Court Asked to Allow Prosecution for "Sexting"

[gorehound]

I am a 54 year old and believe me when I tell you that sexting is a lot less than anything my generation did in its wildest days.To think of all the crazy stunts we pulled in the early 70's as teens.
Be glad thse kids are not shooting up Heroin,droppin lsd on a daily usage,selling drugs,being a delinquent in a big city.
this sexting to me is their way of going against the establishment.
the establishment being their parents,school,authority.
At least they will still have their brains and their lives unlike a lot of us old timer troublemakers.
A lot of folks I knew are dead from drugs and viloence.

 

[g-thor]

"The prosecutor is seeking to press charges against the "topless" girl because she--along with her parents--refused to undertake a "re-education" program."

Re-education program? That reminds me of the actions taken in dictatorships. Neither the parents nor the (I believe) 14 year old girl seem to need be re-educated. Perhaps the county prosecutor needs to be re-eduacated in the proper application of the law. It wasn't designed to be a means of scoring political points - it was designed to safeguard citizens.

 

[mac_angel]

I kinda liked the idea I read in another article - sorry, I can't remember which one.
Someone can send a nude picture of themself to another, but you can not send a picture of someone else, meaning you can't forward that picture or whatever.
Girl (or boy) A can send a picture of herself to Boy (or girl) A, but Boy A can not forward it to anyone.
Girl (or boy) A can't take a picture of Girl (or boy) B and send it to someone.

PS. I also think that it's funny that in almost all places in North America you can have sex with someone 16, and some places younger, but you can't take pictures of it, even for your own use.

 

[Gin Fushicho]

*shakes head* We need a law overhaul , or better yet, a revolution , Was it not Washington that said we need one ever couple decades?

 

[Guest]

Why don't we surgically attach clothing to all kids that way there can be none of this issue? This is just silly.
I imagine that beaches are of great interest to child molesters, Wal-mart too. Are we gonna close all the beaches and Wal-marts for the sake of the kids. A 9-11 yr old boy was molested in the Wal-mart bathroom near where I live, during business hours. Nevermind that the vast majority of the molesters are related to the child, or are known and trusted by the child, as a prosecutor I would hope he know this.

We waste time and money on grandiose ideas like this but we keep cutting education, have homeless starving children on the streets, have kids suffering simple maladies because there is no money for basic treatment and the priority is this foolishness. This is another way we have lost our country to the politicians, and those whom they serve. This guy has only one objective get re-elected and push as many panic buttons while looking while he cares about the kids. He doesn't he is merely seeking self gain and would gladly destroy the entire family if it was to his benefit, which it is.

 

[Guest]

There are obviously too few homicides, robberies, assults and rapes to investigate. I perfectly understands that they must fill their days with something useful at the DA's office.

 

[TeraMedia]

Isn't the purpose of the child-pornography laws to protect minors from being exploited by molesters? And if so, is it even possible for a child - or anyone, for that matter - to knowingly and deliberately exploit themselves? By that logic, the child who works underage should be arrested for allowing himself to be exploited. The child who injures herself playing soccer should be arrested for endangering the welfare of a minor.

This prosecutor is trying to make an example of these girls because there are other instances of sexting that are exploitation and he wants to show that he's doing something about it, and send a message to kids not to do it. I could maybe see prosecuting the girl who took the topless photo of the other girl if it was done without consent... but I can't see prosecuting the girl being photographed.

 

[malphas]

Pretty sure I have some childhood photos of myself playing in the bath and such as a little kid, took by my mother, in an album somewhere. Guess that would make me a paedophile by the prosecution's standards here.

 

[jackjones]

[citation][nom]megabyteme6662002 :[/nom]She very well could have ruined her own life by taking these photos[citation]

How does a naked picture of oneself ruin their lives? Because people like you will bully them? You've never seen a naked person before? Or you'd rather prosecute them before the bullies get to them? Why would anyone be so petty and judgemental?

 

[Guest]

Last I checked this was still America..Re-Education??? sounds like shock therapy... Last i checked that was outlawed in the 90's in America. You cannot punish one for exploiting themselves unless its prostitution as far as I can remember.

 

[frankzz]

[citation][nom]malphas[/nom]Pretty sure I have some childhood photos of myself playing in the bath and such as a little kid, took by my mother, in an album somewhere. Guess that would make me a paedophile by the prosecution's standards here.[/citation]

Lawyers already tried that one.

 

[redraider89]

If anything, the parents need to be prosecuted for negligence. All you morons who want to act like nothing happened are being more of a moron than the prosecutor because you are obvioulsy ignorant of the ramifications of all this. This is wrong. Nude pictures of minors is AGAINST THE LAW, PERIOD. The law was broken. Period. And there are laws against distributing nude pictures of minors. And these girls broke the law. PERIOD. Some kind of prosecution needs to take place. Rather than prosecute the kids as sex offenders. Prosecute the parents for child neglect and fine them to strike some fear into parents to take responsibility for their children's actions that are illegal. That is the bottom line. The law was broken. But the ACLU doesn't care about the law or else they wouldn't always be trying to tear down every law enforcing decency and morality. The ACLU wants the eradication of personal responsibility and wants chaos.

