http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,488044,00.html
QuoteTeenagers' habit of distributing nude self-portraits electronically — often called "sexting" if it's done by cell phone — has parents and school administrators worried. Some prosecutors have begun charging teens who send and receive such images with child pornography and other serious felonies. But is that the best way to handle it?
"Hopefully we'll get the message out to these kids," says Michael McAlexander, a prosecutor in Allen County, Ind., which includes Fort Wayne. A teenage boy there is facing felony obscenity charges for allegedly sending a photo of his private parts to several female classmates. Another boy was recently charged with child pornography in a similar case.
So like the article says, is this the best way to handle it? I for one this it's a good idea. Lewd is lewd no matter how you slice it. Especially when it comes to people underage. Hey if both parties are legal adults do what you do but until then...just no.
Yay Faux Noise....
As noted in the article, I can see prosecution of the sender, but not someone that possesses the images. The cell phone companies in their all money-making wisdom makes it kinda hard to reject/deny a text message. Possession is often from consent or the action of the possessor, but with text images it is sometimes not by choice.
Granted, I am sure that is not the case with these kids exchanging, bilaterally pictures, but it is a point that must be explored once prosecution starts.
These minors may need to register as a sex offender...depending on the state, it may stay on their record into their adulthood.
I don't know...I'm on the fence about this one.
But on the other hand, I agree about the texting thing with Eric. It is kind of hard to accept/deny something without actually opening it.
I don't see how it's a good or bad idea, the law's the law and they're just enforcing it.
Quote from: AnimeEmperor on February 04, 2009, 08:22:02 PM
I don't see how it's a good or bad idea, the law's the law and they're just enforcing it.
But I'm not sure that the child porn laws that they're trying to apply to these specific instances actually apply. It's open to interpretation. I sympathize with the principal of the school who "agrees that pornography charges or other felonies are not appropriate, noting that 'the laws have not caught up to technology.' They're grasping at what they can use to charge the kids.
And truthfully, I'm not sure that's the most effective way to clamp down on this problem. We can argue about this staying on their record and pretty much screwing their lives, etc.. But if they're teens and immature enough to do this in the first place, are they really going to think of future ramifications? So, how is prosecuting them going to help? I don't think making an "example" out of any of them will help deter others from doing it. Basically, it will stop the ones who didn't realize this is stupid and probably wouldn't have done it in the first place.
But for the idiots who think it's funny/just want to do it, this isn't going to stop them. And I'm not sure what will.
Quote from: AnimeEmperor on February 04, 2009, 08:22:02 PM
I don't see how it's a good or bad idea, the law's the law and they're just enforcing it.
a true strict constructionist.......the law is only law until it has gone to trial. A law on the books is meaningless unless a judge rules on it in the case of an offender. kinda like personal evaluations, its bs until you are put to the test.
Codex already touched on this, but one think to keep in mind about this kind of thing is that if you're successfully prosecuted, this kind of crime stays on your record and subjects you to all sorts of other laws aimed at socially ostracizing sexual offenders. Thus, if you're a kid, you get sent one of these sexual picture messages, and you're caught and found guilty, you'll be seen as a monster by society at large even though you may not have consented to receiving such a picture to begin with (merely possessing child pornography is enough to put you away).
Food for thought.
naked teens on phones = bad news.
Teens these days think they can get away with alot. but flooding the court system with stupid girls/boy who dont know any better probably wont solve the problem and i think some of them do it for the attenion than anything else.
great just what we need, more attention whores. :(
the world we live in. now with more child pornography thanks to digicam cell phone technology.
>:(
why is this suddenly now a problem? Kids have been trading nudes with each other over the net for what feels like a decade already. Shit I think I still have those pictures of me and my ex back when we were 13 on a floppy disk somewhere. Freaking go to stickcam or msn webcams. child pron running rampant.
Quote from: RaddaX2 on February 08, 2009, 04:26:32 PM
why is this suddenly now a problem? Kids have been trading nudes with each other over the net for what feels like a decade already.
This is not "suddenly" a problem. Yes, it's been going on a while. But what is different is that they're trying new ways of combatting the problem, with felony charges. Trying to get teens/kids to be safe online has been an ongoing battle. Schools, parents, community groups, law enforcement, etc. all been trying to find ways to fight this for years.
And evidently, they're willing to try anything. The prosecutor in the article even admits that their aim isn't so much to throw the kids in jail as to get them to think.
Quote from: RaddaX2 on February 08, 2009, 04:26:32 PM
why is this suddenly now a problem? Kids have been trading nudes with each other over the net for what feels like a decade already. Shit I think I still have those pictures of me and my ex back when we were 13 on a floppy disk somewhere. Freaking go to stickcam or msn webcams. child pron running rampant.
You were 13? and LOL @ Floppy Disk.
what they do not realize is these pics can go anywhere on the internet, soon i imagine it will bite them in the arse and end up in the wrong hands or possibly in a parents computer XD that would suck for them
And the ACLU is now getting involved (http://www.aclupa.org/pressroom/aclusueswyomingcountydafor.htm), which is a good thing. Sexting may be a problem, but condemning teenagers to various Megan's Law lists is severe overkill, and that's exactly what this kind of prosecution would do to the teenagers involved.
Charging them with child pornography is a little off; it seems more like harassment and something like unlawful conduct or whatever it is they charge people who run around in public naked. I forget the name.
And I agree that charging the recipient is also wrong because people can't choose what they receive. If they kept the images on their phone knowingly, then maybe. But the charge is still questionable.
It is especially wrong that the DA is going after the people photographed not the photographer and distributer of the images. It is not always your choice to be photographed. The fact that the DA says both underwear shots and bikini shots are "provocative" and should be persecuted is wrong. It is against the law now to have a picture of yourself as a teen in a swimsuit?
It also sounds like that particular DA was just persecuting girls and his "program" for them seems a little off.
kinda on the same topic, but myspace:)
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gebS2MKqUm9cqEj6s0Rv9gQVvY6AD97608480
Quote from: ewu on March 26, 2009, 05:34:40 PM
kinda on the same topic, but myspace:)
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gebS2MKqUm9cqEj6s0Rv9gQVvY6AD97608480
ouch, a possible 17 years is kind of hard for a underage person? don't they have juvenile laws in that state?!?!
Quote from: kollunz on March 29, 2009, 05:50:23 PM
Quote from: ewu on March 26, 2009, 05:34:40 PM
kinda on the same topic, but myspace:)
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gebS2MKqUm9cqEj6s0Rv9gQVvY6AD97608480
ouch, a possible 17 years is kind of hard for a underage person? don't they have juvenile laws in that state?!?!
17 years in prison wouldn't be the end of it, either. As pointed out earlier in the thread, they'd end up on Megan's Law lists on top of that. That means that they'd be publicly known as sex offenders, be restricted in where they can live and work, be subject to all sorts of social ostracism thanks to being publicly known as sex offenders. All because they stupidly took nude or "provocative" pics of themselves as teenagers and posted them to the Internet or shared them as cell phone messages.
Basically, this kind of prosecution would destroy their lives over a stupid mistake, because some stupid DA wants to make a name for themselves by making an example of some teens.
You cant really control what 18+ 'teenagers' do, but for the younger ones just dont give them an F-ing cellphone. I hardly see why theyre needed in HS anyway.
And the Federal Judge bars prosecution of the teens while the ACLU suit is underway (http://www.katu.com/news/national/42189562.html). Looks like we're seeing at least a little sanity in this case, and it's looking like the prosecution is more about retaliation than anything. It'd be nice if the DA in this case got disbarred because of that, but I don't think that's going to happen.
People need to get over themselves and stop with Abstinence only, and Teach REAL sex education, Teach about condoms and teach about the repercussions of sex and having a baby and disease, and that sex is ok and why its good to wait, rather than just don't do it and sex is taboo to talk about. I understand the importance of religion and how different cultures are with this topic, but its mainly because its an impure topic.... but really you really want kids to understand TEACH THEM ABOUT IT!!!
