Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tories to raise age of consent
Sun Media ^ | 2006-02-08 | Kathleen Harris

Posted on 02/08/2006 7:42:20 AM PST by Clive

OTTAWA -- Raising the legal age for Canadians to have sex and toughening up prison terms for gun-toting criminals will be top legislative priorities for the new Conservative government, according to Justice Minister Vic Toews.

The Manitoba MP, a former attorney general in his home province, said the Conservative government would likely pace its law-and-order agenda instead of tabling a mammoth omnibus bill that could have trouble passing as a package.

"One of the issues I would like to see brought forward as quickly as possible is the age of protection, raising that from 14 to 16, and looking at bringing in a close-in-age exemption," Toews said.

"We don't want to criminalize consenting sexual conduct between youth; we want to protect young people from adult sexual predators. If we look at that, for example, as a stand-alone bill, that could be done fairly quickly."

GRITS BLOCKED MOTION

Last fall a Conservative motion to raise the age of consensual sex was defeated in a 169-100 vote. Former justice minister Irwin Cotler had urged fellow Liberals to vote against it because a child protection law already strengthened safeguards to stop the sexual exploitation of children.

Toews also said the Conservatives will band together with the NDP to boost mandatory minimum sentences for gun offences.

But the Tory pledge to abolish the controversial gun registry could move to the back burner in the wake of warnings from police chiefs.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day didn't directly say if the plan to cancel the controversial registry will proceed with the sweeping agenda to combat crime.


TOPICS: Canada; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: ageofconsent; moralabsolutes; teens

1 posted on 02/08/2006 7:42:21 AM PST by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Great Dane; Alberta's Child; headsonpikes; coteblanche; Ryle; albertabound; mitchbert; ...

-


2 posted on 02/08/2006 7:43:06 AM PST by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

thank goodness. 14 was really bugging me!!! AND i hope they really do crack down on people who commit crimes with a gun. automatic double sentence? that sound fair to you? and i hope STIFFER sentences!!


3 posted on 02/08/2006 7:47:47 AM PST by ferri (Be Politically Incorrect: Support the Constitution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ferri

I hardly bothered to look at the post until I noticed 14 years old!? How did they reduce the age of consent to that?


4 posted on 02/08/2006 7:50:18 AM PST by vimto (Life isn't a dry run)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clive
Interesting thing about liberal philosophy, they want "Big Momma Government" to protect every one from just about everything - but have a number of curious exceptions, one being their view that children should not be protected from sexual predators.

I don't wish to automatically conclude that their group is infested by pedophiles but there certainly is a curious connection.

Glad to know that the Tories might be pushing that bar back a little, however, 14/16 is still very young.

5 posted on 02/08/2006 7:59:54 AM PST by zerosix (Native Sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vimto

"I hardly bothered to look at the post until I noticed 14 years old!?"

Until recently, several US states had the age of consent set at 14, too. I believe all have raised to at least 16 now.


6 posted on 02/08/2006 8:18:15 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clive
About frickin time, eh?
7 posted on 02/08/2006 8:19:42 AM PST by CaptainCanada (The Canadian electorate has decided not to perpetuate foolishness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

How long was the age of consent 14, is it a throwback to the old pioneer days when people married and died at a young age.


8 posted on 02/08/2006 8:21:36 AM PST by tonycavanagh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
I seem to remember a scandal regarding Jerry Lee Lewis and a minor(incidentally his sister lives nearby in South Wales UK now).
9 posted on 02/08/2006 8:22:17 AM PST by vimto (Life isn't a dry run)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Clive; GMMAC; Pikamax; Former Proud Canadian; Great Dane; Alberta's Child; headsonpikes; Ryle; ...

Canada Ping!

Please FReepmail me to get on or off this Canada ping list.


10 posted on 02/08/2006 8:41:10 AM PST by fanfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vimto

14 has always been the age of consent here in Canada.


11 posted on 02/08/2006 8:42:13 AM PST by fanfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clive
"One of the issues I would like to see brought forward as quickly as possible is the age of protection, raising that from 14 to 16, and looking at bringing in a close-in-age exemption," Toews said.

So it would be perfectly legal for a 40 year old man to have sex with a 16 year old?

12 posted on 02/08/2006 8:42:48 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

"So it would be perfectly legal for a 40 year old man to have sex with a 16 year old?"

Yup. As it is in many states in this country.


13 posted on 02/08/2006 8:46:23 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Yup. As it is in many states in this country.

So now a 40 year old man can legally sodomize a 16 year old boy. Of course Canada is much more "progressive" than the US.

14 posted on 02/08/2006 8:51:32 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Clive

Only the Liberals would think 14 is an acceptable age of consent.


15 posted on 02/08/2006 9:00:09 AM PST by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Depends on the state. You can go to the site below, which has ages of consent, along with information on different ages for homosexual sex, in some cases.

You can click the link for each state for further explanations. In some states, the scenario you mention would be legal. In others it would not.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm


16 posted on 02/08/2006 9:10:15 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: vimto

They probably didn't reduce the age of consent to 14, it probably was always that way.

Marriages at puberty were common in pre-industrial societies, including in North America, and age-of-consent laws reflected this. In many 'Red' states, age-of-consent laws allow marriages with parental consent at 14. Oddly the 'Blue' states where once one hits 18 any sex, no matter how perverse, is 'celebrated', were the ones to first institute the fiction that sexually mature human beings who can't vote yet are 'children'.


17 posted on 02/08/2006 9:12:55 AM PST by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Depends on the state. You can go to the site below, which has ages of consent, along with information on different ages for homosexual sex, in some cases.

Do you think the Supreme Court will allow those differences will be allowed to stand?

18 posted on 02/08/2006 9:15:17 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Clive

Canada: "We're #1 at being just north of the United States!"


19 posted on 02/08/2006 9:15:52 AM PST by Ignatz (Freeper cyborg: "The lay teachers could not make hands of some girls.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

"Do you think the Supreme Court will allow those differences will be allowed to stand?"

They probably will, but I don't know. It would take a case getting to them to find out.

From what I understand, SCOTUS upheld the Texas laws against homosexual activity, but I could be mistaken.

It's not something I follow, really. I just knew of this site from another thread.


20 posted on 02/08/2006 9:18:51 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
So now a 40 year old man can legally sodomize a 16 year
old boy. Of course Canada is much
more "progressive" than the US.

Yes, if 1 + 1 = 2, then 2 + 2 = 7....


21 posted on 02/08/2006 9:21:36 AM PST by CaptainCanada (The Canadian electorate has decided not to perpetuate foolishness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
From what I understand, SCOTUS upheld the Texas laws against homosexual activity, but I could be mistaken.

It's not something I follow, really. I just knew of this site from another thread.

They upheld it (1986) before they overturned it (2003).

22 posted on 02/08/2006 9:30:04 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

"They upheld it (1986) before they overturned it (2003)."

OK. Then I guess the age of 17 is the legal age there. Did you know that the age of consent in Hawaii used to be 13, until they raised not too long ago?


23 posted on 02/08/2006 9:41:16 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; MillerCreek

FYI.


24 posted on 02/08/2006 11:35:04 AM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ferri
i hope they really do crack down on people who commit crimes with a gun

Why only for crimes comitted with a firearm?
25 posted on 02/08/2006 2:08:48 PM PST by proud_yank (Good intentions + bad information = Recipe for disaster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: vimto

Re post 4, the liberals did it. Are you surprised?


26 posted on 02/08/2006 2:13:39 PM PST by Former Proud Canadian (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
Why only for crimes comitted with a firearm?

it is the jerks that use guns when holding up a store or mugging someone that are causing so many to scream for gun control. i know most states have longer sentences if a firearm is used in the commision of a crime, right? so make it automatic here.

27 posted on 02/08/2006 2:17:35 PM PST by ferri (Be Politically Incorrect: Support the Constitution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: vimto
How did they reduce the age of consent to that?

I guess because they couldn't get it down to age 12, as proposed
by Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
(I just had to say it as an American with family in Canada)
28 posted on 02/08/2006 2:19:58 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ferri
The other things about crimes committed with guns is that the turkeys who are using them for crimes have no training and no concept of fire discipline and so they are just as likely to spray the neighbourhood and kill innocent children as to actually hit what they are aiming at.

Witness the people wounded and the teen girl killed on Yonge Street on Boxing when a firefight between gangs broke out amidst innocent shoppers on the busiest shopping day of the year and the 19 year old girl killed yesterday when she went to pick up her boyfriend after a basketball game and a child killed a few months ago while waiting for a bus.