 

[Guest]

@Redraider89. You sound like a broken record. "AGAINST THE LAW, PERIOD", "The law was broken", etc, etc. Why don't you stop being such a stiff-necked prig once in a while and get a life? You are obviously one of those blue-nose judgemental morons who's always telling others how they should live their lives. Your stupid hyperbole about the ACLU wanting chaos is just one more indication of what an ignoramus you are. You stupid cow! Kids have done stupid things forever, and always will, and if you say you never did, you just added liar to your many titles of stupidity. If you were in charge, everyone but you and your family would be in jail for something that violates your sense of propriety. Notice I didn't mention friends, because I sincerely doubt a finger-wagging dolt such as you has any at all,

 

[TeraMedia]

@Redraider89:

There is a reason that the US legislature and local govts have powers to write and amend laws. It is because laws are written by humans, and hence are subject to imperfection. There is also a reason that the US gov't design incorporates a separation between the people creating the laws and the people enforcing them.

To whit, there are numerous laws on the books in various states that are simply not enforced because they are not worth enforcing. For example, there was (not sure if there still is) a law in VT (not sure if it's state or local) against whistling underwater. Is that law a good idea? I'm sure someone thought so because it passed. But I don't think anyone has been charged with it recently, because it is not useful to enforce.

Sometimes laws - even well-intentioned laws such as those designed to protect young children from horrific exploitation and mental and physical scarring - are written in such a way that there are unintended consequences. If a young girl can commit a felony by allowing a picture to be taken of herself, then perhaps that was not an intended consequence of the law's authors. Perhaps the law needs changing. And until it is changed, it is up to the enforcement and judicial branches to ensure that the law is not applied towards those unintended consequences.

 

[redraider89]

All these people who think the law shouldn't be enforced, I doubt very seriously that if a kid under 18 broke into your house and stole all of your stuff you would be saying, "Oh, well, kids do stupid things" and let it go. I'm not a prig, all those who approve of this are idiots and hypocrits based on my scenario above. All those who approve of just letting this go without any repercussions at all, which I said the PARENTS should be responsible (which "The anti-prig" failed to see apparently believe that adults should not be held accountable to the law), state it here, in response to this that you believe that kids who would break into your house should not be held accountable under the premise that "kids do stipid things". I'm waiting...

 

[redraider89]

And all those who are against this prosecutor are saying they approve of the distribution of nude minors. All those who approve of that, don't be shy. I'm waiting for you to state it here that you approve of that...

 

[redraider89]

I mean those who are against this prosecutor are in favor of the distribution of *pictures* of nude minors. Don't be shy and state that you are here. I'm not. But apparently most here are...

 

[malphas]

Didn't you ever stop to consider that maybe the law is flawed if it just blindly states that any nude picture of a minor is illegal regardless of the circumstances around it?

 

[maestintaolius]

[citation][nom]Redraider89[/nom]If anything, the parents need to be prosecuted for negligence. All you morons who want to act like nothing happened are being more of a moron than the prosecutor because you are obvioulsy ignorant of the ramifications of all this. This is wrong. Nude pictures of minors is AGAINST THE LAW, PERIOD. The law was broken. Period. And there are laws against distributing nude pictures of minors. And these girls broke the law. PERIOD. Some kind of prosecution needs to take place. Rather than prosecute the kids as sex offenders. Prosecute the parents for child neglect and fine them to strike some fear into parents to take responsibility for their children's actions that are illegal. That is the bottom line. The law was broken. But the ACLU doesn't care about the law or else they wouldn't always be trying to tear down every law enforcing decency and morality. The ACLU wants the eradication of personal responsibility and wants chaos.[/citation]

Incorrect. The nudes have to be of a sexual nature to be illegal, photos of naked minors in and of themselves isn't illegal. Otherwise, a lot of parents would be in trouble for taking videos of 'baby's first bath' or similar things. How many of you out there have had parents that loved showing off a particularly embarrassing baby picture to your significant other? Hell, there's even a naked little girl in "Monty Python's The Meaning of Life" (the Catholic song) and you can still go buy that at BB and not get hauled off in the 4Chan party van. You can also find a naked 16 year old in the 1968 Romeo and Juliet (if monty python isn't your thing).

 

[blackened144]

[citation][nom]jackjones[/nom]The pictures "would be of great interest to child molesters".Child molesters are interesting in all photos of kids, clothed or otherwise. This is the same logical that certain religious fanatics have, and insist that their women dress in veils, so that they do not incite men.I'm sure that child molesters have a great interest in children's TV too. Alcoholics have a great interest in drink, but that doesn't people who buy wine, alcoholics.For goodness sake America, grow up![/citation]
This seems like a great reason to make it a crime to take a childs picture for any reason. Anyone photographing any child will now be considered guilty because those pictures, no matter how "innocent", would be "of interest" to some child molester somewhere in the world.