Quote from: Yoshi31 on April 03, 2009, 09:00:44 AM
People need to get over themselves and stop with Abstinence only, and Teach REAL sex education, Teach about condoms and teach about the repercussions of sex and having a baby and disease, and that sex is ok and why its good to wait, rather than just don't do it and sex is taboo to talk about. I understand the importance of religion and how different cultures are with this topic, but its mainly because its an impure topic.... but really you really want kids to understand TEACH THEM ABOUT IT!!!
Can you clarify how this comment has anything to do with this discussion? Unless your argument is that the kids are so repressed sexually due to the "abstinence only" sex education that they're sexting. And I'm not sure I would buy that argument.
Back on topic, the more details that come out, the more it seems like the DA is trying to blackmail the students into compliance. At one point, I almost sympathized with the DA because I thought he was desperately trying to solve an issue by shocking the families with an "over the top" tactic. That this was just a drastic wake-up call.
But the more he pursues this, the more I'm starting to agree with Stormfalcon that he just wants to make a name for himself. Yes, I know I'm too naive sometimes, wanting to believe not all people are are so self-serving. Sigh.
Looks like students aren't the only ones getting caught up in this growing witch hunt.
'Sexting' Hysteria Falsely Brands Educator as Child Pornographer (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/04/sexting-hysteri.html), reported over on Wired.
To sum up, an assistant principal gets felony child pornography charges leveled at him when he has a photo transferred to him in the course of his investigating the whole sexting thing at his school. Eventually, the charges get dropped when the judge rules that the photo didn't count as child pornography (private areas were covered), but it left him with a mountain of debt from his legal bills and a trashed reputation. While it is true that he may have screwed up in not reporting the picture to the authorities when he came across it, the DA in this case went way too far and was out for blood.
And people think that it's a good idea to unleash this kind of treatment on kids who are simply being stupid? Yeah, they need to be taught that they shouldn't be putting pictures of themselves on the Internet like that, but what we're seeing is beyond overkill.
I think a nice fine would do nicely. Namely something in the $300-500 range.
Registered as a sex offender is extremely overkill, a misdemeanor on their record could be reasonable.
The DA in the case is probably looking to play off the fears of the problem rather than actually solving the problem.
Quote from: JTchinoy on April 17, 2009, 01:19:48 AM
I think a nice fine would do nicely. Namely something in the $300-500 range.
Registered as a sex offender is extremely overkill, a misdemeanor on their record could be reasonable.
Zomg! thats enough for a hotel room at fanime! what a coincidence >.>
On a more serious note, its pretty sad that one must take naked pictures of themselves and send it to others in order to get off.... what happend to dating?
Quote from: Lucifargundam on May 02, 2009, 03:04:33 AM
Quote from: JTchinoy on April 17, 2009, 01:19:48 AM
I think a nice fine would do nicely. Namely something in the $300-500 range.
Registered as a sex offender is extremely overkill, a misdemeanor on their record could be reasonable.
Zomg! thats enough for a hotel room at fanime! what a coincidence >.>
On a more serious note, its pretty sad that one must take naked pictures of themselves and send it to others in order to get off.... what happend to dating?
Must be a long distance relationship...
Quote from: Gekido 87 on May 03, 2009, 01:15:55 AM
Quote from: Lucifargundam on May 02, 2009, 03:04:33 AM
Quote from: JTchinoy on April 17, 2009, 01:19:48 AM
I think a nice fine would do nicely. Namely something in the $300-500 range.
Registered as a sex offender is extremely overkill, a misdemeanor on their record could be reasonable.
Zomg! thats enough for a hotel room at fanime! what a coincidence >.>
On a more serious note, its pretty sad that one must take naked pictures of themselves and send it to others in order to get off.... what happend to dating?
Must be a long distance relationship...
but it said "schoolmates".... is it some sort of virtualreality school?
Quote from: Lucifargundam on May 05, 2009, 12:20:19 AM
but it said "schoolmates".... is it some sort of virtualreality school?
I meant that people who would do those might be in a long distance relationship. I wasn't commenting about the students about what they were already doing.
The issue at hand is that this is occurring within a school, not across a country. It's understandable for a couple across the country, which is often what webcams are used for. Spamming it throughout your class to people you have no sort of intimate relations with, wtf? That's just putting yourself out there as a piece of meat.