Posted on 01/15/2009 7:10:43 AM PST by Perdogg
Well then I wish them well in their new found profession.
Agreed but it’s obvious the parents arent doing their job. These girls need to learn a lesson.
______
And do you think that criminalizing them, turning them into sex offenders is the appropriate method to teach the lesson.
I think the girls should sext message the prosecutor and judge in the case. Wouldn’t they then have to recuse themselves for being involved with child porn?
What a joke.
For example, teenaged girls taking pictures of themselves and sending them to their own teenaged friends?
If THAT is "kiddie porn", so is taking a naked picture of your own child and sending it to your friend, Mary.
AUUUG! I was PWN3D!!!!11!!!
You are kidding right? Isn't publishing this sort of stuff exactly what these laws were designed to prevent?
Hey I went to that high school. Hopefully they’ll register on “Classmates”. After they get older of course.
The girls are taking photos to arouse the boys.
But then, these new felons would then be able to own firearms and we can't permit that, right?
Yes, teenaged boys.
In my days, the girls wore "hot pants" to arouse us.
Hot Pants - The Bad Fads Museum
Kiddie porn laws were written to protect minors from adults.
If we are going to start enforcing laws written to protect minors from adults against the minors themselves, then Levi Johnston needs to be prosecuted for the statutory rape of Bristol Palin and Bristol Palin needs to be prosecuted just like Mary Kay Letourneau was.
My first reaction to this was “really?”
I don’t see how they will find 12 people who will find these kids guility.
It’s just a waste of time and taxpayer money.
The technology is merely a facillitation beyond what the average 'latchkey kid' had a couple of decades ago--the ability to act in 'private' without parental oversight.
That that same parental disengagement leads to a morally rudderless society is a crying shame, but one which will occur as long as people are economic slaves wed to two paychecks. Granted, not everyone can afford to have one parent stay at home, and many who could choose not to. Thus, their children are showered with things, but sadly short on guidance and supervision.
We all make our choices within the constraints of necessity, but I am amazed at what is considered 'necessary' enough to justify the de facto abandonment of children to their own devices.
As for these kids, I am not one who would see them branded as kiddie porn operators or consumers, and I think the parents should be given the opportunity to deal with the situation first. Overall, however, I am not optimistic that even knowledge of such behaviour would cause most parents to remove the phone the kids have, nor limit the service, which likely exists for the convenience of the parents as much as the kids.
“take a picture, it’ll last longer”
Obviously the boys shared the photos.
2 can keep a secret, 3 cannot.
The laws exist to keep people from being exploited and victimized.
Teens can be predators and violent thugs too. We try teens as adults all of the time.
There are boys who like to rack up notches on their bedpost with different girls. It isn’t always about love.
How could you make a distinction that wouldn’t make the law meaningless?
Would it be a crime if their parents took the phone with the pictures in it, and were caught with the phone?
If they send the pictures and they end up in a computer that is used by an adult, can that adult be charged?
If an adult talks them into taking pictures of themselves, but they take the pictures, would that be a crime?
If the person they send the pictures to is a minor, does that make it OK? Are minors allowed to have nude pictures of other minors, while adults are not?
Frankly, the issue might well be the classification of the pictures. There certainly are many pictures taken of kids without clothes on, and not all of them are considered pornography.
This is a particularly interesting issue as regards nudist organizations, which do take pictures of their activites, which do include children, both pre and post pubescent, and which at this time are not being charged with child pornography.
But I don’t think we should determine whether it is a crime or not solely based on whether the child takes the picture, or an adult takes the picture. It’s just too easy for an adult, who already has convinced the child to allow a picture, to then convince the child to TAKE the picture.
Perdogg, I almost dread seeing these types of threads appear on FR these days because I always suspect if I read them I’ll see exactly the types of insane comments which have appeared here.
Free Republic, sadly, has it’s own sizable contingent of self-righteous moral thugs who are too stupid to understand that they, and those who share their mindless statist attitudes, are a far greater threat to this country and to the rights and freedom of their fellow citizens than any of these teens they claim “must be taught a lesson”, and that the proper way to do that is to crush them by the blindly rigid application of “the Law” completely devoid of judgment.
The irony is that these types will be “shocked, shocked, I tell you” when they inevitably become the targets of such “justice” themselves...
its all in the name of criminalizing america....anything they can make up to charge you with and get you in the system.....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes, have you seen the idiotic proposal in South Carolina (my state, I admit with shame) to enact a maximum penalty of up to five thousand dollars and or up to five years in prison for using bad language? Amazingly some freepers seem to think it is a good idea. I am losing all hope, we seem to have only extremists of one sort or another, whatever happened to level headed America?
I thought I heard on the news that the DA wasn’t going to pursue this as a criminal case. Let the school discipline the students. Exercise common sense, in other words.
Expect that juveniles are shooting selfpics and videos every bit as explict as what college kids are doing (and have probably been shooting since their high school etc. years).
There are art nudes, scientific/medical images, and other non-obscene images.
So we have intent of the creator (was it designed to appeal to purient interests) and the explicit content (certainly they would not be safe for work, I expect that same standard would apply to school, they probably would not even be safe for pay-cable).
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.