"Sexting" = Child Pornography?

P

praxus

New member
Aug 4, 2009
263
2
0
Court asked to allow prosecution for sexting | Reuters

Ok WTF? This asshole prosecutor is charging teens with child pornography for sending pics of themselves in underwear to friends? Because they didn't agree to go to a "re-education" camp?

You would think that someone in the legal profession would realize that child pornography laws are there to protect children from being exploited by adults. I find it amazing that the intent of the law is being twisted like this.
 


This has been going on for awhile. Keep in mind there is nothing rational about laws that involve sex or children. Put the 2 together and all logic flies. To me this basically means they are arresting children for "'molesting" themselves. Makes a whole lot of sense.

Underwear? WTF, but again not surprised.

Re-education camps? Nice touch, but considering judges were recently caught selling kids into slavery and determining sentences by counting birds, nothing surprises me.
 
630_nigga_skinhead.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Infinite Keith
This whole set of laws always has been, and always will be, a load of bullshit.

Let the underage chicks do what they damn well please!! Even if that means taking half nakey pics in the mirror and sending them to me! :D

If no one wanted it, they wouldn't make it illegal.
 
I don't know about charging them with child pornography but they need to be charged with something. Once kids understand the severity of the situation maybe they'll actually stop and think before they do something that stupid and then maybe their fun little photos that was only meant to be sent to their bff won't wind up in a Skittles thread on Wickedfire.
 
turbolapp said:
I don't know about charging them with child pornography but they need to be charged with something. Once kids understand the severity of the situation maybe they'll actually stop and think before they do something that stupid and then maybe their fun little photos that was only meant to be sent to their bff won't wind up in a Skittles thread on Wickedfire.
Click to expand...

Mothers are almost incapable of understand how stupid this whole things is.

And here is the proof.

Charged with something? WTF. They need parenting. Last time I checked the gov hasn't started issuing that... yet. Of course crap parents will always look for gov/school/god to do their job. It just doesn't work in the real world.
 
This just amplifies my belief that there should be no victimless crimes.

Prostitution? Where's the victim (excluding of course FORCED prostitution...)

Pot smoking? Same.

This? No victim. People engaged in voluntary activity. They may be dumb asses - but not victims.
 
have you guys been seeing all the public service commercials and shit, there are like 20 different commercials saying how wrong and bad it is, they are a fucking joke, if your that dumb to send pictures of yourself naked to other people they are going to be seen by a lot more people, Its your fault for sending them. and never ever send me naked pics of anyone, cause they will show up online. hehe
 
In light of this I'm shifting all 2010 work to develop a V chip like cell phone app.

Is Your Daughter Being a Little Slut and Sending Nudes On Your Cell Phone Plan Behind Your Back?
Get C chip NOW
 
  • Like
Reactions: greenleaves
From the article:

"A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals was considering a March 2009 court ruling that said the pictures, in which teenagers sent sexually suggestive pictures of themselves to their friends by cellphones or the Internet, fall under the U.S. Constitution's free speech protections."

The court has ruled, free speech.

Now if adults start texting pics of kids, that's a different story, obviously.

It totally goes against the spirit of child porn laws to prosecute these kids, however.

Yeah, it may not be the smartest thing to do...but, so what?

Yell at the parents, not the courts.
 
We've had cases of it in school and it's unbelievably complicated. Girl 1 sends a pic of herself topless to Boy 1 in hopes that he'll leave his girlfriend for her. Pissed Girlfriend forwards the picture to all of her friends including young adults. So now nineteen-year-olds are forwarding pictures of a fifteen-year-old to others. In one case, some kids even forwarded the pics to a teacher - which is extremely serious for the teacher, who did nothing except get a text message from a kid on his soccer team or whatever.

The girl was stupid. The boy actually did nothing and got off free. The girlfriend's parents got her out of trouble and of the hundreds of people all over the district who saw the pictures, only the poor girl who sent them was punished.

In her case, there was some weak parenting, but I'm sure most of you would agree that poor parenting is not a catch-all excuse for erratic teen behavior. Otherwise everyone on this board who ever got community service hours for MIP or the like is the victim of terrible parenting.

Teens especially suffer from a narrow perspective of things. They fail to see long term consequences, and Turbo's right. Since some can't effectively judge something like this on their own (lack of frontal lobe development and all that), if there is a definable punishment in place for doing it, it's a more certain deterrent.
 
How can we have a definable punishment for something the courts have ruled as free speech?

Free speech, people.

Yell at the parents, tell them to yell at their kids, but it's useless yelling at the courts.
 
turbolapp said:
I don't know about charging them with child pornography but they need to be charged with something. Once kids understand the severity of the situation maybe they'll actually stop and think before they do something that stupid and then maybe their fun little photos that was only meant to be sent to their bff won't wind up in a Skittles thread on Wickedfire.
Click to expand...

As much as I love skittles, Turbo is spot-on.
They really need to treat this as a severe issue despite how stupid it appears to all of us adults. We can be held responsible for our actions while kids usually don't think things through before realizing too late they just ruined their lives.
 
So if it's okay for the teen to send pictures to a "friend," can that "friend" be the 23-year-old guy she's lusting after - and what if that guy is her probation officer or her math teacher? This thing is full of holes. If an eighteen-year-old can be labeled a sex offender for sleeping with his consenting fifteen-year-old girlfriend, I fail to see how "free speech" can clean this whole sxting mess up into a neat tidy basket. It would be nice to see a harmless penalty at least - maybe some community service or a seminar of some kind as a deterrent.

And don't you worry, my kids will get an earful.
 
InternetAuthor said:
It would be nice to see a harmless penalty at least - maybe some community service or a seminar of some kind as a deterrent.
Click to expand...

I agree.

But it would still be punishing what the courts have ruled as free speech, so it's still full of holes. You can't punish something that is deemed a right.

It's a tough issue.

I guess we'd have to consider the age of the person that is viewing the picture... straight across the board. If you're 18 or over and viewing the pictures, you're breaking the law and labeled a pedo. If your 17 or under and viewing the picture then we can't say that person is a pedo... they're still a kid.

I rule if the person sending the picture and the person viewing the picture are both 17 or under, it's free speech. It is free speech, so the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

The legal age for consent is 17 most places isn't it? So they can fuck, but they can send pics to each other.... huh?
 
edit last line^* can't send pics to each other

Since the courts can't do it legally, the parents must.

First line from article:

"In the first U.S. case to test the constitutional status of "sexting,' "

The kids had every right to refuse the "re-education" program, good for them!

Keep the "re-education" in the house!
 
Another thing, sorry:

"...the county argued that the pictures were pornographic because they were disseminated for the purposes of sexual stimulation and so would be of great interest to child molesters."

They are prosecuting these girls because child molesters exist in the world!!!

Again, the person viewing the pictures is to be considered, and they did, and totally twisted it!

battlefork said:
They consider anyone under 18 "minor." So the moment they turn 18, it's legal to do that even tho they are as stupid as before?
Click to expand...

The nuance flew over your head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom