• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Define Child Porn

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
I dont understand how its even a crime for a 14 year old girl to take a naked picture of herself and show it to someone.Of course its stupid..and could be dangerous..and her parents should discipline her.But how is it criminal?

Following the letter of the law, it is illegal for a nude picture to taken of a 14 year old. Possession of a nude picture of a 14 year old is also illegal. The law does not care about the circumstances as it expects the police and judges to ensure proper usage of the law. In this case it appears they wish to make an example and are abusing the laws in order to do so.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Following the letter of the law, it is illegal for a nude picture to taken of a 14 year old. Possession of a nude picture of a 14 year old is also illegal. The law does not care about the circumstances as it expects the police and judges to ensure proper usage of the law. In this case it appears they wish to make an example and are abusing the laws in order to do so.
Depends on the circumstances, I think.

If it's a matter of the girls sending nude pictures to the boys of their own volition, then I think it may very well be heavy-handed. If it's a matter of the boys coercing the girls into sending them nude photos, then I think charging them is probably appropriate... especially in the case of boys at the older end of the range given soliciting them from girls at the younger end of the range.

Is the situation more like a sophomore girl a few months younger than her boyfriend flirting with him by sending him photos, or is it a matter of senior boys preying on freshman girls? It's hard to tell without all the info.

Either way, though, I think it's out of line to charge the girls just for sending the photos of themselves. Child porn laws are as harsh as they are because they're based on the idea that the subjects are victims. If these girls are victims, they shouldn't be charged at all. If they aren't, then child porn laws aren't the right tool to deal with them.
 
Last edited:

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
I think the authorities are going too far with this one. And I agree with Dallas Apple that the parents should have handled it.
 

methylatedghosts

Can't brain. Has dumb.
That's not porn.

A picture of nude people is not porn.

Child porn is pictures of nuddy kids, taken by other people specifically for the porn industry (whether underground or no) - I think it requires the exploitation of children.

Classmates sending nuddy pics to each other of their own volition is hardly porn - it's just natural exploration of their own comfort zones.

If one of the people involved was peer-pressured into it, then perhaps it could come under bullying...

This whole thing is silly, and shouldn't even have reached courts. It's not in the spirit of the law, and in my honest opinion, the case should be thrown out. Innocent childs play is all it is.

And people wonder why they feel they should be ashamed of their own bodies, and ashamed of anything to do with sex....
 
Last edited:

methylatedghosts

Can't brain. Has dumb.
Following the letter of the law, it is illegal for a nude picture to taken of a 14 year old. Possession of a nude picture of a 14 year old is also illegal. The law does not care about the circumstances as it expects the police and judges to ensure proper usage of the law. In this case it appears they wish to make an example and are abusing the laws in order to do so.

So... if a 14 year old takes a picture of him/herself nude, and keeps it... is he/she able to be charged with possession of child porn AND manufacture...?

Seriously..
 

Elessar

Well-Known Member
That's just stupid. Nude pictures, pornography or no, self-taken by the girls specifically FOR the boys to look at is not a crime. Perhaps stupid, perhaps naive, whatever. It isn't, or at least, shouldn't be, criminal. Now, I don't know particulars, obviously - if anyone was coerced in any way, then it would be illegal bullying, and possibly sexual abuse, but certainly not "Child Pornography" - those involved obviously aren't children, but teenagers, and the receiving end, obviously, teenagers. No money was exchanged, it seems...

I mean, in some states, maybe, but PENNSYLVANIA? I mean, come on! My 14-year old sister could legally get married in this state (w/parental consent, of course), but she couldn't possess a nude photograph of herself? That's not just stupid - that's insane. If the teenager took the picture of herself, and only gave it to other teenagers, and it was completely consensual, then I don't see how this is any more a crime than underage sex, perfectly legal in this commonwealth (consensual sex between minors 14+ is legal in PA).

Now, of course, the mandatory, I'm religious, they're sinning, etc. etc. etc. The point is, sin or not, stupid or not, it shouldn't be criminal, and this is abuse of the court system. Just seize the cell phone, don't LOOK at it, for G-d's sake! I don't see why they even have to inform the parents!!! It's actually *illegal* in this state for *anyone* to inform parents about legal sexual activity, evidence of sexual activity, etc. of their child except the child themselves. Just ignore it, get your nose out of their legal, teenage sexual activity, and stop abusing our court system.
 

blackout

Violet.
Following the letter of the law, it is illegal for a nude picture to taken of a 14 year old. Possession of a nude picture of a 14 year old is also illegal. The law does not care about the circumstances as it expects the police and judges to ensure proper usage of the law. In this case it appears they wish to make an example and are abusing the laws in order to do so.

Are you actually saying that it's illegal for a 14 year old to take nude pictures of him/herSelf?!?

What kind of BS is that?!

That just cannot be right. :eek:
 

blackout

Violet.
Just seize the cell phone, don't LOOK at it, for G-d's sake! I don't see why they even have to inform the parents!!! It's actually *illegal* in this state for *anyone* to inform parents about legal sexual activity, evidence of sexual activity, etc. of their child except the child themselves. Just ignore it, get your nose out of their legal, teenage sexual activity, and stop abusing our court system.


YAH! *** is that?
What right did they have to invade the girls cell phone privacy in the first place?

I hate the way the schools strip young American citizens of their BASIC AND LAWFUL rights to privacy. *blech*

In this case I would sue.

And I am not the suing type at all.
 

methylatedghosts

Can't brain. Has dumb.
it's putting these kids through a ****load of unnecessary stress, ridicule at school, not to mention a
tarnished reputation which seems to matter whole lot apparantly

Hell, if these kids aren't being well-supported emotionally at home by family and friends, this whole ordeal could likely cost their lives.

hm.... maybe throwing my shoes at those responsible for making this an issue would be a better idea than just spitting.. that way they may actually bruise... :p
 

jamaesi

To Save A Lamb
This happened in my area so the local news will not shut up about it.

The teenagers were just being horny teenagers and sending nude pics of themselves to each other. It's not exactly a smart idea but labeling them as sex offenders for being immature teenagers is hardly a solution. There's a huge outrage here over how it's being handled.

The creepiest part of this whole story was that the girl had her cell phone on at school, so it was confiscated- and then an administrator decides to look through it and then found the pics. That's just creepy and an invasion of privacy.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
I would define child porn as the photos or footage of the sexual abuse of a child. I don't think teenagers taking pictures of themselves qualifies.
 

frg001

Complex bunch of atoms
The world has gone mad. It's the same as the banning these days of parents taking pictures or videos at school plays. Nonsense.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
The world has gone mad. It's the same as the banning these days of parents taking pictures or videos at school plays. Nonsense.
I talked with one of the art teachers from my high school recently (at a funeral for one of my other teachers, unfortunately).

When I was in school, he'd constantly be taking photos of school life: students, teachers, whatever was around the school. He almost always had a camera with him - the good photos would go up in a display case in the hall or get added to the yearbook. Students got a kick out of being immortalized that way. As a result of doing this, he has (and shares) an amazing archive of life at the school over several decades. That archive ends a few years ago, when the school board decided that nobody could take a photo of a student or teacher without signing a consent form first.
 

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
Yep, taking pictures of anykind can get you trouble these days.

Father-of-three branded a 'pervert' - for photographing his own children in public park

By David Wilkes
Last updated at 1:46 AM on 16th July 2008
Father-of-three branded a 'pervert' - for photographing his own children in public park | Mail Online

When Gary Crutchley started taking pictures of his children playing on an inflatable slide he thought they would be happy reminders of a family day out.

But the innocent snaps of seven-year-old Cory, and Miles, five, led to him being called a ‘pervert’.

The woman running the slide at Wolverhampton Show asked him what he was doing and other families waiting in the queue demanded that he stop.

Mr Crutchley, 39, who had taken pictures only of his own children, was so enraged that he found two policemen who confirmed he had done nothing wrong.

Yesterday he said: ‘What is the world coming to when anybody seen with a camera is assumed to be doing things that they should not?

‘This parental paranoia is getting completely out of hand. I was so shocked. One of the police officers told me that it was just the way society is these days. He agreed with me that it was madness.’

Father-of-three Mr Crutchley, a consultant for a rubber manufacturer from Walsall, West Midlands, was with his wife Tracey and their sons when the pleasant Sunday afternoon out turned sour.

He said: ‘The children wanted to go on an inflatable slide and I started taking photos of them having a good time. Moments later the woman running the slide told me to stop.

‘When I asked why, she told me I could not take pictures of other people’s children. I explained I was only interested in taking photos of my own children and pointed out that this was taking place in a public park.

‘I showed her the photos I had taken to prove my point. Then another woman joined in and said her child was also on the slide and did not want me taking pictures of the youngster.

‘I repeated that the only people being photographed were my own children. She said I could be taking pictures of just any child to put on the internet and called me a pervert. We immediately left the show.’

Mrs Crutchley, 37, a teaching support assistant and qualified nursery nurse, said: ‘I was shocked by the reaction of those women.

'It is very sad when every man with a camera enjoying a Sunday afternoon out in the park with his children is automatically assumed to be a pervert.’

The slide was run by Tracey Dukes, 35, whose father Malcolm Gwinnett has an inflatables hire company.

Mr Gwinnett, 58, a LibDem councillor in Wolverhampton, said: ‘Our policy is to ask people taking photos whether they have children on the slide. If they do, then that is fine.

‘But on this occasion another customer took exception to what the man was doing and an argument developed between those two people that continued without any further involvement from staff on the slide.’
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
It is one thing to confiscate a phone, it is another thing all together for the administrator to go through the girls pictures. This whole thing is so blown out of proportion it is not even funny.
 

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
It is one thing to confiscate a phone, it is another thing all together for the administrator to go through the girls pictures. This whole thing is so blown out of proportion it is not even funny.

According to the article..another student saw the pictures on the girls phone.I guess the administrators had to view them to confirm.I would say..I would prefer a female (in this case) to view what the other student claimed.(not that men are bad but even for the male admins own protection).

But the bottom line is if what was on the phone were nudes and semi nudes of the girl who owned the phone that she took herself?Then you call the parents and say "your daughter is taking nude photos of herself on her cell phone and showing people".."thats against school policy" "come pick her up with her cell phone"She is welcome back tomorrow..without a cell phone containing nude photos of herself"

Love

Dallas
 
Last edited:
Top