the confusion.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
If the court tris them as an adult that does not mean they are an adult. It means they did something so awful that they deserve to be tried as such. Please learn the law before you start making stuff up its really annoying.
Also when someone is tried as an adult they go to juvi till they are 18 and are at that point transferred to an adult prison to finish out the term. A 12 year old could be tried as an adult. IT DOES NOT MAKE THEM AN ADULT.
If a 12 year old slaughters and eats his parents he might be tried as an adult.
Though he might also go to an institution. Even if you go to an institution you are there till you are sane enough and after which transferred to a prison. Children also get less harsh sentences.
However generally when these people get out they are already adults. It does not mean getting tossed in prison magically changes your age. Going to prison is not magic.
--
jimrichy
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Wow, you're pretty condescending!
You are really missing so many valid points and trying to see this as black and white, when it's clearly not. If a court can try a child as an adult then the definition of what an adult is, is clearly not as black and white as you make out, whether they are 'legally an adult' or not. That's obvious and is a fact, whether you like it or not.
I imagine it is the blurred line between what constitutes an adult and a child, which makes age of consent so important.
Yes, I get it, to you, you are an adult when the state declares you legally an adult. But that's not a the same everywhere, it varies throughout the world,, as does the age of consent.
To put it most simply, consent age exists for a reason. And I very much doubt your idea is original or innovative and has no doubt been raised by someone else and then denied due to its several flaws.
Consent law in its most basic form has nothing to do with age, it is just the law that says you can't have sex with someone without their prior consent. But what is relevant is that an age must be decided upon at which someone is capable of giving consent. A child, for obvious reasons can't consent to sex.
Like I said, I'm not disagreeing with you, an omnipresent age consent would be much more appropriate, even if (as I think you're trying to say) the age of consent was changed to suit the age at which someone is legally an adult, the age of consent would still be there, as it would have to be. Your 'only have sex with adults' approach is basically a simpletons way of saying 'have the age of consent that same as the age of legal adulthood'. But scrapping the age of consent entirely, is completely idiotic and would be open to numerous abuses.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No the reason they do this is that adults get harsher sentences and they can only legally do so much to a child. So no a 12 year old going to prison tried as an adult in court does not make them adult. Like I said going to prison does not magically change your age. You are still 12 and put in juvenile detention till age 18 when you finish out your sentence. Meaning you are in fact an adult when you get out but it does not mean you were an adult going in. I just explained this. Also I am saying we get rid of consent laws period. Its not a simpleton way of saying it. Its what I was saying. If thats too difficult for you to understand I will try to explain it again but I already said this and am just repeating myself. We have the law saying "I CHILD CAN NOT CONSENT TO SEX WITH AN ADULT" and we also have we have adults which can have the ability to consent to everything themselves, and we have the consent laws saying "Minor of this age may consent to certien things". Removing this means that it would be left at 18 and no minor would be able to consent. Also what exactly do you find stupid about adults being with adults, drinking and being able to vote and smoke?
--
jimrichy
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
See More Comments =>
Ok. Well we clearly have a difference in opinion and value of logic. It was interesting. Thank you :)