If the parents had done everything within their power to protect this child, she still could have been driven to suicide via her own interaction on the net using a cell phone, a game system, a neighbor's pc, a public pc, or just by hearing from her classmates what is being said about her online.
There is no form of "broadcasting" in our past that is in any way comparable to the wall to wall, 24/7/365 intensity of the internet, especially on a child.
He was found guilty of aiding a suicide under Minnesota law, which provides penalties for anyone who “intentionally advises, encourages, or assists another in taking the other’s own life", punishment can be up to 15 years in prison and a fine of up to $30,000. He was sentenced on May 4, 2011, to 360 days in jail.
I realize that you disagree with this characterization -- as so many parents of children who have suicided also disagreed. I know you will want to be persuaded I'm right and not just take my word for it.
However, I am 100% confident that if you look into this, you'll come to agree with me. And once you do, you'll also agree that using the net as a weapon to kill a child should be a criminal act.
He was able to get the Minnesota conviction overturned on appeal, and was subsequently arrested in Canada. Minnesota then used the Canadian arrest to yank his nursing license.
There are no similarities with your hypothetical and this case.
She took her life because she was unstable.
Nor does this does not need to be made into criminal law. That is ridiculous.
And the proposed law that you later sighted, I hope fails miserably. It is not needed.
Just as in this case, the lady is not responsible for the other unstable person's death. Nor should she be.
All that is, is the current desire to blame others, "someone else is to blame", attitude.
Sorry, that doesn't fly.
There are already laws on the books to take care of the harassment and the assault in this case.
But the only person in this case who is responsible for her death is her. No one else.
And we should really stick with reality.
Otherwise we will start seeing hypotheticals about teens being enticed into rape by the intoxicating effects of the way a girl dresses.
And I am sure you will see that just as absurd as I see this current effort to shift responsibility onto others, when clearly she is the only one responsible, just as the teens in the above hyp would be.
Puppy love is as intoxicating if not more so, yet it does not remove ones responsibility for there actions.
She is still responsible for cutting herself, for drinking bleach, for taking drugs on top of the internet even, and for taking her own life.
No one else.
Not even the interwebs.
And I have already admitted that. Numerous times even.
Other than those trying to place blame where it does not belong, no none needs any motivation to state the truth.
She is solely responsible.
Strange to say the least.
But it clearly shows your bias.
I guess I am also done trying to reach you.
She is responsible for her her actions. No one else.
Nothing you have said changes that.
Nor could it.
To bad you can't see that.
Some of the kids who have been "bullied to death" on the net were as young as 9 years old. It's not possible to analyse their "choice to suicide" as you would an adult's.