Sexting

[Korey]

[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]It's rare now a days that I read the news, but I found this article awfully interesting and thought it would bring about quite the discussion.

[URL="http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/04/07/sexting.busts/index.html?iref=mpstoryview"][U][COLOR="Blue"]Sexting: Various Stories[/COLOR][/U][/URL]

In one part of the story, there was an 18 year old kid who was convicted for child pornography when he sent pictures of his 16 year-old girlfriend to all of his friends that were racy. He was ordered to 5 years probation and had to register as a sex offender.

Now, I'm wondering, what exactly are the bounds for child pornography? In my mind, I picture young kids (between 3-10 years old) being forced to do sexual acts. But this girl took pictures supposedly by her own volition. If you willingly take nude pictures of yourself, I think that you should be fully aware that they may be distributed. Teens make that mistake that they won't be published to others.

This kid had to register as a sex offender in Florida. According to the story, Florida keeps a public database on the internet of registered sex offenders. So now his reputation is pretty much shot down the drain for sending nude pictures of his GF to others in a fit of rage.

But I think that "sexting" is a rather common act and many kids do it, it's just a matter of who gets caught and who doesn't. Even adults send each other less than tasteful texts and photos, so it's not like this is a rare instance.

So now I pose the discussion. Should pictures of minors, even taken by their own volition be constituted as child pornography? Should registered sex offenders be forced to wear "scarlet letters" by having their names put on a public database? When is the earliest age that minors could/should be prosecuted for sex crimes?[/FONT]

[Botar]

Alright, for one, I think if you send a picture of yourself naked to others of the same age, it should be alright. But if a 14 year old sends a picture of herself to a 27 year, and he opens it, thats wrong, and it's the same in reverse. I believe people should be charged for that shinanigens at the age of 18. If it's before that, and it's to others of the same age, there phone servise should be shut off and internet should be shut off, but thats what I believe.

[Skye]

[size=1]Here, in Georgia, the legal age of consent is 16. If she gave consent to those pictures, she gave consent to him sending them to whoever the hell he felt like it. Now, I don't agree that sending them to your buddies without her permission is okay, and I would likely have taken my own justice on the guy. BUT everyone makes mistakes. This was his, and hers. If she gave permission initially, she's just as much in the wrong. If you think you're old enough to be doing stuff like that anyway, you are old enough to take the consequences. If not, you'll learn.

And that's all I am saying, because I do not want this to turn into a hate-fest. =]

EDIT: I lied. To me, a sex offender is someone who violates another persons personal space. Although this could be construed many different ways, this usually means a person who [i]forces[/i] someone else to do something sexual when they don't want to. In this regard I agree with Ron White:if you're a sex offender, as far as I'm concerned, you don't have any rights anymore. Sorry. You lost them when you took away the other persons right to say no.[/size]

[Sangome]

[SIZE="1"]At first I was wondering how he had got caught, but upon reading the article, he apparently sent the pictures to her family, too. Smooth move, bucko.

As for my thoughts...if we're going to punish the guy for distributing them, we need to punish the girl as well...that is, assuming she consented to having the picture taken. If she did, then she needs some sort of reprimanding as well.

No, I don't think he should have been made to register as a sex offender. Girls post whorish pictures of themselves on their Myspaces and the like. Teen girls are also sexualized in the media all the time [Miley Cyrus's Vanity Fair photo shoot, anyone?]. There might be some backlash, yes, but I never hear of authoritative action taken on stuff like that.

Eh. My brain hurts. Maybe I can better arrange my thoughts later. @_@[/SIZE]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='Korey][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"']So now I pose the discussion. Should pictures of minors, even taken by their own volition be constituted as child pornography? Should registered sex offenders be forced to wear "scarlet letters" by having their names put on a public database? When is the earliest age that minors could/should be prosecuted for sex crimes?[/FONT][/quote]The way I see it is if you're dumb enough to do it, you deserve the consequences of your actions. However, I do think the age factor should be considered and putting them on the sex offender's list should only be for those who really are 'sexting' And by that I mean it's more than just some harmless and immature stupidity on the teen's part.

Some, like the guy in the article, just made a really stupid mistake. Where I'm sure there are others who really do fit the definition of an offender and do it with the intent to harm.

[Sabrina]

[FONT="Tahoma"]=_= Stupid kids is my first thought whenever I read about this kind of stuff. Being common for them to do it doesn't make it okay either. If you're dumb enough to do it, then I think it's only fair that you have to face the consequences of that decision.

However, I do think putting them on the sex offender list is going a bit too far. That should be something that's evaluated on a case to case basis instead of being the standard for that kind of deal. Some of them really are just being stupid and only need a good smack to wake up and be a little more responsible.

Still, sending photos like that when you're a teen (or at all) is just... ugh. [/FONT]

[Binxy]

[quote name='Sangome'][SIZE="1"]As for my thoughts...if we're going to punish the guy for distributing them, we need to punish the girl as well...that is, assuming she consented to having the picture taken. If she did, then she needs some sort of reprimanding as well.[/SIZE][/QUOTE][SIZE="1"]There is some reprimanding in certain states about things like this. Teen who participate in sexting have the choice to either register themselves as sex offenders or have to take a two week course on sex education including writing a paper about how what they did was wrong. Most parents don't want their children to have to take the class or register and are trying to find ways to beat the system for their children.

I've also heard about a case where two 12-year old girls were having a sleepover and took pictures together on their cellphones of themselves in training bras. Somehow a parent got hold of one and reported to the other's mother that he had fully nude photos of her daughter. The mother saw it as innocent but he didn't. I forget the rest of the story but anyhow.

Sexting shouldn't be illegal. It's just another way for the government to exploit minors. Almost anyone who sends a picture like that knows what could result from it and it's their fault. Simple as that. One teen girl committed suicide as a result of her sending out nude photos that resurfaced miles away to people all over. She should have known. And child pornography I would agree with however. If you're under 18 and your nude, it's child pornography. Whether it is forced or not.[/SIZE]

[Nathan]

[FONT="Arial"][quote name='Binxy][SIZE="1"']There is some reprimanding in certain states about things like this. Teen who participate in sexting have the choice to either register themselves as sex offenders or have to take a two week course on sex education including writing a paper about how what they did was wrong. Most parents don't want their children to have to take the class or register and are trying to find ways to beat the system for their children.[/SIZE][/quote]Gotta love parents trying to help their kids [I]avoid[/I] the responsiblity of their own actions. It speaks volumes as to how they were raised in the first place.

The way I see it, if you're a minor, then you shouldn't be taking pictures of yourself and putting them out there. Minors lack the maturity and legal grounds to even give consent.

So if you sent it yourself, you're an idiot and that's why you're considered a minor. You're not old enough to fully understand making a decision like that. So yes, it's pornography of a child.

However, along that same line of reasoning, just as they aren't legally adults, they shouldn't be treated as one if busted. Being required to take a class seems like a fair punishment to me, where registering them as sex offenders seems to be overkill. [/FONT]

[Raiha]

[quote name='Nathan'][FONT="Arial"]The way I see it, if you're a minor, then you shouldn't be taking pictures of yourself and putting them out there. Minors lack the maturity and legal grounds to even give consent. [/FONT][/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]And yet we promote sex education that equips these minors to have sex. When I was 14 I was taught how to properly put a condom on a large pyrex dildo named Mr. Man. So, by that logic, it's a little- wait no. It's REALLLLY stupid to assume that kids aren't going to be getting naked for each other and it's even more stupid to assume that said naked kids won't think "Hey, I should whip out my...phone. And take a picture! For posterity!"

Because as a girl who has done said illegal things before [and just never been caught] I'm pretty sure that you have to be balls to the walls retarded to get caught. So in other words, if you must take nude pictures of yourself, make sure they're an 8X10 glossy. At least you can set those on fire.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[eleanor]

[quote name='Raiha'][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]When I was 14 I was taught how to properly put a condom on a large pyrex dildo named Mr. Man. [/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[font=trebuchet ms] Now I am glad I grew up in Georgia.[/font]

[Drizzt Do'urden]

Well I'm going to have to throw this out there. Whether you have sexual education in schools or not, kids ARE still going to have sex. Ever talk to anyone from the 60's and 70's about sex? Everybody was having it, and it was mostly unprotected. At least nowadays teaching people to properly put on condoms may descensitize them enough to make sure they use them...

As far as this goes, this guy doesn't deserve to be labled a sex offender, but he does deserve fines and probation Age of consent is for sex NOT for pornography, so that particular law does not apply.

Either way, if a boy or girl is under the age of 18 they are legaly incompetant to make their own decisions. Of course they are physically, and many of them are mentally, but the majority are not (case in point).

If they're together and wanted to do this kind've stuff, the guy shouldn't have been bragging to his friends in the first place.

[Nathan]

[FONT="Arial"][quote name='Raiha][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]And yet we promote sex education that equips these minors to have sex. When I was 14 I was taught how to properly put a condom on a large pyrex dildo named Mr. Man. So, by that logic, it's a little- wait no. It's REALLLLY stupid to assume that kids aren't going to be getting naked for each other and it's even more stupid to assume that said naked kids won't think "Hey, I should whip out my...phone. And take a picture! For posterity!"[/FONT'][/COLOR][/quote]We promote sex education that teaches kids the dangers of unprotected sex. We don't hand them condoms and say, here you go, you can go do whatever you want! They're still bound by a little thing known as [I]age of consent[/I] based on what state you live in. Statutory rape anyone?

So it's REALLLLY stupid to assume ([SIZE="1"]or talk in a roundabout fashion that essentially says the same thing[/SIZE]) that they're teaching the kids that the class gives them a free pass to do whatever they want. If anything, it wouldn't hurt to expand the class a bit to explain how certain behaviors will land them in serious trouble, like passing on those pictures taken for posterity. [/FONT]

[nezzyjean]

[quote name='Botar15']Alright, for one, I think if you send a picture of yourself naked to others of the same age, it should be alright. But if a 14 year old sends a picture of herself to a 27 year, and he opens it, thats wrong, and it's the same in reverse. I believe people should be charged for that shinanigens at the age of 18. If it's before that, and it's to others of the same age, there phone servise should be shut off and internet should be shut off, but thats what I believe.[/QUOTE]

That's completely different than an 18 year old viewing pictures of his 16 year old girlfriend. That's the equivalent of a senior & a sophomore in highschool exchanging racy pictures, while you're talking about a 14 & 27 year old, which is the equivalent of an 8th grader and a full grown adult...which is much more perverse than the former.

If that girl was stupid enough to send out a promiscuous picture of herself and not even consider the fact that it might get sent around to others it was not intended for, she had a lesson to learn any way. I think that her boyfriend still proved himself to be a complete pig by sending it around & should recieve some consequences, however being listed as a sex offender at age 18 for what he did? Thats just a little bit ridiculous.

[Raiha]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Actually when I was 14, in the same class as Mr. Man the dildo, condoms were distributed throughout the room. Supposedly they don't trust us enough to NOT have under age sex so they figure they might as well have us having protected underage sex. Because sex while very young NEVER has terrible consequences or ever hurts people.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Drizzt Do'urden]

[quote name='nezzyjean']That's completely different than an 18 year old viewing pictures of his 16 year old girlfriend. That's the equivalent of a senior & a sophomore in highschool exchanging racy pictures, while you're talking about a 14 & 27 year old, which is the equivalent of an 8th grader and a full grown adult...which is much more perverse than the former.
[/quote]

You just repeated his whole post and turned it around like he was comparing the two. He said that he didn't find it wrong that a 18 year old and a 16 year old have a relationship...

That's really all I had to say, attack a pointless post with a pointless post.

[Korey]

[quote=Nathan]We promote sex education that teaches kids the dangers of unprotected sex. We don't hand them condoms and say, here you go, you can go do whatever you want! They're still bound by a little thing known as age of consent based on what state you live in. Statutory rape anyone?

So it's REALLLLY stupid to assume (or talk in a roundabout fashion that essentially says the same thing) that they're teaching the kids that the class gives them a free pass to do whatever they want. If anything, it wouldn't hurt to expand the class a bit to explain how certain behaviors will land them in serious trouble, like passing on those pictures taken for posterity. [/quote]

[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]Ok Nathan, but this is the way I rationalize it. If I take sex education (which it was offered at my school, but I elected not to take it) and am informed about the dangers of unprotected sex, then I can make an informed decision on whether or not to engage in sexual activity. Handing out condoms is NOT a free pass. Hormones are raging in kids at that age and if a condom is the thing that would keep my kids from getting STDs or having kids of their own, then I wouldn't mind if schools handed out condoms.

Now there many split hairs arguments when it comes to age of consent. What if both parties in question are minors based upon age of consent? Do you punish them both? Or does an age difference more ground for statutory rape?

As far as expanding the class to talk about sending out racy pictures and things, that should really be common sense. Telling a kid in class "Look, if you take racy pictures of yourself and send them to others, you could get in trouble. And if you send a picture of your BF or GF and they are nude or semi-nude, we'll charge you with child pornography."

But I guess kids would need that, seeing as common sense is something they are severely lacking in these days.[/FONT]

[Pumpkin]

[size=1][font=tahoma]I think putting him on the sex offender list is ridiculous. I mean honestly, yes that would suck. Yes she did take those photos herself, however I can understand the situation. I think its harsh for just sending photos via phone. However, if it were posted on the internet distributing it for all perverts to see, then you have a problem.

I know a friend of a friend (who use to be a stripper but thats besides the point) had sex and made a video tape with her ex boyfriend. When they broke up, he posted the video on youtube and all different websites, hacked her myspace and posted a bulletin of it. It messed up her career choices, and her family had seen something that was private to her. Honestly, if someone did that to me, I think it would be more of the betrayal. People make videos or take photos all the time, because obviously they have trust in the other person. It would take a lot to see yourself on the internet, you have to admit that.

Long story short, he went to jail for a year and got out. Last I heard, he reposted it even though the cops said he would go back if he did. Just goes to show you, becareful who you trust because you never know what might happen! [/size][/font]

[Nathan]

[FONT="Arial"][quote name='Korey][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"']But I guess kids would need that, seeing as common sense is something they are severely lacking in these days.[/FONT][/quote]And that would be why I think putting them on the sex offender list is taking it too far. They're still kids in many ways so branding them with that kind of punishment is unnecessarily harsh. [/FONT]

[SunfallE]

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]Well I do agree that there should be some form of punishment, but putting them on the sex offender list is stupid. I can see being required to take a class on it, but the other is just way out there and totally unnecessary. If they're still considered minors, then they shouldn't be punished as if they were an adult.

I want to feel sorry for them, but at the same time, since they willingly gave the pictures to others, it just screams... Self Inflicted Problem! [/FONT][/COLOR]

[Nony]

I echo the thoughts of other people that labeling these kids as sex offenders seems way harsh. It [i]is[/i] stupid, of course, but dang...

The guy probably would've gotten off scot-free if he hadn't been dumb enough to send the pictures to the girl's family. Seriously. If you're going to do something illegal (or something that's just plain stupid), it's best to be discreet about it.

[Rosencavalier]

[quote name='Korey']So now I pose[/QUOTE]

Nekkid?

[quote name='Korey']the discussion.[/QUOTE]

Crap.

[quote name='Korey']Should pictures of minors, even taken by their own volition be constituted as child pornography?[/QUOTE]

An artist was once convicted of the same thing by complete strangers for painting her daughter in the nude while playing with their dog, it's all dependant on circumstance really. In this instance, or any for that matter, I don't think age is an excuse for lude behaviour and shouldn't exempt anyone of their actions.

[quote name='Korey']Should registered sex offenders be forced to wear "scarlet letters" by having their names put on a public database?[/quote]

Sure, then we can follow it up by having them disgraced in public and executing them in the street. I'm not into methods that border on extremism, it doesn't really set the right message imo.

[quote name='Korey']When is the earliest age that minors could/should be prosecuted for sex crimes?[/QUOTE]

As soon as the urge to screw something sets in I would hope. If you're not willing to take responsibility at a young age, you're not that likely to do so later in life.

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='Rosencavalier'] If you're not willing to take responsibility at a young age, you're not that likely to do so later in life.[/quote]I don't think it's as cut and dried as that. Hence why they're considered minors in the first place. They lack the maturity to fully comprehend the consequences of their actions. I'm quite sure a lot of them do grow up as it were. =P

[Rosencavalier]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff']I don't think it's as cut and dried as that. Hence why they're considered minors in the first place. They lack the maturity to fully comprehend the consequences of their actions. I'm quite sure a lot of them do grow up as it were. =P[/QUOTE]

I would never presume the intellectual capacity of a child nor their capabilities. My reasoning behind that statement abstains from the phrase 'mind your habits, lest they become you' as learning is a habitual process, yes? If you do not learn how to be responsible in the early stages of your life you are unlikely to register it, comprehend it, let alone be it later in life.

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR="DarkGreen"][FONT="Tahoma"][quote name='Korey][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]Now, I'm wondering, what exactly are the bounds for child pornography? In my mind, I picture young kids (between 3-10 years old) being forced to do sexual acts. But this girl took pictures supposedly by her own volition. If you willingly take nude pictures of yourself, I think that you should be fully aware that they may be distributed. Teens make that mistake that they won't be published to others.[/FONT][/QUOTE]You'd think they'd be smart enough to realize doing something that dumb could backfire on them and yes I agree, if you hand them out, you should be prepared to accept the consequences of doing so.[QUOTE=Korey][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]This kid had to register as a sex offender in Florida. According to the story, Florida keeps a public database on the internet of registered sex offenders. So now his reputation is pretty much shot down the drain for sending nude pictures of his GF to others in a fit of rage. [/FONT][/QUOTE]I think forcing him to register as a sex offender is taking it too far. Sure he shouldn't have done something so utterly stupid, but that's not the same as someone deliberately exploiting someone else. [QUOTE=Korey][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]But I think that "sexting" is a rather common act and many kids do it, it's just a matter of who gets caught and who doesn't. Even adults send each other less than tasteful texts and photos, so it's not like this is a rare instance.[/FONT][/QUOTE]Of that I have no doubt. I know many people who do it and think nothing of it. That's something I want no part of. Adults don't really factor into this, in my opinion. They are adults after all. I still think it's dumb but that's not the same in my mind. [QUOTE=Korey][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"']So now I pose the discussion. Should pictures of minors, even taken by their own volition be constituted as child pornography? Should registered sex offenders be forced to wear "scarlet letters" by having their names put on a public database? When is the earliest age that minors could/should be prosecuted for sex crimes?[/FONT][/quote]It's going to depend on the case and actual age of the person who took the image. Minors are considered incapable of fully understanding the consequences of their actions, so just cause they think it's okay, doesn't mean it actually is. I say this as a minor myself btw.

I do agree with what others have said, that the sex offender list is going too far. Their are other options like requiring them to take a class and write an essay on why it's wrong. Though by wrong, I would see that as being legally incapable of giving consent. I guess the best age to go by would be age of consent or when one is actually considered legal. I'm not sure. [/FONT][/COLOR]