Teens Who Sext Are Child Pornographers?

[Kirk Freeman]

How would you write a child pornography law to avoid this?

Expand the Romeo-Juliet defense to child porn.

 

[jd4320t]

I don't think it should be child pornography as long as it's two minors involved. However, I'm all for using it as a threat to scare kids out of not doing it.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[HoughMade]

So the same picture is worth 20 years (check the fed. law) to a 21 year old and perfectly legal for a 17 year old?

I know who's going to "own" all the devices where child porn is distributed from.

 

[hornadylnl]

Ban all cameras and electronic capabilities to send pictures electronically. It's the only way to be sure.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

So the same picture is worth 20 years (check the fed. law) to a 21 year old and perfectly legal for a 17 year old?

If the legislature so chooses.

 

[CathyInBlue]

If you have a photograph of a child's genitals, defined as a person aged 15-17, there are two conditions that must be met else a prosecution for possession of child pornography can ensue: A) You must personally know the subject of the photograph, B) the subject of the photograph must be no more than 3 years younger or older than you. If the photograph of a child's genitals is on a mobile device, these conditions must be met by either the owner or the primary user of the device. This would technicly allow a parent to own a mobile device used by their child to have access to child pornography if they simply access their own child's sexting folder, but better than than allow a vengeful child in possession of their own mobile device that their parents technicly own to frame them by getting sexting pics that would be legal for them to possess under the above regime, but their parents would run afoul of, since they couldn't satisfy the age difference. If a wayward child gets sexting pics of kids they don't know, they, as the primary user would go down for possession of child porn right along side their parents, but only if their parents retain technical ownership of the wayward child's mobile device. This, of course, gives impetus for any parent buying a mobile device for their children to explicitly make it a gift, so as to divest themselves of any ownership interest or responsibilities for any sexting pics on it.

 

[jkaetz]

Spirit of law vs letter of law problem. We've advanced, as usual our laws have not. Unintended consequences occur. Nevermind the difficulty in defining what is and what is not child pornography. The nature of life is that no two situations are identical which makes a well defined law extremely complex or a less defined law that is overly broad. Both scenarios cause problems and are open for abuse.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Meh...laws will not prevent this. Kids are going to have sex and they're going to entice their partners some how. Let the parents, go after the unlicensed broadcasting and distribution of their child's likenesses in civil court--if many even really object. Maybe there's a way to tax and/or regulate it, even....I mean if they're going to do it anyway, we are missing a tax revenue opportunity. I'm sure somebody can figure out a way to capitalize on this. There's that guy that Bill Clinton went to visit in the Bahamas that has the private island for "under-age" sexcapades--Maybe folks like that can figure out a way to help these kids and their families profit from what they're goint to do any way.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Another story on this came up today.

NC Law: Teens who take nude selfie photos face adult sex charges - Fayetteville Observer: Local News

 

[Bill of Rights]

The CP law was originally written to defend children (up to age 18) from malicious predators who took advantage of their naivete, right?

So here's the question: If the child snaps a selfie, which are they? That child can either be the malicious predator or the innocent victim, but not both.

How about changing the CP law to exclude any photo where the subject of the photo is also the photographer, and where no coercion is employed to manipulate the child into taking the photo him- or herself?

It's not a perfect law, but it would prevent a child who is exploring sexuality (as they all do) from being slapped with the "felon" or "sex offender" label and destroying their life. (ETA: It would also protect the other children who received the photo being sexted from prosecution without the messy "Do you know them? Are you within X years of their age?" stuff, while at the same time, teach them that actions have consequences and once it's "out there" on the 'net, there is no bringing it back.)



Blessings,
Bill

 

[Leo]

Sure, but teen on teen should be handled much differently than 38 male and 15 year old girl.

At the same time, there are people who went steady all through High school, and the boy ended up as a registered sex offender a few months before the girlfriend turned 18. I know one personally.

 

[Bill of Rights]

At the same time, there are people who went steady all through High school, and the boy ended up as a registered sex offender a few months before the girlfriend turned 18. I know one personally.

That's what the "Romeo and Juliet" defense Kirk mentioned in post #21 is about, Leo. If they're within a few years of each other (3 in Indiana, IIRC) and in a relationship, there's no "sex crime" involved. (layman's definition... I'm too lazy to look up the specific law right now)

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

At the same time, there are people who went steady all through High school, and the boy ended up as a registered sex offender a few months before the girlfriend turned 18. I know one personally.

I do also. A guy just like any other guy, has a good job, is a hard worker, is a nice guy providing for his family, and is a registered sex offender because he was a little bit older than his high school girlfriend and because her parents freaked out when she got pregnant.

I understand that the law has been changed in some states, though I'm not sure if it's changed in all of them, and apparently changing the law doesn't affect those who were convicted before they changed the law.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I do also. A guy just like any other guy, has a good job, is a hard worker, is a nice guy providing for his family, and is a registered sex offender because he was a little bit older than his high school girlfriend and because her parents freaked out when she got pregnant.

I understand that the law has been changed in some states, though I'm not sure if it's changed in all of them, and apparently changing the law doesn't affect those who were convicted before they changed the law.

It does not. That would be ex post facto... it works both ways. (if he was sentenced under a less strict guideline, they can't make it more so because the law changed.) That said, however, he should be able to apply for post-conviction relief, remove both the sex offender and felon tags from his name, and go on with his life. If this was my friend, and that was all he did, you bet your bippy I'd be telling him that. He needs to contact his lawyer, either from the original case, or whoever he has now, and it would likely have to go back to the same court that sentenced him. I'm only guessing, but I'd think he could reduce it to a misdemeanor, or maybe even expunge it completely. His lawyer can tell him for sure, but if one of our INGO lawyers could verify this, that would be very cool.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Teens Face Lifetime Of Consequences Following Arrest For Sex Tape « CBS Sacramento

 

[searpinski]

If cell phones were around when I was a teenager this would have happened all of the time too. I'd rather my children sext instead of get pregnant / impregnate. It's fairly innocent but they should definitely be disciplined and taught of the consequences.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

New Colorado bill would reduce the penalty for an underage teen who sexts, from a form of child pornography to making it a class two misdemeanor for electronically "distributing, displaying... publishing... or possessing, a sexually explicit image of himself or herself or of another juvenile.

 

[HoughMade]

New Colorado bill would reduce the penalty for an underage teen who sexts, from a form of child pornography to making it a class two misdemeanor for electronically "distributing, displaying... publishing... or possessing, a sexually explicit image of himself or herself or of another juvenile.

To quote The Offspring:

Hey, they don't pay no mind,
If you're under 18, you won't be doing any time,
Hey, come out and play.

Law of unintended consequences. I see some minors being recruited to gather some rather disturbing videos and images.