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: 8
13
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   
And this is still normal behavior for many girls at her age to do, and still none of your business and not a legal issue, but a moralistic one. Back in the 70s and 80s half the kids weren't virgins by 15 or 16. While a parent should bust this behavior and assign consequences, I would never wish to return to an era of women being treated like pristine property or damaged goods. And police states that try to use laws that are in place to prevent an adult from exploiting a child have are contrary to the rights and dignity of all people, families, parents, and children, and to the natural and normal right teenagers have to be explorative and to learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately, this girl is in foster care, but if I was her parent, I'd be suing the entire judicial system, for exploiting her further in the process.




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by mystiq
And this is still normal behavior for many girls at her age to do, and still none of your business and not a legal issue, but a moralistic one. Back in the 70s and 80s half the kids weren't virgins by 15 or 16. While a parent should bust this behavior and assign consequences, I would never wish to return to an era of women being treated like pristine property or damaged goods. And police states that try to use laws that are in place to prevent an adult from exploiting a child have are contrary to the rights and dignity of all people, families, parents, and children, and to the natural and normal right teenagers have to be explorative and to learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately, this girl is in foster care, but if I was her parent, I'd be suing the entire judicial system, for exploiting her further in the process.


So you admittedly take the stance that the distribution of child pornography is okay amongst children. You don't believe the law should be involved in the self-creation and distribution of child pornography over microwave frequencies where anyone with the right technology can intercept.

In fact, you might not even consider naked pictures of 11 or 12 year olds to be child pornography.

Curious, what is your age limit? Is 8 too young for you, or do you not care either way?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by logician magician
 


If the pornography was sent to a kid, then he shouldn't be held legally responsible for anything. He was not searching for child porn, and he did not publish anything (as far as I know).

Grown man who intercepts child porn, is a pedophile obviously searching for child porn, and should be treated like one.

GIANT difference.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by schism85
reply to post by logician magician
 


If the pornography was sent to a kid, then he shouldn't be held legally responsible for anything. He was not searching for child porn, and he did not publish anything (as far as I know).

Grown man who intercepts child porn, is a pedophile obviously searching for child porn, and should be treated like one.

GIANT difference.


Do you not thinking that children are capable of creating child pornography?

Do you think it's okay for an 11 year old to send vaginal penetration pictures to anyone, as long as they are under 18?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:54 PM
link   
There is a lot of assumptions and stereotyping of girls in this thread.

Taking nude photos of yourself isn't proof she is a whore or a slut or a prostitute. Good lord people.

When couples make sex tapes are they these things? When the girlfriend makes a sexy short video for her man who is overseas in the military is she now a big filthy whore?

Technology is just a medium. It's not evil to use it. It's the intent. Sending nude pics to a child porn site is no where near the same as sending them to a boyfriend...even if they somehow end up on some shady web site!

People. It's sexual. Yeah it is. Humans are sexual. At the age of fifteen the hormones are starting to fire. It's absurd to call her a slut for expressing what most teens do in one shape or form. It's absurd to say she is making child pornography because there is a chance it might somehow end up being used for that. It wasn't her intention, and that's what's important when determining her punishment.


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



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Distributing porn is an adult activity, its not even on the same table as talking about a teenager send nudie shots to her boyfriend or friends. This is the high tech version of a rather mixed up girl who used to sit around with groups of guys and flash them. She was eventually dealt with, discreetly by both the manager of the townhouse and her parents.
And her behavior changed. This is not the same thing. Quit comparing apples and oranges because they really are two different fruits.

Edit to add: not even the manager of the townhouse wanted to scar her for life and embarrass her for her exhibitionism. They just wanted it stopped, discreetly.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by mystiq]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by logician magician
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?


WOW. "The lady doth protest too much, me thinks".

What do we propose? Punishment. But, not as severe as being labled a "sex offender" for 10 years and becoming a felon. There goes any chance she has of ever bettering herself if she is indeed a "slut" as some would like to percieve.

Now, the only job she can ever get is prostitute or pornography. Good job there of nipping that in the bud.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Ok, question for those who see this as such a huge legal problem and are ok with the "sex offender" label being slapped on this girl for the next 10 years....

If this was your daughter that did this, would you just sit back and let the sex offender label be slapped on her....for taking nude pictures of herself and sending them to her boyfriend? Would you think it was right and proper then and cheer it on if it was your 15 year old daughter?? Would you be ok with her being labeled a sex offender for the next 10 years and her being called a "child pornographer"?

[edit on 10/16/2008 by skeptic1]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:58 PM
link   
The reason this girl is in trouble is because of the sexual nature of the photographs that she has sent. The intent of why she sent them, and the recipients of the photographs.

This is why she is in trouble. This is what she is being punished for.

I still don't see why some members on this board feel that child porn is ok and the fact that this young lady sent explicit underage material to another minor is acceptable.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by logician magician

Originally posted by schism85
reply to post by logician magician
 


If the pornography was sent to a kid, then he shouldn't be held legally responsible for anything. He was not searching for child porn, and he did not publish anything (as far as I know).

Grown man who intercepts child porn, is a pedophile obviously searching for child porn, and should be treated like one.

GIANT difference.


Do you not thinking that children are capable of creating child pornography?

Do you think it's okay for an 11 year old to send vaginal penetration pictures to anyone, as long as they are under 18?


Iam not dealing in hypotheticals with you freind. Yes I think its morally wrong. Do I think they should lock up an 11 yr old, and label he/she as a sex offender, and a felon because of it, and potentially ruin her/his professional career, absolutley not. But this is not whats happening here so it has no relevance.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by mystiq
Distributing porn is an adult activity, its not even on the same table as talking about a teenager send nudie shots to her boyfriend or friends. This is the high tech version of a rather mixed up girl who used to sit around with groups of guys and flash them. She was eventually dealt with, discreetly by both the manager of the townhouse and her parents.
And her behavior changed. This is not the same thing. Quit comparing apples and oranges because they really are two different fruits.


Nobody is comparing anything. I just want to know where you people who advocate this, or think that the girl is perfectly innocent would draw the line because as of now you are openly interpreting her actions - so how far does your interpretation let you go?

You haven't drawn any type of line yet - you've only been beating around the bush.

Are you afraid to answer?

If she was spread eagle, is it porn? What is it that you do or don't consider child porn? You're not even saying it, you're just falling back on "Oh she's just a mixed up kid doing kid stuff."

What did the pictures portray? Do you know?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   
So she's being punished for the intent to "show off" like many teenagers around this age do, and for the purpose of sending her boyfriend a picture of herself. Like I'd support making this a crime and put it on the same platform as an adult exploiting a child.


[edit on 16-10-2008 by mystiq]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by schism85
Iam not dealing in hypotheticals with you freind. Yes I think its morally wrong. Do I think they should lock up an 11 yr old, and label he/she as a sex offender, and a felon because of it, and potentially ruin her/his professional career, absolutley not. But this is not whats happening here so it has no relevance.



You are dealing with hypotheticals because you don't know what the pictures were of.

If you do, what type of pictures were they, exactly?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno

I still don't see why some members on this board feel that child porn is ok


That's because you made up your mind even before you read our posts. And you are not considering the other viewpoint. Which is:

We don't feel child porn is okay.

We just don't agree with you that this is child porn.


and the fact that this young lady sent explicit underage material to another minor is acceptable.


It's the ignore what we say game I see.

None of us are saying there should be no consequence. Many of us don't think it should be extreme. You do. Unless your stance has changed from your original "the full extent of the child porn law".

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



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   
OK, let me be more specific. She should get charged so she learns her lesson, but I still feel that she should not be labeled a 'sex offender'. She should be labeled 'stupid', which most teenagers are. Sex offender laws are on the books to protect children from adults. There were no adults involved in this case. The line has to be drawn somewhere, I think 18 years old should be that line. I also feel that her parent(s) should also be in legal trouble for not teaching her better! But if we don't draw the line somewhere, like a previous poster said, next we will be charging and labeling a 15 year old for spanking his monkey as a 'sex offender' because he was sexually abusing a minor, himself. Let's use some common sense here!



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
The reason this girl is in trouble is because of the sexual nature of the photographs that she has sent. The intent of why she sent them, and the recipients of the photographs.

This is why she is in trouble. This is what she is being punished for.

I still don't see why some members on this board feel that child porn is ok and the fact that this young lady sent explicit underage material to another minor is acceptable.



Oh jeez!! Here you go again. Please post a link to someone on this board who said her behavior is acceptable, so I know exactly who SOME members are. Because I have failed to read a post in which it says they condone such behavior.

Plus, you keep on about intent. I don't think she had criminal intent. Was her mind thinking like a criminal, NO. She was thinking like a 15yr old girl going through puberty.

edit:typo

[edit on 16-10-2008 by schism85]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   
I've already seen the off line version of this, and was somewhat concerned for my younger sons being exposed to it. Also, a relatives daughter was known to be a little too outgoing online, and it took considerable efforts to explore internet safety issues with her. This isn't actually uncommon behavior. Its somewhat typical for a certain percentage of teenagers.
Smart parents can come up with many effective ways of curbing this with the normal child when they are caught. Most people, even some commercial property owners, respect the child's feelings and embarrassment enough not to expose them to unwarranted public attention. Thats a normal thing adults do, protect children and teach them. My relatives daughter is currently a very hard working young lady in her second year of college, holding down various jobs. Her grades are excellent. Quite proud of how she turned out. Plus she's a free thinker.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by mystiq
 


Why not? The intent is the same, the end result is the same. Its like the old argument guns don't kill people the bullets launching at high velocity out of the end do.

She had the same intent as a fully grown sexual predator or pusher of child porn does. To send out explicit material to others.

Why should she not be punished the same? Perhaps not given the same punishment as a grown man would receive. But obviously something a little more serious than a time out and bad girl will do.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
She is underage which makes what she did a felony.


So, when it comes to pictures, she is underage, but when it comes to trying her, she is an adult?


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.


The difference would be that one adult person took pictures of a minor. Apples and oranges my friend.


Why shouldn't she?


Maybe if she took pictures of her 12 year old sister/brother in explicite positions and posted them to porn sites etc. But, not for what she actually did in this case.

I really can't believe people can't see the difference.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
OK, let me be more specific. She should get charged so she learns her lesson, but I still feel that she should not be labeled a 'sex offender'. She should be labeled 'stupid', which most teenagers are. Sex offender laws are on the books to protect children from adults. There were no adults involved in this case. The line has to be drawn somewhere, I think 18 years old should be that line. I also feel that her parent(s) should also be in legal trouble for not teaching her better! But if we don't draw the line somewhere, like a previous poster said, next we will be charging and labeling a 15 year old for spanking his monkey as a 'sex offender' because he was sexually abusing a minor, himself. Let's use some common sense here!


You think 18 years old should be the upper line?

What about the lower line? I doubt you think it's okay for a 17 year old and a 9 year old to trade pornographic pictures of themselves.




top topics



 
13
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join