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.

(Some Guy)   Third Circuit Court of Appeals to decide whether children can be charged with possession of child pornography for having naked pictures of themselves   (post-gazette.com) divider line 207
    More: Asinine, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, child pornography, possessions, appeals court, federal appeals court, lower courts, MaryJo Miller, motor vehicles  
•       •       •

9933 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Jan 2010 at 9:13 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



207 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-01-16 02:59:47 PM
Why not just cut to the endgame? Make it illegal to take any picture of someone under 18 for any reason. Make it retroactive. Then just line our borders with tall fences tipped with razor wire, so we're all jailed.

Yeah, we'd all be criminals, but it would also solve the illegal immigration problem.
 
2010-01-16 03:16:58 PM
Lockup all parents and pediatricians while you're at it.
 
2010-01-16 03:19:46 PM
Archie Goodwin: Lockup all parents and pediatricians while you're at it.

Clicked here to add pediatricians.... too late.
 
2010-01-16 03:20:10 PM
Suppose they should dig up our parents and toss their ass in jail for all those bathtub photos while they're at it.
This shiat's getting ridiculous.
 
2010-01-16 03:29:03 PM
Guess I'd better 86 that pic of me at six months on my blue blankey.
 
2010-01-16 03:46:42 PM
At any given moment, most of us could be arrested for laws we didn't even know we broke. No sarcasm.
 
2010-01-16 03:50:06 PM
Axias: At any given moment, most of us could be arrested for laws we didn't even know we broke. No sarcasm.

If you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.
/right?
//guys??
 
2010-01-16 05:52:07 PM
Good. Let's also jail them for looking at themselves naked in the mirror. That's like viewing live child porn.
 
2010-01-16 05:53:35 PM
please don't be Pennsylvania!

*reads article*

dammit!
 
2010-01-16 06:51:58 PM
This has been a huge problem for a while. Reason had an excellent article on the trend a few months ago.

Bottom line: Thanks to the farked-up incentives of the current system, cops and prosecutors have every reason in the world to be raging assholes. And so most of them are- either criminals themselves or they cover for their friends who are. Getting rid of their near-total immunity would be a good start. Not voting them into higher office would also help.
 
2010-01-16 06:53:16 PM
Woops. Link farked up. That last sentence should go here.
 
2010-01-16 07:08:19 PM
Weaver95: please don't be Pennsylvania!

*reads article*

dammit!


Yeah, I've been cringing while following this story in the local news for the past week. Pretty soon we're gonna need our own tag.

/wouldn't be the first time PA qualifies itself for one, though, we have some pretty dumb laws
 
2010-01-16 07:10:00 PM
I don't see why this ruling on this is "asinine." If the MySpace generation wants to take naked pictures of themselves and send them to others, they need to be willing to face consequences.
 
2010-01-16 07:14:36 PM
While we're at it, let's make sure that teenage masturbation is prosecuted as child molestation. Our sex offender lists need to be larger, to protect the children.
 
2010-01-16 07:17:27 PM
The sad thing is, all the "while we're at it, we might as well ban..." comments are not entirely implausible.
 
2010-01-16 08:01:02 PM
Sum Dum Gai: While we're at it, let's make sure that teenage masturbation is prosecuted as child molestation. Our sex offender lists need to be larger, to protect the children.

scienceblogs.com[!]
 
2010-01-16 08:05:26 PM
Weaver95: *reads article*

I read the headline and went "Gotta be Pennsylvania..."

GreenAdder: If the MySpace generation wants to take naked pictures of themselves and send them to others, they need to be willing to face consequences.

Ever heard of a crime where the victim and perpetrator is the same person?
 
2010-01-16 08:06:53 PM
WhyteRaven74: Ever heard of a crime where the victim and perpetrator is the same person?

Suicide is illegal in many states. Figure that one out, because I can't.
 
2010-01-16 08:08:49 PM
WhyteRaven74: Weaver95: *reads article*

I read the headline and went "Gotta be Pennsylvania..."


my hope for a reasonable solution to this went down the tubes.
 
2010-01-16 08:09:42 PM
GreenAdder: I don't see why this ruling on this is "asinine." If the MySpace generation wants to take naked pictures of themselves and send them to others, they need to be willing to face consequences.

Did you read the article?
 
2010-01-16 08:09:53 PM
GreenAdder: WhyteRaven74: Ever heard of a crime where the victim and perpetrator is the same person?

Suicide is illegal in many states. Figure that one out, because I can't.


Its just a law ahead of its time.

Once the technology to bring back to life has been perfected, we'll do so in the case of suicides, then we'll put them on trial for committing suicide, and, if the prosecution does their job right, they'll be executed for it.
 
2010-01-16 08:10:30 PM
Weaver95: please don't be Pennsylvania!

*reads article*

dammit!


Do you have any idea how humiliating it is to live in northeast PA?

I mean, besides the obvious.
 
2010-01-16 08:16:06 PM
GreenAdder: Suicide is illegal in many states. Figure that one out, because I can't.

Yeah I know and yeah, can't figure it out either.

SilentStrider: they'll be executed for it.

That is so very Running Man.
 
2010-01-16 08:17:51 PM
WhyteRaven74: Ever heard of a crime where the victim and perpetrator is the same person?

Marijuana possession?
 
2010-01-16 08:28:51 PM
SilentStrider: Once the technology to bring back to life has been perfected, we'll do so in the case of suicides, then we'll put them on trial for committing suicide, and, if the prosecution does their job right, they'll be executed for it.

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2010-01-16 08:36:08 PM
SilentStrider:
Once the technology to bring back to life has been perfected, we'll do so in the case of suicides, then we'll put them on trial for committing suicide, and, if the prosecution does their job right, they'll be executed for it.


We don't need to waste all that money on a trial. They're zombies; we just shoot them all in the head. On pay-per-view. Win-win for the state.
 
2010-01-16 08:39:47 PM
It should be a felony to supply minors with mirrors.
 
2010-01-16 08:44:09 PM
cryinoutloud: We don't need to waste all that money on a trial. They're zombies; we just shoot them all in the head. On pay-per-view. Win-win for the state.

You can't just shoot them in the head. That's not entertaining enough. You need build-up. You need one of those nifty 1000fps cameras, so after the shooting you can replay the head exploding in super slow motion. In fact, let's get like 3 of those cameras so we can show it from multiple angles.

You need celebrity guest hosts and guest executioners. Maybe hire Bruce Campbell, for instance. If we're going to make zombie-killin' into entertainment, you need to think showmanship.

Nobody's going to tune in for a simple "lineup, bang, splat" routine.
 
2010-01-16 08:57:34 PM
Bucky Katt: It should be a felony to supply minors with mirrors.

one teenage girl (or boy, for that matter) could potentially bring down ALL of western society. they take a couple pictures of themselves in provocative poses, maybe show a little skin. Then they email the results to every elected official, every judge and every cop they can find.

According to the law, that would make ALL of those people pedophiles. To include the kid in question. how's that for cool?
 
2010-01-16 09:15:20 PM
It's just a matter of time before school yearbooks look like phone books.
 
2010-01-16 09:17:09 PM
Well, they could be holdin' for someone, right?

/Back row near to loo please.
// No peanuts.
/// The broken dinner tray is fine.
 
2010-01-16 09:17:27 PM
RodneyToady: Why not just cut to the endgame? Make it illegal to take any picture of someone under 18 for any reason. Make it retroactive. Then just line our borders with tall fences tipped with razor wire, so we're all jailed.

Yeah, we'd all be criminals, but it would also solve the illegal immigration problem.


Right now a judge is nodding its head in silent agreement.
 
2010-01-16 09:18:01 PM
oldebayer: Guess I'd better 86 that pic of me at six months on my blue blankey.

img51.imageshack.us
 
2010-01-16 09:18:02 PM
Weaver95: one teenage girl (or boy, for that matter) could potentially bring down ALL of western society. they take a couple pictures of themselves in provocative poses, maybe show a little skin. Then they email the results to every elected official, every judge and every cop they can find.

According to the law, that would make ALL of those people pedophiles. To include the kid in question. how's that for cool?


Wish I was 15 again. Or hell, 10; I'd still have found it immensely funny, and I wouldn't even have to worry about being charged with anything.
 
2010-01-16 09:18:15 PM
Yeah, let's make them registered sex offenders and ruin any chance of them getting a decent job or having a normal life.
 
2010-01-16 09:18:18 PM
Pics or it didn't happen...
 
2010-01-16 09:19:45 PM
I am not expecting a sensible ruling on this.
 
2010-01-16 09:20:14 PM
Weaver95: Bucky Katt: It should be a felony to supply minors with mirrors.

one teenage girl (or boy, for that matter) could potentially bring down ALL of western society. they take a couple pictures of themselves in provocative poses, maybe show a little skin. Then they email the results to every elected official, every judge and every cop they can find.

According to the law, that would make ALL of those people pedophiles. To include the kid in question. how's that for cool?


Might I suggest you start at the top, and work your way down. there's a few very-easy-to-find email addresses for the whitehouse, then of course there's the senate and house memeberships which make contact emails easily available...
 
2010-01-16 09:24:22 PM
Figure the whole "case" is so the legal eagles can ogle the damned photos in the first place!

/and add them to their collection
 
2010-01-16 09:25:40 PM
TheMega: Figure the whole "case" is so the legal eagles can ogle the damned photos in the first place!

Of course, they need to look at the pictures, you know, for research purposes.
 
2010-01-16 09:26:29 PM
The idea of it being illegal to be possession of a digital image is inherently ridiculous.
 
2010-01-16 09:26:35 PM
You know under these ridiculous laws, I'm going to have a five year old run around the neighborhood in a mini speedo and have all my neighbors arrested for watching child pornography.
 
2010-01-16 09:27:15 PM
If it was educating the newly-blossomed women that using sex appeal to get attention or gifts isn't necessarily the way you want to go through life, it'd be different.
No, they're just sex offenders, not opportunistic. Or is the term empowered?
 
2010-01-16 09:29:14 PM
Lando Lincoln: The idea of it being illegal to be possession of a digital image is inherently ridiculous.

That's basically true, yes. It's too hard to prove intent to get it- even child pornography, which no one can argue is horrible and gross- how hard would it be to email some to someone you don't like and ruin their lives over it?

They should focus on prosecuting those who make images that exploit children (real child pornography, not a teenage girl sending her boyfriend a picture of her in her bra) and focus efforts there- and stop with the witch hunts.
 
2010-01-16 09:29:21 PM
The case involves photos of two 12 year-old-girls in training bras, and a 16-year-old wrapped in a towel with her breasts exposed as she leaves a shower. The latter photo was central at yesterday's hearing before the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Can someone start with how this is pornography? My understanding of child pornography is that pictures have to be PORNOGRAPHIC. In other words, pictures of children naked is NOT A CRIME. Please see the works of Jock Sturges before you respond.
 
2010-01-16 09:30:47 PM
GreenAdder: I don't see why this ruling on this is "asinine." If the MySpace generation wants to take naked pictures of themselves and send them to others, they need to be willing to face consequences.

Kohlberg's stages of moral development

10 Print("its illegal because its wrong because ")
20 Goto 10
 
2010-01-16 09:31:30 PM
GreenAdder: cryinoutloud: We don't need to waste all that money on a trial. They're zombies; we just shoot them all in the head. On pay-per-view. Win-win for the state.

You can't just shoot them in the head. That's not entertaining enough. You need build-up. You need one of those nifty 1000fps cameras, so after the shooting you can replay the head exploding in super slow motion. In fact, let's get like 3 of those cameras so we can show it from multiple angles.

You need celebrity guest hosts and guest executioners. Maybe hire Bruce Campbell, for instance. If we're going to make zombie-killin' into entertainment, you need to think showmanship.

Nobody's going to tune in for a simple "lineup, bang, splat" routine.


Let's not forget all those old school forms of punishment like crucifiction, burning at the stake, and boiling people in oil.
 
2010-01-16 09:31:40 PM
pbfcomics.com

/right click, "View Image"
 
2010-01-16 09:32:24 PM
Why are we wasting tax payer dollars on stupid shiat like this? Rather then prosecuting this stuff, it should be resolved with counseling for the underage person taking the naked pictures, and a smack upside the head for the person receiving them. Problem solved.
 
2010-01-16 09:33:30 PM
GreenAdder: Suicide is illegal in many states. Figure that one out, because I can't.

Illegal discharge of a firearm
Illegal disposal of a body
Dumping of hazardous biomatter
Criminal Trespass
 
Displayed 50 of 207 comments

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



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report