It comes down to crappy fire discipline by people who know nothing about firearms other than if you pull the little dingus in front of the handle you get a loud noise and exciting things happen and you get to be a hero among the other thugs with whom you associate.

29 posted on 02/08/2006 2:32:01 PM PST by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Clive
yes! not to mention the fact that most of them are stolen guns in the first place...there was also a shooting not long ago in Vancouver, no one was hit, a woman sitting in her apt. watching t.v. and a bullet hits the wall. no idea why, just someone out goofing off i guess...

here in Kelowna we had someone wandering around town in the middle of the night (teens) shootin a pistol. i heard the shots and heard them laughing and yelling, they ended up 'just' blowing out the door on a shoe repair shop. cute.

30 posted on 02/08/2006 2:42:02 PM PST by ferri (Be Politically Incorrect: Support the Constitution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ferri
Personally, I think that sentencing should be the same if you use a knife to murder someone, or use a firearm to murder someone.

i know most states have longer sentences if a firearm is used in the commision of a crime

I think you are correct. But again, I think putting a knife to someone's throat during a robbery should get the same sentence as a gun to someone's temple. I'll have to see if I can find the article someone posted here, but in the US you are 80% more likely to go to jail for a crime than in Canada. I think stiffer sentencing all around is necessary.
31 posted on 02/08/2006 3:02:56 PM PST by proud_yank (Good intentions + bad information = Recipe for disaster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

I think issues so important should be the same as the age of majority which is 19 but the truth is, it would be unenforceable. A lot of parents can't control their 16 year olds now.


32 posted on 02/08/2006 4:09:27 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (I want Western Canada to SEPARATE - Western Canadians CANNOT win in a corrupt system)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
I think issues so important should be the same as the age of majority which is 19 but the truth is, it would be unenforceable. A lot of parents can't control their 16 year olds now.

It's not about controlling 16 year olds; it's about controlling adults who should know better. If those adults were charged with statutory rape and sent to prison, they'd be an example of what not to do.

33 posted on 02/08/2006 4:27:51 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Only if it is consensual.


34 posted on 02/08/2006 4:29:23 PM PST by Sam Gamgee (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't. - Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sam Gamgee
Only if it is consensual.

There can be no legal consent if a one of the partners is below the age of consent.

35 posted on 02/08/2006 4:46:47 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

What I mean is that sex with a 16 year old is OK as long as that sex is consensual - it doesn't matter what kind of sex it is.

Under 16, yes, it is illegal regardless.


36 posted on 02/08/2006 4:48:10 PM PST by Sam Gamgee (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't. - Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Sam Gamgee
16 is an age when you're practically an adult. I don't think 14 year olds should be having sex with any one. Its incumbent upon us to do all we can to protect our children and the Conservatives in Canada are doing the right thing by toughening the country's laws against sexual predators.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

37 posted on 02/08/2006 4:52:37 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Sam Gamgee
What I mean is that sex with a 16 year old is OK as long as that sex is consensual - it doesn't matter what kind of sex it is.

I think it should be higher than 16 if the older person is more than two years older.

38 posted on 02/08/2006 5:12:58 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Clive

Clive, perhaps the liberal politicans should have thought about "crime", gun, knife or otherwise, BEFORE they started importing criminals from Jamaica and many other places. The Liberals "easy and open door" immigration policy has had a LOT to do with the mega increase in these crimes. The Liberals CREATED this problem and now they want to punish those of us who have NEVER committed a crime. Gun safety courses are good to take but don't be expecting the "criminals" to enroll. What we have in Toronto, Vancouver and probably Montnreal are GANGS. Vancouver - Asian and Indo gangs; Toronto - Jamaican, Asian and God only knows what else gangs; Montreal - probably Arab gangs and we know they have Hells Angels as well. Immigration needs FAST FIXIN.!! CO


39 posted on 02/08/2006 5:15:06 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (I want Western Canada to SEPARATE - Western Canadians CANNOT win in a corrupt system)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Clive

This law needs to be dome and I support it, but whaat I don't get is why is this the very first thing that the Conservatives are doing.... Is it THAT urgent? Someone very powerful must have had a daughter with an older boyfriend......


40 posted on 02/09/2006 7:48:19 PM PST by rasblue (Everyone has their price)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson