View Poll Results: Are they?

Voters
46. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes they are, and should be prosecuted.

    19 41.30%
  • Yes they are, but they shouldn't be prosecuted.

    19 41.30%
  • No they aren't.

    8 17.39%
Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 126

Thread: Is this person distributing child pornography?

  1. #71
    Guru
    deltabtry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    MA.
    Last Seen
    11-26-16 @ 03:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    4,021

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    This is a very good point as to why someone does need to get involved.



    Again though, it's extremely rare that we charge a minor with a felony and the only cases I can think of is with murder. Even those who said it should be CP said they wouldn't support it following them into adulthood.
    Even those who said it should be CP said they wouldn't support it following them into adulthood.
    Then what is the point of CP then? The child won't know any different but what will happen is that the child will have a label and to what purpose will this serve. Perhaps grounding the child for 1 month or more(depending on age) will do more to serve in correcting the behavior than any CP, not to mention we don't have to expose a child to criminal proceedings and tying up our family and or criminal courts.

  2. #72
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    This came up in another thread, but I felt it warrants it's own discussion.

    The scenario is a minor, takes naked/sexual pictures of themselves, and posts it on the internet. Now my question is, are they distributing child pornography, and if so, should they be prosecuted like any other child pornographer?

    Thoughts?
    Even though it is themselves, it's technically child porn. Should we do something about it? If some adult ends up with the picture, he's going to jail. Is it right to let underage kids release nude sexual pics of themselves unto the internet wherein other people will then get into serious trouble if they are found with them? I don't know. On one hand it's their own body and I can't think of a proper argument as to why they shouldn't be allowed. On the other hand, the repercussions are serious and can involve many others.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #73
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    Why do people do this? I disagree with charging them with CP also but there is no need for the hypoerbole. Except for very rare cases a minors record does not follow them into adulthood.

    An Oklahoma teenager is swept up in laws aimed at protecting kids from child predators. He must register as a sex offender for life, as the worst level offender, after having a sex with his girlfriend, who said she was his age, 16. Sex between teenagers is no longer just a moral issue, it's a legal one.



    Phillip Alpert found out the hard way. He had just turned 18 when he sent a naked photo of his 16-year-old girlfriend, a photo she had taken and sent him, to dozens of her friends and family after an argument. The high school sweethearts had been dating for almost 2 years. "It was a stupid thing I did because I was upset and tired and it was the middle of the night and I was an immature kid," says Alpert.

    Orlando, Florida, police didn't see it that way. Alpert was arrested and charged with sending child pornography, a felony to which he pleaded no contest but was later convicted. He was sentenced to five years probation and required by Florida law to register as a sex offender.

  4. #74
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Fair enough. Do you recall if you've ever given your opinion on parental consent issues for abortion. If so, would you direct me to the thread. I'm curious to see whether you, and others, believe that young girls are mature enough to have control over medical/surgical decisions for their bodies but not mature enough to take naked pictures of themselves.
    No, I don't think I have given a strong opinion because I don't have a strong opinion on that... I also think you are comparing apples to oranges. If a minor uploads photos online, they don't know the risk and they aren't required to be informed of those risks. If a minor makes the decision to continue a pregnancy or abort, a professional should inform them of the risk. Although they are still a minor, they should still be informed about the side effects and possible outcomes. Also if a young girl is pregnant and has to make that decision, then she is confronting the possible risks of engaging in sex. A more appropriate comparison would be comparing uploading nude photos online, to deciding to have sexual intercourse.

  5. #75
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Ithink the images she did in Penthouse were sex. I caught a glimpse of them on a oogle search (cropped versions).

    So I was wrong.

    But it lead to a good convo I hope.

    I still don't think if Penthouse or Playboy published Sally Mann the images would become suddenly illegal though.
    This question has already been answered.

    Who was the youngest Playmate of the Month? The legal age limit is, of course, 18. However, supposedly Elizabeth Ann Roberts, in the January 1958 issue, was only 16 at the time. Her mother accompanied her to the photo session, and claimed she was 18. She was also attending college at the time. Both Playboy and Miss Roberts' mother were charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, charges later dropped.

    Marion Dreyfus: Counting Playboy

    n the United States, pornography is considered a form of personal expression, and thus governed by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Pornography is generally protected speech, unless it is obscene, as the Supreme Court of the United States held in 1973 in Miller v. California.

    Child pornography is also not protected by the First Amendment, but importantly, for different reasons. In 1982 the Supreme Court held in New York v. Ferber that child pornography, even if not obscene, is not protected speech. The court gave a number of justifications why child pornography should not be protected, including that the government has a compelling interest in safeguarding the physical and psychological well being of minors.

