The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
A strange charcater so this post is 100% necessary. Who wants him to go and who wants him to stay? It may make him see the light as with what he should do.
Vote Go or Stay then we'll tally them up.
Vote Go or Stay then we'll tally them up.
Page:
Hedfix wrote:
> *Watches Tigs turn into a block of flats*
furnished or unfurnished?
> *Watches Tigs turn into a block of flats*
furnished or unfurnished?
*Watches Tigs turn into a block of flats*
Timmargh wrote:
> I once had sex with a 15 year old girl ... I was 13 at the time.
Oh dear...
**Goes into counselling mode
> I once had sex with a 15 year old girl ... I was 13 at the time.
Oh dear...
**Goes into counselling mode
Memorandum! wrote:
> [ Loads of stuff ]
Good point, duder.
> [ Loads of stuff ]
Good point, duder.
TGMbloke wrote:
> Memorandum! wrote:
> So now I'm going to let you all think about this, and realise that
> he
> was, of course, lying the entire time.
>
>
> Can 15 year olds be put on that?
And therein lies the entire answer. All three of the involved parties were underage. It is my understanding that the sex offender's register is designed as a list of the people above 'the legal age' who have engaged in sexual activities with underage children, or have committed whatever other sexual crimes.
Plus, even if under-16s can be put on the list, why is only the boy going onto it? Surely the girl has committed the same 'crime'? The boy who took the photo has broken other laws regarding photographing underage children performing sexual acts, yet he isn't going on the register?
Hmmmm.
> Memorandum! wrote:
> So now I'm going to let you all think about this, and realise that
> he
> was, of course, lying the entire time.
>
>
> Can 15 year olds be put on that?
And therein lies the entire answer. All three of the involved parties were underage. It is my understanding that the sex offender's register is designed as a list of the people above 'the legal age' who have engaged in sexual activities with underage children, or have committed whatever other sexual crimes.
Plus, even if under-16s can be put on the list, why is only the boy going onto it? Surely the girl has committed the same 'crime'? The boy who took the photo has broken other laws regarding photographing underage children performing sexual acts, yet he isn't going on the register?
Hmmmm.
Hedfix wrote:
> Timmargh wrote:
> I once had sex
>
> :D
Why you ...
:D
> Timmargh wrote:
> I once had sex
>
> :D
Why you ...
:D
Timmargh wrote:
> I once had sex
:D
> I once had sex
:D
I once had sex with a 15 year old girl ... I was 13 at the time.
EL ® ö B ì Ñ wrote:
> The boy in the photo having uderage
> secks is going on the sex offenders list.
EL ® ö B ì Ñ wrote:
> the boy who took the photo: 14
>
> The boy in the photo: 15
>
> The girl in the photo:13-14
So now I'm going to let you all think about this, and realise that he was, of course, lying the entire time.
> The boy in the photo having uderage
> secks is going on the sex offenders list.
EL ® ö B ì Ñ wrote:
> the boy who took the photo: 14
>
> The boy in the photo: 15
>
> The girl in the photo:13-14
So now I'm going to let you all think about this, and realise that he was, of course, lying the entire time.
EL ® ö B ì Ñ wrote:
> the boy who took the photo: 14
>
> The boy in the photo: 15
>
> The girl in the photo:13-14
OOOOOOOOOOOOOO bit young
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
> the boy who took the photo: 14
>
> The boy in the photo: 15
>
> The girl in the photo:13-14
OOOOOOOOOOOOOO bit young
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
Page: