Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   All teenagers will now be sex offenders because they see themselves naked   (news.com.com) divider line 230
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

32078 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Feb 2007 at 4:54 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



230 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-02-09 05:47:22 PM  
oh dear bloody farking (insert deity of choice)!

they need a stricter definition of child porn.

the judge total asshat, representive of whats wrong with the religious right and by leadershif of it, America

/this ever happens in canada, austriallia looks nice and not as assine
 
2007-02-09 05:48:11 PM  
sevens1997
I am fairly certain it would be. As drawings of children in sexual situations can be considered child porn.
 
2007-02-09 05:48:23 PM  
Whoa. Here's ridiculous idiocy: the majority opinion states the the minors are not intellectually capable of using sound judgement because of their age, but that they CAN be held criminally liable????????
Idiocy.
 
2007-02-09 05:48:24 PM  
sevens1997

Does anime count? Because I have Elfen Lied and Puni Puni Poemy on my shelf, and if that's illegal contraband, I would like to know.

It is now considered a Federal crime to own or distribute lolicon.
 
2007-02-09 05:48:29 PM  
wiskey tango foxtrot, over?

come see the circus that IS America! watch and be amazed as political correctness hides behind the "for the children" flag!


farking morons...NUKE FLORIDA
 
2007-02-09 05:48:55 PM  
sevens1997

If McCain's "Crazy Old People Don't Understand the Internet and Cartoons are Pornography" Bill passes, then yes they do count.


Also, can I be prosecuted for sexual abuse of a minor for jacking off when I was underage?
 
2007-02-09 05:49:14 PM  
Everyone involved in prosecuting and deciding this case should be either fired or impeached. This is not how our justice system should operate.
 
2007-02-09 05:49:23 PM  
Common Sense takes a handful of pills, washes it down with Vodka, and chokes on its own vomit.
 
2007-02-09 05:50:23 PM  
If you have old pictures of yourself before you were 18, can you be arrested for child porn?
 
2007-02-09 05:50:44 PM  
Fart_Machine
Just like Anna Nicole Smith!
 
G2V
2007-02-09 05:52:20 PM  
So next time your mom embarresses you with your girlfriend by showing pictures of you as a naked baby, put her in the slammer.
 
2007-02-09 05:52:45 PM  
Whoa. Here's ridiculous idiocy: the majority opinion states the the minors are not intellectually capable of using sound judgement because of their age, but that they CAN be held criminally liable????????

The thinking here is that by instilling this sense of "responsibility without representation" or even "responsibility without right" at a young age, you produce a generation of adults that are less likely to rise up and hang violators of the constitution.

It seems to be working. ;)

I've long thought that the voting age in my own country should be lowered to the minimum age at which you can be legally charged with a crime. Can't handle 12 year olds voting? Don't charge them with crime.

That simple.

No rights without responsibility. No responsibility without rights.

Oh, and BTW - you guys may want to reconsider denying the vote to American citizens who are also felons. This presents a huge loophole for political abuse.
 
2007-02-09 05:54:34 PM  
navydude
I urge all of you to mail this assclown judge (address given under the link to his name in the article)

KEEP THE F*CKIN GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR BEDROOMS.

I work the bastards that run the show and I can see how terribly wrong this is.

The judge was saying they might suffer psycological problems in the future from the pictures??

are you kidding me!!?!?!?!
what world do these people live in where they so overcome by political correctness that it's blinds every decision of every case brought before them.


might as well f*ckin' Chip us all and get it over with.


Agree with the sentiment, but my head still hurts from reading that.
 
2007-02-09 05:54:58 PM  
nightfire
Oh, and BTW - you guys may want to reconsider denying the vote to American citizens who are also felons. This presents a huge loophole for political abuse.
But then how do we legally disenfranchise the poor?
 
2007-02-09 05:55:13 PM  
defiancecp:

"Whoa. Here's ridiculous idiocy: the majority opinion states the the minors are not intellectually capable of using sound judgement because of their age, but that they CAN be held criminally liable????????
Idiocy."

I'm often flummoxed by that myself. If a 12-year old gets tried as an adult, does that mean he's old enough to buy beer?
 
2007-02-09 05:55:38 PM  
The Deep South shows us its underbelly once again.

Prosecute!
 
2007-02-09 05:55:47 PM  
Wow, I just realized... I bet one of the parents (probably the girl's, just guessing) turned them in, trying to get the other in trouble. Bet they're kicking themselves now that their kid has a criminal record...
 
2007-02-09 05:56:32 PM  
So I know I'm already on the bad side of the law for having pics of my kids as little naked tykes (the ever present "bathtub" pics).

But when I give them to the kids as they get their own families, will they be criminals for having pics of themselves?

Or will this only be if we all go to Florida, the state of fruits and nuts on the judges benches?

/Goddamn state needs its own SITE.
 
2007-02-09 05:56:37 PM  
trapped-in-CH
/insert something witty with lots of V's in it.

www.asmik-ace.com

Vagina.
 
2007-02-09 06:01:28 PM  
This was a 2 to 1 appeals court decision.
Judge Philip Padovano dissented.
It's nice to see that some people in Florida still have functioning brains. The other 2/3rds? That's why we have a Florida tag.
 
2007-02-09 06:02:41 PM  
nightfire
No rights without responsibility. No responsibility without rights

Change "rights" to "priviledges" and I'd agree. There are basic rights to which anyone should be entitled, such as not being starved, imprisoned without cause, etc.

By your argument, we should be able to indiscriminately slaughter anyone below voting age because they don't even have the right to live.
 
2007-02-09 06:03:05 PM  
I need to file to file a sexual harassment suit against my self...

I have been watching me pee for the past few days, and i am getting angry about it. Every time I tell my self to stop, I never listen...
 
2007-02-09 06:06:07 PM  
OK, so it's a federal crime. Explain to me, then, why I can find it here, here, here, and any number of other places. Shouldn't they be under fire for it?
 
2007-02-09 06:07:41 PM  
toast4269: Ok..

#1: Anna Nicole's Dead.

#2: American Justice has just died.

The trifecta is in play. Who shall be the third?


#3 Common Sense ?
 
2007-02-09 06:08:08 PM  
This situation begs me to ask the following question:

If a 16 year old person is tried as an adult for a crime, can they then have sex with someone 18+ yrs old?

In the eyes of the law they were considered an adult to be tried that way, so they must then be able to do adult things.

I am not interested in sex with minors, I just wondered if the judicial system is as two-faced as I think it is.
 
2007-02-09 06:09:15 PM  
Slictor
yeah I guess that was pretty bad wasn't it. :p

I just hope someone stands up for this unlucky couple.

God help them if they add them to the sex offender list.

You can pry my teenage g/f pics out of my cold dead hands.

/I really don't have any teenage g/f pics :p (black choppas!)
//happy husband and father
 
2007-02-09 06:11:37 PM  
From TFA:

And he said that transferring the images from a digital camera to a PC created innumerable problems: "The two computers (can) be hacked."

Wait, so, if I own something, such as a medication that I've been prescribed that happens to be Schedule II, I shouldn't be allowed to have it, because someone might steal it, and it would be illegal for them to possess the item?
 
2007-02-09 06:12:21 PM  
sevens1997

It's a really huge grey area. Here's the first man to be prosecuted under laws which criminalize lolicon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_Whorley
 
2007-02-09 06:13:24 PM  
At least the dissenter in the opinion is entirely reasonable and logical in in statements. The INTENT was to keep them private, therefore no law is being violated. That they sent them over a computer, and those computers could be hacked, reading the excerpt of the majority, seems to be their overriding basis for their judgment. Well, by that, if they took Polaroids of themselves and locked them up, does the fact that someone COULD break in and steal them fall into the same category?
 
2007-02-09 06:13:49 PM  
Welcome to the United Stupidity of America...
 
2007-02-09 06:14:17 PM  
These kids are nothing more than sex offenders who should be treated as such.

The letter of the law is quite clear, and they broke the law. I wouldn't be suprised if the "boyfriend" was involved in some kind of plans to distribute the picturs of his "girlfriend" all around. They are both making child porn and should probably go to federal prison for ten to twenty.

But I say bag 'em tag 'em and put em on the peepee touchers list.

Plus I'm sure this judge saved this young girls life cuz now she won't get pregnat and maybe they learned a lesson.

Finaly florida does something right
 
2007-02-09 06:14:29 PM  
But, but but.. FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!
 
2007-02-09 06:15:39 PM  
Vaylon Kenadell
sevens1997
Does anime count? Because I have Elfen Lied and Puni Puni Poemy on my shelf, and if that's illegal contraband, I would like to know.

It is now considered a Federal crime to own or distribute lolicon.


Really? Because Amazon has both of those titles for sale.
 
2007-02-09 06:16:49 PM  
Ed Grubermann

If the anime or manga fails the Miller test for obscenity, then it's illegal.
 
2007-02-09 06:16:57 PM  
Yeah, this is why when I was 18, and my 17 year old girlfriend sent me photos, after 10 minutes, anything that was not legal was completely destroyed from my computer.
 
2007-02-09 06:19:21 PM  
Uh oh. I used to give a teenager handjobs. Several times a day. Ten once.

/I've said too much.
 
2007-02-09 06:20:41 PM  
soupgoblin:
 
This situation begs me to ask the following question:

If a 16 year old person is tried as an adult for a crime, can they then have sex with someone 18+ yrs old?



FredGarvin asks why they shouldn't be able to buy beer. And nightfire suggests that they should likewise be given the vote.

All great points about this huge-ass can of worms. Texas and Florida (obvious?), to cite two examples, have indeed tried 12- or 13-year-olds as adults. Double- and triple-standards out the wazoo...
 
2007-02-09 06:22:21 PM  
thegoodthebadthedumb: Remember this next time you feel that you want to "kill all the lawyers": For every case where there's a lawyer bringing some ridiculous lawsuit, there is another lawyer on the other side fighting against him.

/lawyer


Then kill HALF the lawyers!
 
2007-02-09 06:23:58 PM  
Vaylon Kenadell

Interesting, but that guy had characters performing actual sexual acts. Elfen Lied has nudity, but that's as far as it goes, erotica-wise. My question is, does that fall within acceptable limits? If not, why haven't retailers been forced to pull it from their shelves? I can walk into Suncoast at any time and find it. Hell, that's where I bought it.

Where exactly is the line? Is it even well-defined?
 
2007-02-09 06:24:07 PM  
Just in case no one has already quoted this:
"In addition, the statute was intended to protect minors like appellant and her co-defendant from their own lack of judgment."

How is this protecting them again?

At least they seemed to go leniently on her, only giving her probation. I didn't know that was an option in a case like this (I thought there were crazy mandatory minimum laws for child pornography).

/Why so many child porn articles on Fark recently?
 
2007-02-09 06:25:47 PM  
Oh, and also:
"Mere production of these videos or pictures may also result in psychological trauma to the teenagers involved."

The answer of course being to subject them to the psychological trauma of the American legal system.
 
2007-02-09 06:26:34 PM  
Vaylon Kenadell
If the anime or manga fails the Miller test for obscenity, then it's illegal.

Any image can fail the Miller test. Any image of anything. All you need is the right collection of "average people".

The idea of "obscenity" is laughable in the first place. Why is obscene material illegal in the first place? That's a violation of the First Amendment. Period.
 
2007-02-09 06:26:43 PM  
sevens1997

Interesting, but that guy had characters performing actual sexual acts. Elfen Lied has nudity, but that's as far as it goes, erotica-wise. My question is, does that fall within acceptable limits? If not, why haven't retailers been forced to pull it from their shelves? I can walk into Suncoast at any time and find it. Hell, that's where I bought it.

Where exactly is the line? Is it even well-defined?


I suppose Elfen Lied has serious artistic merit; therefore it passes the Miller test, is not considered obscene, and is thus not illegal (for now). I have no doubt that one day in the future, unscrupulous politicians may try to eliminate even simple nudity from animation because "it's for the children."

The line is the Miller test of obscenity. If it passes, it's OK. If it fails, it's obscene (and therefore illegal). But you're right, it's not well-defined at times.
 
2007-02-09 06:28:31 PM  
Sid_6.7:
 
From TFA:

And he said that transferring the images from a digital camera to a PC created innumerable problems: "The two computers (can) be hacked."

Wait, so, if I own something, such as a medication that I've been prescribed that happens to be Schedule II, I shouldn't be allowed to have it, because someone might steal it, and it would be illegal for them to possess the item?



It would appear that way, based on this decision. My head asplode...

I hope this case gets taken pro bono as far as it has to go to be overturned. The number of idiotic (though "logical") implications that this decision appears to bring seems to be incalculable.
 
2007-02-09 06:28:35 PM  
Wow, according to this I was a child pornographer.

/had many photos of own teenage exploits...
//probably still on a disk somewhere...
///why are the police on my porch now?
 
2007-02-09 06:28:38 PM  
Ed Grubermann

Any image can fail the Miller test. Any image of anything. All you need is the right collection of "average people".

The idea of "obscenity" is laughable in the first place. Why is obscene material illegal in the first place? That's a violation of the First Amendment. Period.


You're preaching to the choir.

Governments should not be in the business of enforcing morality.

Still, unscrupulous politicians will say or do anything if it garners them more power, and unfortunately forcing morality onto people who don't need or want it is one of those things.
 
2007-02-09 06:31:45 PM  
How is this protecting them again?

It protects them in precisely the same way that stoning women for infidelity does.

It's not as severe, to be sure, but people have been abusing the word "protect" for as long as humans have been able to conceptualize mass-subjugation.
 
2007-02-09 06:35:21 PM  
In addition, the statute was intended to protect minors like appellant and her co-defendant from their own lack of judgment...

They're not mature enough to use good judgement and decide what they were doing was wrong, but they're mature enough to be charged with the crime? If they "didn't know any better" as the judges say over and over, then why should they be held at fault?

And the hypothetical situations they keep describing are irrelevant. The pictures might have been seen by someone else in the future. The computer might have been hacked. Space aliens might take the pictures and put them on an intergalactic billboard. So...?

You might kill someone with a gun. You might kill someone with a knife. You might run someone over with your car. You might kill someone with your inane stupidity. You might slip, fall down the stairs, slide right out the front door, slide right into some old lady who hits her head and dies. I didn't realize that you could arrest someone for something that might possibly at some point in the future maybe happen. Thoughtcrime please?
 
2007-02-09 06:36:47 PM  
Heahengel
/Why so many child porn articles on Fark recently?

Because the hysteria involved in these stories demonstrates the insanity of the current judicial mindset of the nation. The mere idea that two teens can be arrested for taking consensual pictures of themselves engaged in consensual acts shows how out of control the justice system has become.

Child porn legislation is the razor's edge being used to shred the constitution. Most people agree that CP is a horrible thing and they want to see it go away. They allow the legal system to emplace insane laws to combat CP, laws that violate your rights and give the government very easily abused powers, without complaint because it will be used to rid us of this foul scourge. And then these laws will, as they always are, be turned towards others who are not harming anyone. And the precedent for their use will be well established. Government doesn't even worry about people objecting to these laws because no one want to be seen defending pedos and they know it.

There are reasonable solutions to the problem. But we don't like reasonable solutions. They take too much effort to craft and enforce. Politicians like simple, quick solutions. Unfortunately they don't care what innocent bystanders get caught up in the crossfire.
 
2007-02-09 06:36:57 PM  
Vaylon Kenadell

I suppose Elfen Lied has serious artistic merit; therefore it passes the Miller test, is not considered obscene, and is thus not illegal (for now). I have no doubt that one day in the future, unscrupulous politicians may try to eliminate even simple nudity from animation because "it's for the children."

A reasonable explanation. I can go with that. Though I don't know how they would enforce such laws, considering how popular it is and how many people own it. They could hit retailers, but what about people who've already bought it?

I've never heard of the Miller test. I'm overdue for a new GIS, anyway.
 
Displayed 50 of 230 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report