It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

15 Year Old Girl Charged as Sex Offender

page: 7
13
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Okay in a few sentences elucidate the real "issue" again for me.




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by mystiq
She's just a kid experimenting with her sexuality.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by mystiq]


Oh, sure... and when they make what she did not a crime - when they introduce a legal loop hole, that's the same excuse the child pornographers will use when they buy, produce, and distribute child porn - because, after all, everyone knows the children are just experimenting.

The line has to be drawn somewhere.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by logician magician]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Except that she is just a kid exploring her sexuality, not an adult exploiting a child. She has not committed any crime except a "moral" one. This is nobody elses business.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:29 PM
link   
I wonder how long until we start arresting 15 year old teens for masturbating, since we all know that they are molesting a child - themselves - during the process.

Times have changed, get used to it. 15 is no longer the innocent spin the bottle player that it used to be, if you want to play spin the bottle you need to go hang out with the 8 year olds. 12 to 14 is the new age for drugs, drinking, and sex.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by schism85
reply to post by SantaClaus
 


Taking her phone away from her untill she was 18 wouldn't be such a bad idea. Maybe she does need new caretakers, because she is obviously laking guidance. But thats no reason to jump to the conclusion that shes a whore. I mean, maybe she is who knows, but its not my place to say that, and quite frankly it wouldn't make a big difference in wether or not the legal action being taken would be appropriate in this case.


Yeah, the more I consider it, the sillier it seems that any legality be brought into this.

I suppose I just see too many babies having babies. And this has everything to do with sex. Why aren't kids scared of sexuality like in the good old days?

Its society's problem, the parents' problem, and no one is doing anything to stop it. Scary stuff.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:30 PM
link   
So where do you draw the line?

What if a 12 year child creates and distributes pornography of themselves on the internet?

Do you not think those pictures could be exploited and her little "experiment" blown out of proportion?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by deadline527
I wonder how long until we start arresting 15 year old teens for masturbating, since we all know that they are molesting a child - themselves - during the process.

Times have changed, get used to it. 15 is no longer the innocent spin the bottle player that it used to be, if you want to play spin the bottle you need to go hang out with the 8 year olds. 12 to 14 is the new age for drugs, drinking, and sex.


Is that the new age for porno too?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


The real issue is this, this young lady has created and distributed illegal pornographic material over a telecommunications system.

Is it legal for her to be in possession of photographic material of underage children in sexually explicit positions? The fact is no, It's not legal for her to be in possession of this material. It's not legal for anyone to be in possession of this material. The article eludes that these photographs were sent for the expressed purpose of it being a turn on for her boyfriend, therefore it is pornographic material. She is underage which makes it child porn.

Sending this material over the phone constitutes distribution of child porn.

And she should not be punished at all except her phone taken away and for her to be told "bad girl"?

Seriously? Then I guess we better let all those pedophiles go cause apparently it's not a bad thing to do to create or send explicit material of underage children. Better just take away their computers and tell them "bad boy" for their behavior.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by SantaClaus
 


I agree to the fulliest. There are waaay too many babies having babies. Even too many grown ups having babies. You would think a few is enough!!

I have known a few underage girls that have gotten pregnant, and all that happens is the poor 40-50 something year old mother ends up taking care of it, when they should be retiring. I don't blame you for jumping on this girl, Iam just glad you can see things for what they are here.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:34 PM
link   
This is just plain retarded! Child porn laws should apply to adults, not children, which this girl still is! And the fact that they are debating whether or not to charge the other children who received it is equally ridiculous! The laws are there to protect children from pedophiles! Yes, she should get into some type of trouble, but 'sex offender' status???? And, as I read the law in the OP, every parent who takes the traditional 'nudie' baby photo, which we all have (my parents did, so did I), is guilty of violating this law and should be registered sex offenders!! It just proves that 'common sense' isn't very common anymore!



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:35 PM
link   
We made the Law. The Law didn't make us.