    Child pornography laws in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Can I pose for playboy this young? - Yahoo! Answers

    Everything that I have read states there is a difference between posing nude in a sexuality explicit manner, a manner in which attention is drawn to the genitals or meant to create sexual arousal, than there is to posing nude for artwork... A child simply being naked is not a crime. I have watched travel channel document life in African and South American communities, and I have seen naked children on TV there. I have even seen young children going through puberty naked on those shows, but it's not rated R. That's because it's not sexually explicit. Simply put, pornography and nudity are not the same. The only time a minor has been in Playboy in America, they lied, and that should tell you something.

  6. #76
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    I just read a little bit more about Pretty Baby with Brooke Shields. She was 12, not 10, when she filmed that movie and she was totally nude in it. It was shown all across the US. The film earned a number of positive reviews, including one from Roger Ebert and another from the New York Times.

    I'm wondering if the laws have changed so significantly from the 1970s.
    Nudity and pornography are not the same... I don't have a problem with nudity, even children being nude. I watched a show about a woman that was charged with child porn because she look pictures of her kids playing, and they were nude in some of those photos. That was extreme, and the charges were eventually dropped.

  7. #77
    Devourer of Poor Children
    DrunkenAsparagus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    DC
    Last Seen
    01-20-16 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,496

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    As a recent high school graduate, I've had experiences with this stuff. A girl in my grade posted naked pictures of herself on the Internet. She wasn't charged with anything, but the shame that it brought forced to her to move. Doing this kind of thing is incredibly stupid, and the "victim/perpetrator" will probably experience plenty of social pressure to not do it again. There is no reason to bring in the DA.

    When people think "sex offenders", they think "Creep in the bushes." They want to punish this person, and legislators are more than willing to win their vote by passing laws that are tough on sex offenders. I say, good, punish the child molestors and rapists. Make them wish they hadn't done what they did, so that they don't do it again. The problem is that these punishments often extend to people who don't deserve them, like 18 year-olds having sex with their 17 year-old girlfriends. Lumping in teenage porn stars, public urinaters, and people a few months senior to their significant others with rapists and child molestors is ridiculous, flies in the face of the 8th Amendment, and does nothing to make us or our children safer. Charging minors for distributing pictures of themselves are ridiculous.
    Last edited by DrunkenAsparagus; 08-20-11 at 05:24 PM.
    "Doubleplusungood"

    George Orwell

  8. #78
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Voyeurism is illegal in many cases. Before you get into a "expectation of privacy" what was he charged with?
    The name of the charge is irrelevant. The women in the dressing room had an expectation of privacy and putting a phone under the door violated that. If the guy had watched a couple having sex on a public sidewalk, he would still be a voyeur but not guilty of anything.

    People are arrested all the time for having child pornography on their computers to get off on. They didn't take the pics in most cases. Simply have nude pics of a minor on your computer and you'll get arrested.
    I already explained that. Possession is banned under the concept that obtaining it creates demand and thus leads to more children being exploited.

  9. #79
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Installing camera's in bathroom is illegal because it violates the expectation of privacy, not because voyeurism is illegal. It doesn't matter whether or not the owner plans to whack it to the footage or not. The state has no reason to care what people get off on, only on protecting the rights of its citizens. A minor posting their own naked picture may be foolish, but they are not infringing upon anyone's else rights.
    Well, a peeping tom also violates the expectation of privacy... If somebody is peeping in my windows, I have no right to protect my privacy in that case?

    In the United States, video voyeurism is an offense in nine states and may require the convicted criminal to register as a sex offender.[10] The original case that led to the criminalization of voyeurism has been made into a television movie called Video Voyeur and documents the criminalization of secret photography. Criminal voyeurism statutes are related to invasion of privacy laws[11] but are specific to unlawful surreptitious surveillance without consent and unlawful recordings including the broadcast, dissemination, publication, or selling of recordings involving places and times when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a reasonable supposition they are not being photographed or filmed by "any mechanical, digital or electronic viewing device, camera or any other instrument capable of recording, storing or transmitting visual images that can be utilized to observe a person."[12]
    Voyeurism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    Pedophile rings trading videos of sex crimes doesn't violate anybody's rights either... it's not hurting anybody... they are just getting off. Why isn't child pornography and owning video of such crimes against the law then?

  10. #80
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Even though it is themselves, it's technically child porn. Should we do something about it? If some adult ends up with the picture, he's going to jail. Is it right to let underage kids release nude sexual pics of themselves unto the internet wherein other people will then get into serious trouble if they are found with them? I don't know. On one hand it's their own body and I can't think of a proper argument as to why they shouldn't be allowed. On the other hand, the repercussions are serious and can involve many others.
    I feel the same way, they could potentially get other people in trouble and they can potentially get themselves in trouble if the wrong people find those photos and start trading them. It's all around a bad idea, and the minor is acting socially irresponsible, but the minor is also too naive to probably understand that. I definitely don't think they should be charged with felony, but it definitely shouldn't be a legally protected behavior either.

Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •