Define Child Porn

[Trey of Diamonds]

I don't believe that fourteen year olds are "children".

While I agree with this statement, what we believe doesn't matter. In the eyes of the law, 14 year olds are children.

 

[Falvlun]

I would have thought the same principles would have applied as the laws concerning sexual relations between minors (minors can have sex with other minors, but if a legal adult has sex with a child, THEN it's considered illegal). At least that's how it works as far as my knowledge goes

I remember a case from last year where a 17 year old was being charged with statutory rape because his 14 or 15 (can't remember) year old girlfriend performed oral sex on him, and her parents found out and charged him. I know the poor kid had to sit in jail while the ridiculous trial was going on, but I don't remember hearing what the verdict ended up being.

 

[Falvlun]

think there is a lot of confusion going on in this case.

For one thing, I don't believe that fourteen year olds are "children". So nude photos of them are not going to be "child pornography" by definition.

I agree.

Secondly, nude photography is not automatically pornography. Nor is pornography automatically illegal. So nude photos of fourteen year olds does not automatically equate to being illegal pornography, regardless of who took the pictures.

Very true. However, I do think claiming that these photos are "just nude photography" to be a bit disengenous. Obviously, I don't know for sure, but I find it hard to believe these photos were not meant to be sexually arousing.

Again, I ask, what is the definition of "just a naked photo" and "pornography"? I would say the former is meant to be artistic, tasteful, and beautiful, while the latter is specifically meant to be sexually arousing.

While I agree with this statement, what we believe doesn't matter. In the eyes of the law, 14 year olds are children.

Agreed, but then again, the law should be changed. There is a big difference between an 8 year old and a 16 year old.

By and by, why were the photos of Miley Cyrus not prosecuted as "child pornography"? There was an outrage, sure, but no charges that I was aware of. Isn't that the same sort of thing?

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

By and by, why were the photos of Miley Cyrus not prosecuted as "child pornography"? There was an outrage, sure, but no charges that I was aware of. Isn't that the same sort of thing?

They could have been if someone had wanted to. I doubt it would have held up in court but it could have still been taken that far. However, Miley's parents are a lot smarter than they look and while they frowned at what Annie did, they left it at that.

 

[Stellify]

I remember a case from last year where a 17 year old was being charged with statutory rape because his 14 or 15 (can't remember) year old girlfriend performed oral sex on him, and her parents found out and charged him. I know the poor kid had to sit in jail while the ridiculous trial was going on, but I don't remember hearing what the verdict ended up being.

Here in Texas, there's a two-year grace period. As long as the boyfriend and girlfriend are within two years of being the same age, it's ok. That way 18-year-olds don't get in trouble for dating 17 or 16-year-olds. That actually happens so often it's kind of shocking....or 18 to 20-somethings being charged with statutory rape or indecency with a minor because some stupid 16-year-old girl lied and told them she was 18....then either cried rape or her parents took the guy to court once they found out. I've known so many guys who were scared to death to date a girl without checking out her IDs and age with friends first...And the poor guys can never do anything to fight it. I think it's disgusting. (I'm sure this has happened with women being charged by boys, too...Just using girls/men because it's more common).

 

[Falvlun]

They could have been if someone had wanted to. I doubt it would have held up in court but it could have still been taken that far. However, Miley's parents are a lot smarter than they look and while they frowned at what Annie did, they left it at that.

I don't understand... it shouldn't matter whether the parents throw a fit or not. If we (as in the United States' legal system) are defining child pornography as a naked shot of a minor, then Miley's photographer should have been charged.

Here in Texas, there's a two-year grace period. As long as the boyfriend and girlfriend are within two years of being the same age, it's ok. That way 18-year-olds don't get in trouble for dating 17 or 16-year-olds. That actually happens so often it's kind of shocking....or 18 to 20-somethings being charged with statutory rape or indecency with a minor because some stupid 16-year-old girl lied and told them she was 18....then either cried rape or her parents took the guy to court once they found out. I've known so many guys who were scared to death to date a girl without checking out her IDs and age with friends first...And the poor guys can never do anything to fight it. I think it's disgusting. (I'm sure this has happened with women being charged by boys, too...Just using girls/men because it's more common).

Thank goodness for a law with a little common sense. I do think it's just sick how parents/legal system could care less about destroying some young man's (or young woman's) life for the sake of a law that was never meant for people like them, or the actions they committed.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I don't understand... it shouldn't matter whether the parents throw a fit or not. If we (as in the United States' legal system) are defining child pornography as a naked shot of a minor, then Miley's photographer should have been charged.

Sorry, I thought you were familiar with the photograph. She isn't nude, (yes, covering up with a sheet counts as not nude). The issue was with the provocative quality of the photography, not nudity.

 

[gnomon]

I think there is a lot of confusion going on in this case.

For one thing, I don't believe that fourteen year olds are "children". So nude photos of them are not going to be "child pornography" by definition. Secondly, nude photography is not automatically pornography. Nor is pornography automatically illegal. So nude photos of fourteen year olds does not automatically equate to being illegal pornography, regardless of who took the pictures.

The solution to this confusion is simple, however. If an illegal act was committed in order to achieve the photograph, then the people who took the photo and participated in distributing it, etc. are guilty of a crime, and of covering up and abetting that crime. If the photo depicts no criminal behavior, and implies none for it to have occurred, then there is no legal reaction necessary.

Actually, federal child pornography definitions include any minor which under federal law is anyone under the age of 18. The only aspect of the law which it falls under to be child pornography is that it would be considered obscene on only the barest margins.

I'm suspecting that possibly bad press will drive the AG to drop or reduce charges.

However, considering how rabid the law went after that substitute teacher in the case of pop-ups of porn sites appearing on the computer you never know how far prosecutors are willing to go to get another notch on their belt.

 

[DallasApple]

I do think using the word "child" is a bit misleading with 14-15-16 year olds.(in this circumstance)But the fact is they are legally minors.They arent considered adults under the law.But for instance with alcohol?If you give a 14 year old a beer..its called contributing to the delinquency of a "minor" not child.Now Im assuming if you gave that same beer to 6 year old.You might be charged with something more like child endangerment.

But I guess the point is..it doesnt matter if we don't think of them as "children" they definately arent "adults" yet in regards to anything untill the age of 17.And here in Texas that is the age of "consent".But you are still considered a "minor" in regards to smoking cigarretes..driving..drinking..medical treatment...in most situation criminally..legal conatracts(you cant open a bank account,get a loan on a car..sign a lease on an apartment etc..)as well as your parents can count yuo as a dependent "child" on their income taxes..etc...

Love

Dallas

 

[DallasApple]

Actually, federal child pornography definitions include any minor which under federal law is anyone under the age of 18.

Isnt that odd..In some states the age of "consent" is as young as 16..I think most are 17.So they are considred "adults" when it comes to having sex.But yet if that same "adult" takes nude photos or sexually explicit photos of THEMSELVES they can be charged with manufacturing child pornograghy underal the federal guidelines?

Thats kind of wacky.

Love

Dallas

 

[DallasApple]

Problem - anything remotely sexual, and its illegal for them to inform the parents thereof in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Back in the 70s, we had a major problem with central Pennsylvanians honor-killing their daughters when doctors, medical professionals, schools, etc. would tell the parents about things like this, or the fact that the daughters had acquired birth control or sexually transmitted diseases. Thus, would be illegal.

UM...like the parents arent going to know their kids are arrested and charged with the manufacturing , distribution and possesion of child porn??? In this case that law is completey inneffective and quite frankly sounds like it put these kids in a much more precarious situation.Why cant people use their common sense?They could have even insisted the girls tell their parents and if you ask me left the boys out of it completely.What 16 (average) or 17 year old boy is going to reject a nudie picture that a schoolmate sends them?

Love

Dallas

 

[gnomon]

Isnt that odd..In some states the age of "consent" is as young as 16..I think most are 17.So they are considred "adults" when it comes to having sex.But yet if that same "adult" takes nude photos or sexually explicit photos of THEMSELVES they can be charged with manufacturing child pornograghy underal the federal guidelines?

Thats kind of wacky.

Love

Dallas

It begs the question of allowing the Feds to write criminal laws that are essentially and traditionally handled by the states. Now there is good reasoning as to why there is a Federal code but I think the extent of the code needs to be addressed.

It also raises the wisdom of arbitrary standards applied to human behavior. The notion of what age constitutes a minor and what responsibilities such an individual should possess has increased for the former and decreased for the latter. Higher age of expected maturity with less responsibility. A cursory examination of post-Industrial Western society shows that society accepted a lower age of expected maturity with a greater expectation of responsibility.

Heck, I know many people that look at college students as if they are the same as teens were a couple of decades ago. If that's the expectations we place upon them then that is probably what we'll observe.

All that or maybe we just overreact to isolated cases. Which in this case gives rise to the issue of allowing judges to exercise greater discretion in sentencing rather than have legislatures enacting mandatory sentencing. Which I don't know if such legislation exists for child pornography cases.

 

[DallasApple]

I remember a case from last year where a 17 year old was being charged with statutory rape because his 14 or 15 (can't remember) year old girlfriend performed oral sex on him, and her parents found out and charged him. I know the poor kid had to sit in jail while the ridiculous trial was going on, but I don't remember hearing what the verdict ended up being.

This is rediculous too..I have looked up sex offenders in my area.(its public information through the police dept.)..I was shocked to see all the "red dots" on the map that was about a 10 mile radius around my home.Then I looked at the list.90% of them were men who had been convicted at 18-19 years old for having sexual relations with "minors"..No one can tell me those werent highschool "sweethearts" with ****** off revengful parents after finding out their daughters were having sex with their boyfrineds.

Technically my husband was a sex offender by age 18 ....I was 16 and we were having sex..And in fact when I was 14 and he was 16 I got pregnant..and my mother called the police to see if she could have him charged.He escaped by two days.We are 2 days shy of two years apart.

But when he was considered an "adult" and I was still a "minor" he could have been in big trouble.Thank goodness my mother changed her tune.

Love

Dallas

 

[frg001]

Yep, taking pictures of anykind can get you trouble these days.

Its this sort of ludicrous nonsense that led to a paediatrician in the UK being targeted and forced to leave her home a few years ago...

Doctor driven out of home by vigilantes | UK news | The Guardian

Thankfully in Sweden we haven't sunk to this level yet (at least where I live)... My sons daycare take lots of pictures of the kids, and nobody minds people taking pictures of their own kids playing with others. I actually even feel perfectly safe taking pictures of my son playing on a beach... impossible in many places these days.

In the UK, I even got attacked verbally by a mother after I gently moved a child out of the way who was messing about on an escalator, holding everyone up. She was screaming at me "How dare you touch my child!" etc and shouting for her husband...thankfully he was a bit more sensible.

That woman in the park is a terrible example of an overprotective society.

The girls sending pictures should have been laughed at and maybe would have learned their lesson when the pics appeared online. It's not like anyone was getting hurt, or abused...It's childhood pranks, nothing more.

As for closing all loopholes...BullS***, that is impossible in a functional society.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Its this sort of ludicrous nonsense that led to a paediatrician in the UK being targeted and forced to leave her home a few years ago...

That's crazy! Talk about the dangers of stupid people.

In the UK, I even got attacked verbally by a mother after I gently moved a child out of the way who was messing about on an escalator, holding everyone up. She was screaming at me "How dare you touch my child!" etc and shouting for her husband...thankfully he was a bit more sensible.

Basic rule of thumb, don't touch someone else's kid. No one can know what your intentions are and there are too many kid snatchers out there today. If a kid is doing something wrong, you tell the parent. The only acceptable excuse is to protect them from a life threatening situation. Otherwise you are in the wrong.

 

[DallasApple]

That's crazy! Talk about the dangers of stupid people.



Basic rule of thumb, don't touch someone else's kid. No one can know what your intentions are and there are too many kid snatchers out there today. If a kid is doing something wrong, you tell the parent. The only acceptable excuse is to protect them from a life threatening situation. Otherwise you are in the wrong.

Some parents know your intentions are harmless..But they are worried that the child wont know the difference in the case they arent around.So they cant "condone" any "stranger" touching their child.If the mommy or daddy allows it..then the child doesnt learn to be terrified and petrified to death of anyone thats not them.

Love

Dallas

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

then the child doesnt learn to be terrified and petrified to death of anyone thats not them.

Good point but I don't want my daughter to be terrified of everyone except her mother and me, that's a bit extreme. Consistancy is needed though. All strangers are strangers, not just some of them.

My daughter is shy and naturally doesn't talk to anyone she doesn't already know so she doesn't need much additional training. It's the children that are afraid of nothing at all and will talk to anyone that need to be taught not to do so. You're not teaching them to be afraid, you're teaching them not to talk to strangers. Big difference.

 

[DallasApple]

Good point but I don't want my daughter to be terrified of everyone except her mother and me, that's a bit extreme. Consistancy is needed though. All strangers are strangers, not just some of them.

My daughter is shy and naturally doesn't talk to anyone she doesn't already know so she doesn't need much additional training. It's the children that are afraid of nothing at all and will talk to anyone that need to be taught not to do so. You're not teaching them to be afraid, you're teaching them not to talk to strangers. Big difference.

I remember having "stranger talks" with my now 19 year old son when he was about 4 or 5.

He passed all the "test" on my questions ..Like..what if a stranger says "your mom told me to pick you up today"..or "help I have lost my dog will you help me find him "...He said he wouldnt go with them..I said what would you do..He said he would run and yell HELP stranger..Help..and find ANY other adult..not the one propositioning him.(good odds)..

But when I said..what if the stragner said he was a "Power Ranger" and he needed your help to fight the bad guys..He said ..he would go with them..Power Rangers are good guys..

Love

Dallas

 

[gnomon]

Speaking of those maps.......

There is a registered sex offender living across the street and two houses down from me. And another one two houses down on the same side of the street from that one. Also, on the street behind me there is a house less within a two minute walk with another registered sex offender.

What the hell. All I could obtain as to the convictions is that one was convicted in his early 30's for child molestation. I noticed that house always appeared to be uninhabited and the yard looks like crap. Next is the guy at the age of 18 or 19 convicted of molesting a male minor. The last is the guy convicted at the age of 15 for incest. I don't want to know.

All I know is I'm going to smoke a cigarette outside now and look askance at all my neighbors and be thankful that drug addicts don't have to register.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

If anyone is looking for the map that shows you where criminals live here is the one for the States.

National Sex Offender Registry

I used it when I was looking to buy a new house. It helped me select a neighborhood that I felt was more safe.