The Law is our societies tool for promoting justice. If we don't have the power to improve the Law in accordance to our improved sense of Justice then the Law no longer serves its true purpose. We are not following the Law, the Law is following us.

I say this because some of you are trying to take the subjective nature out of morality.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:37 PM
link   
This case has its own specs, and these pictures were not on a sexually explicit online porn site. Don't compare apples and oranges.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Exactly. She should not be punished at all except to have her phone taken away and be told why its wrong to do such a thing.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   
I love how you guys beat around the bush of ideals when dealing with this subject.

You want to make it legal for 12 year olds to distribute pornography, vaginal penetration, oral sex, anal sex, and bukakke to other 12 year olds?

If not, then what exactly, do you propose?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


I think the reason is intent. This isn't pictures of her as an infant, these were pictures of her as an adolescent with the expressed intent of being explicit and pornographic. Thats why they are charging her. They aren't punishing her for being stupid they are punishing her for willingly distributing child pornography.

Yes she took them herself. She took them herself to send to her bf for the expressed purpose to turn him on.

She is underage which makes what she did a felony. This is why they are looking to make her a sex offender. If an adult took the photographs of her for the same purpose they would be charged as a sex offender. Why shouldn't she?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


So what exactly are you suggesting to happen to this horrible child pornographer? Funeral pyre? Guillotine? Quartering?

I would not be suprised if you answered yes to any of these.

Oh wait, I forgot you don't live in the 1600s. You really could have fooled me.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by schism85
reply to post by whatukno
 


So what exactly are you suggesting to happen to this horrible child pornographer? Funeral pyre? Guillotine? Quartering?

I would not be suprised if you answered yes to any of these.

Oh wait, I forgot you don't live in the 1600s. You really could have fooled me.


What do you propose happen to the people she sent the child pornography to?

What do you propose happen to a grown man who intercepted the child pornography?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   
So, they are going to label her a "sex offender" because:

A. She took nude pictures of herself?
B. She was in possession of nude pictures of herself?
C. She sent the nude pictures she took of herself and was in possession of to her friends?
D. Sending nude pictures of a minor (herself) to other minors (her friends)?

What does not make sense in the above points?

Is it illegal to take nude pictures of oneself? Is it illegal to be in possession of nude pictures of oneself? I don't think so. I can't even see it being option C.

Maybe option D, but only if the law states explicitly that minors cannot send nude pictures of themselves to other minors.

This situation is not what these laws were created for, at all. Was there criminal intent involved? No. Is this girl a pedophile? No. Are her minor friends pedophiles? Seriously doubt it.

I don't even call for punishment for this girl; I call for mandatory therapy for her. Get her some counseling and don't ruin her life.

Did she do something stupid? Oh hell yeah. Criminal. No.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
Then I guess we better let all those pedophiles go cause apparently it's not a bad thing to do to create or send explicit material of underage children. Better just take away their computers and tell them "bad boy" for their behavior. .


They are adults. She has a few years left as a minor. Apples to oranges.

You make it sound like she was an adult sending pics of other children to other adults.

Whereas she was a minor, sending pics of herself, to minors.

Apples to oranges.

 


I think I see the dissonance in all of our arguments here.

Let's decide as a society that there is no longer a such thing as a 'minor'. Let's rid ourselves of that idea, that classification altogether. No longer any rules or laws for that idea. No more. There is no minors.

Okay NOW what you are saying makes a lot more sense.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Here is an example of the downfalls of technology.

And how technology is furthering the downfall of our society.

You have got to feel sorry for the girl.
Millions of people every day do this with cell phone pics, and webcams...


Let this be a leson for this girl, and the rest of the youth of the world.

Cyberspace is not a private domain.
Once something hits the net, or starts to be transfered around via technology, its there, its has become permement in the net. Everyone knows this, and if not, ignorance is not reason to not follow the law...


I hope the lesson that she learned will be passed on to other young sluts in training... i mean, the young girls of america.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join