Should this guy be chrged with childpornography?

Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

egern -> Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/19/2014 12:52:12 AM)
This is the problem: "Earlier this year in a 15-year-old girl and her 17-year-old boyfriend were doing what dating teenagers do. These days that means texting instead of talking on the phone. Teenagers are also apt to explore their sexuality. These days that often means sexting via the phones they use to not talk. The Manassas, Virginia teenagers were doing just that earlier this year, which started with the girl sending nude photos of herself to her boyfriend, which prompted him to send a video which included his erect penis. In the ensuing months, the boy would face two felony charges and a warrant to force him to have an erection. After a complaint by the girl’s parents, the boy was arrested and charged with possession and manufacturing of child pornography. Sexting among minors is illegal in 20 states, including Virginia. Even though the activity is common among teens and done with seemingly few negative effects, states don’t differentiate by age. So whether the offender is 40 or 14, the same charges apply with penalties of up to forty years." Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/teen-faces-2-felonies-as-police-drop-plan-to-photograph-his-erect-penis.html#ixzz37tmEE0up Can children make child pornography?? Can the police? What should teens be allowed?

Moderator3 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/19/2014 2:02:22 AM)
CAUTION Please be very careful how you respond to this topic and if you answer the last question, do not get into anything sexual between minors. You may address the legalities of this issue, but that is about it. Though this is in the Dungeon and Feisty section, I will ask that you be mindful of the topic and the risks involved and not put anyone in a poor position, including any member or the site. No Pictures or links to video with minors in them. Thank you

SadistDave -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/19/2014 4:06:01 AM)
Since society as a whole has decided that we must protect the little kiddies, it would be a little inconsistent to NOT prosecute both the boy and the girl for their roles in creating and distributing child porn. I think it's a little difficult to dismiss this sort of activity as kids just being kids without the realization that they are, in fact, just kids. However, unlike adults kids aren't expected to be aware of all the consequences of their actions, so I wouldn't have a problem if their records were expunged after they completed their punishment. In theory, the police photo won't ever be distributed, but I seriously question the states case if that is truly necessary to prosecute. Unless society is willing to decriminalize photos and videos kids take of themselves, it's really in everyone's best interest to not allow them to create these things themselves without facing some form of punishment. We have these laws to protect them from consequences they are not mature or sophisticated enough to foresee. If it is important to society to protect them, then it is equally as important to try to protect them from themselves as it is to protect them from adults. If it ever becomes acceptable for a child to photograph their naughty bits and distribute them freely, then there is no reason to try to protect them at all. I cannot imagine that an actual thinking person would want that. -SD-

eulero83 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 12:26:39 AM)
FR Not guilty for a simple reason, you can't be both the victim and the perpetrator of the same crime, law against child pornography are there to protect minors from being portrayed by deviant adults and so protect their dignity and sexual devellopment, in this case being him the subject of the video it would be a miscarriage of justice punishing someone because his right was infringed. The same for the girl. This is just punishing them for being sexually active.

wittynamehere -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 12:47:55 AM)
No victim, no crime. I don't see any victims in your story. Hopefully the parents will educate their kids better on privacy and boundaries. Criminal charges wouldn't help anyone involved.

epiphiny43 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 1:15:02 AM)
They shouldn't be prosecuted. Though I'd love to watch the complaining parent's faces when it's pointed out the girl has more culpability as she initiated the exchanges. They should, however be sterilized as 'too dumb to breed' for not deleting the files after sending/receiving and seeing them. "It's My phone! Nobody else can look at it!" That is Dumb!

Hillwilliam -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 8:27:42 AM)
As both participated, if one I charged, then both should be charged Daddy won't like that but it is what it is.

blacksword404 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 9:52:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: egern This is the problem: "Earlier this year in a 15-year-old girl and her 17-year-old boyfriend were doing what dating teenagers do. These days that means texting instead of talking on the phone. Teenagers are also apt to explore their sexuality. These days that often means sexting via the phones they use to not talk. The Manassas, Virginia teenagers were doing just that earlier this year, which started with the girl sending nude photos of herself to her boyfriend, which prompted him to send a video which included his erect penis. In the ensuing months, the boy would face two felony charges and a warrant to force him to have an erection. After a complaint by the girl’s parents, the boy was arrested and charged with possession and manufacturing of child pornography. Sexting among minors is illegal in 20 states, including Virginia. Even though the activity is common among teens and done with seemingly few negative effects, states don’t differentiate by age. So whether the offender is 40 or 14, the same charges apply with penalties of up to forty years." Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/teen-faces-2-felonies-as-police-drop-plan-to-photograph-his-erect-penis.html#ixzz37tmEE0up Can children make child pornography?? Can the police? What should teens be allowed? A warrant to force him to have an erection? How the fuck do you enforce that? I mean sending in two buzz cut having juiced up cops isnt likely to get the job done.

PeonForHer -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 10:17:46 AM)
quote: Can the police? Heh. A neat rationalisation for the police to produce their own illegal porn. If ever such pics were taken, you can bet that they'd find their way onto the net.

eulero83 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 10:20:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 A warrant to force him to have an erection? How the fuck do you enforce that? I mean sending in two buzz cut having juiced up cops isnt likely to get the job done. apparently with some kind of medical injection.

blacksword404 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 10:27:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 A warrant to force him to have an erection? How the fuck do you enforce that? I mean sending in two buzz cut having juiced up cops isnt likely to get the job done. apparently with some kind of medical injection. This is crazy. They're going to inject stuff into a minor to force him to get an erection. So they can get video and pictures of it. Which is in itself child porn. And against his will just makes it worse. And all so they can see if he let his chick see his junk on a video. SMH. Save the kids by terrorizing them.

eulero83 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 10:30:17 AM)
from the virginia code: quote: A. For purposes of this article and Article 4 (§ 18.2-362 et seq.) of this chapter, "child pornography" means sexually explicit visual material which utilizes or has as a subject an identifiable minor. An identifiable minor is a person who was a minor at the time the visual depiction was created, adapted, or modified; or whose image as a minor was used in creating, adapting or modifying the visual depiction; and who is recognizable as an actual person by the person's face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic, such as a unique birthmark or other recognizable feature; and shall not be construed to require proof of the actual identity of the identifiable minor. so for how I understand, if the forced erection is the only way to prove the kid is the one in the video, it means the video was not even child pornography under the virginia law.

blacksword404 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 2:53:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 from the virginia code: quote: A. For purposes of this article and Article 4 (§ 18.2-362 et seq.) of this chapter, "child pornography" means sexually explicit visual material which utilizes or has as a subject an identifiable minor. An identifiable minor is a person who was a minor at the time the visual depiction was created, adapted, or modified; or whose image as a minor was used in creating, adapting or modifying the visual depiction; and who is recognizable as an actual person by the person's face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic, such as a unique birthmark or other recognizable feature; and shall not be construed to require proof of the actual identity of the identifiable minor. so for how I understand, if the forced erection is the only way to prove the kid is the one in the video, it means the video was not even child pornography under the virginia law. Besides I think they'd get laughed out of court if they tried to get an expert to say with certainty it's his penis. I don't think the penile identification database is up and running.

eulero83 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 3:36:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 Besides I think they'd get laughed out of court if they tried to get an expert to say with certainty it's his penis. I don't think the penile identification database is up and running. My opinion (not supported by any source just what would make sense to me) is the mother went to the police thinking her teenage doughter was being harassed by some perv, later during investigation the truth came out, but once they spent time and money someone has to be charged with something, even if they become draconian and spend a shitload of money to make fools of themselves. I can't believe a parent with a bit of common sense would involve police knowing it was the doughter's boyfriend.

thompsonx -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 5:19:51 PM)
ORIGINAL: wittynamehere No victim, no crime. I don't see any victims in your story. Victimless crimes: Prostitution homosexuality* gambling Drugs Suicide

wittynamehere -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/20/2014 5:26:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: wittynamehere No victim, no crime. I don't see any victims in your story. Victimless crimes: Prostitution homosexuality* gambling Drugs Suicide Well those things aren't crimes, but yeah I agree, they're victimless activities.

eulero83 -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/21/2014 1:07:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: wittynamehere No victim, no crime. I don't see any victims in your story. Victimless crimes: Prostitution homosexuality* gambling Drugs Suicide In the countries where those activities are crimes, they are crimes against morality and not the person so the victims are supposed to be the witnesses. Even in virginia child pornography is a crime against the person as the law talks about "a person who induce a minor..." so he is supposed to be the victim and in the prosecutor mind, in order to protect him from himself his life must be destroied that is kind of a odd concept but it seems at least one poster here consider it to be the right way.

SadistDave -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/21/2014 1:13:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wittynamehere quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: wittynamehere No victim, no crime. I don't see any victims in your story. Victimless crimes: Prostitution homosexuality* gambling Drugs Suicide Well those things aren't crimes, but yeah I agree, they're victimless activities. Whether the children consented to take their own photos or not is wholly irrelevant. The photos themselves are illegal to create in the first place. They are illegal to posses. They are illegal to distribute. Both children created, distributed, and possessed illegal content. It's a simple rule really....when something is "illegal" then it's a crime. Whether or not you personally agree with their criminality is irrelevant. Personally, I think it's ridiculous to criminalize suicide. I think we should be encouraging suicide to get rid of all the wackos that suck the life out of society. Unfortunately, most suicide attempts fail miserably and end up costing money and resources wasted on sad sacks who aren't even smart enough to figure out that $3 will buy 8 Castor plant seeds that will kill them the first time, every time... So, suicide is a crime whether I like it or not. Unless you believe that child porn should be legal to create, distribute, and possess then I'm curious what leads you to believe that no crime has been committed... -SD-

PeonForHer -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/21/2014 2:11:13 AM)
quote: Unless you believe that child porn should be legal to create, distribute, and possess then I'm curious what leads you to believe that no crime has been committed... You could be right, but if the police take a photo of this kid with an erect todger then they're committing a crime too. It certainly won't be victimless, either: god knows how the kid in question will live that down. Frankly, I can't help suspecting that those who suggested that such a picture be taken did so precisely to force the justice system into realising that it's being too heavy handed here. It could end up looking both cruel and downright silly.

CobaltRose -> RE: Should this guy be chrged with childpornography? (7/21/2014 2:26:59 AM)
I think since they was under age and it was consensual, he should be charged, but he shouldnt have being a "sex criminal" on his record. Teens do dumb shit. Shouldnt have their lives ruined because of it. Also shouldnt the girl be charged too since she was the one who took the photos in the first place?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.711914E-02