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.

(RYOT.org)   California's new "Erase Law" will let minors delete embarrassing posts from the Internet for good before they get screwed out of jobs because of them. If only the law were for adults too   (ryot.org) divider line 102
    More: Misc, online, Googles  
•       •       •

3783 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Mar 2014 at 9:45 PM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-03 10:48:20 PM

Callous: You can delete a tweet, you can delete a Facebook post.  If someone took a screen shot before it was deleted and posted it elsewhere Twitter and FB can't do anything about that.  Now the question is if CA would try to hold FB or Twitter responsible for for a screenshot of their site or an image that originated on their site that was posted elsewhere.


The actual text of the law explicitly covers this.

Not only would FB or Twitter not be responsible for that, they wouldn't even be responsible if  another Facebook or Twitter user republished the content in question.

Here's the actual bill text.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id= 20 1320140SB568 


(b) An operator or a third party is not required to erase or otherwise eliminate, or to enable erasure or elimination of, content or information in any of the following circumstances:
(1) Any other provision of federal or state law requires the operator or third party to maintain the content or information.
(2) The content or information was stored on or posted to the operator's Internet Web site, online service, online application, or mobile application by a third party other than the minor, who is a registered user, including any content or information posted by the registered user that was stored, republished, or reposted by the third party.
 
2014-03-03 10:48:24 PM

OgreMagi: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.

Something being impossible or not legally enforceable has not stopped the politicians in this state before.  Why would they care now?


Care to elaborate?
 
2014-03-03 10:50:12 PM

China White Tea: It's unenforceable, feel-good bullshiat that does absolutely nothing useful.


Absolutely, agreed.  I'm just glad that it's not the kind of feel good bullshiat that's going to make me do extra work.
I'll probably have to sit in a couple of meetings and tell the same people multiple times that what we already have is compliant, but other than that not much will need to be done.  Yay!
 
2014-03-03 10:54:07 PM
I am not an IT person but if you need to erase something on the internet you simply hit ctrl+d.

The Apple folks need to press ctrl+open apple+reset to erase internet stuff.
 
2014-03-03 11:00:42 PM

serial_crusher: China White Tea: It's unenforceable, feel-good bullshiat that does absolutely nothing useful.

Absolutely, agreed.  I'm just glad that it's not the kind of feel good bullshiat that's going to make me do extra work.
I'll probably have to sit in a couple of meetings and tell the same people multiple times that what we already have is compliant, but other than that not much will need to be done.  Yay!


Do you gentleman realize "feel good bullshiat" is what the majority of Americans survive upon?

Do you realize how little the average American has left to hope for?

We where suppose to be the "Leaders of the free world" my friend...
 
2014-03-03 11:02:04 PM

Sean M: Have any of these legislators ever used the internet for anything other than porn?  Google Cache? Archive.org?  and I'm sure there's others.


Don't forget the Waybackmachine webpage (http://archive.org/web/ ).  That is also a treasure trove of past mistakes:

oi61.tinypic.com
 
2014-03-03 11:02:26 PM

TheDirtyNacho: Fano: Warlordtrooper: SevenizGud: Shall we allow them to delete their embarrassingly bad grades, also?

Because nothing says "successful policy" like indoctrinating our kids into a culture of 'poor decisions have no consequences".

Not that I agree with this law at all but its a reactionary law stemming from a real social problem.  Just because actions have consequences doesn't mean those consequences should be of a nuclear proportion.  It seems like more than ever before the a persons minor transgressions from being a dumb kid are following them around for their entire life.  Yes actions should have consequences but the consequences should be proportional to the action.

I do feel sorry for kids today. Prior to the internet, your "permanent record" was a bullshiat threat made up by teachers to make you straighten up. There were plenty of times there wasn't enough proof that a kid did something, but they knew the kid did enough to tell them you can't do that sort of thing.

Now you can get in permanent trouble for things that used to be quietly forgiven after a stern talking to. Imagine, how political candidates will work in 20 years. Will we be so jaded that being caught with ultraporn and murderhatedeathkill speech is par for the course or will it devolve even worse into Idiotocracy/Jerry Springer hooting and gotcha games.


It's as if we'll have to mature as a civilization in order to continue to function.

Perhaps its not so bad after all.


I guess those pre-teens better get all mature and bootstrappy in a hurry, with no sassmouth, either.
 
2014-03-03 11:05:42 PM

nyseattitude: Do you gentleman realize "feel good bullshiat" is what the majority of Americans survive upon?

Do you realize how little the average American has left to hope for?

We where suppose to be the "Leaders of the free world" my friend...


...I'm sure you had a point hidden in there somew... actually, no, I'm not.
 
2014-03-03 11:21:01 PM
Just from a practical perspective, sometimes this kind of thing isn't intended to be effective in itself, but does prompt action on the part of the targeted industries. In short, it's a warning shot- come up with better systems to protect kids who do dumb shiat (like kids do), or face potentially less palatable rules.

These industries want kids to use their services; they're worth a ton of money. But they'll have to address some of these concerns or face real regulation.
 
2014-03-03 11:23:59 PM
I'd rather pass a law that prohibits anyone under the age of 18 from accessing the internet.
 
2014-03-03 11:24:54 PM

super_grass: God-is-a-Taco: super_grass: [img.fark.net image 177x278]

truly epic 4chan meme, bro

You saying it like half of the mee-mees on Fark aren't stolen from Reddit, which was stolen from 4chan, which was stolen from Fark.


Meta.
 
2014-03-03 11:25:11 PM
Most of Traci Lords' videos were found to be illegal a good decade before the internet flourished, and twice as long before video digitization and online distribution became practical.

Therefore those videos must not be anywhere on the internet, right?
 
2014-03-03 11:26:35 PM

nyseattitude: OgreMagi: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.

Something being impossible or not legally enforceable has not stopped the politicians in this state before.  Why would they care now?

Care to elaborate?


California has tried to pass bullet serialization bills several times.  The only problem is that no one can demonstrate how to do it in production.  The patent holder has demonstrated how to do it on a work bench by hand one bullet at a time but not in anything close to a production environment.

It's at least a 4 step process.  Laser etch the serial number on the side and back of the bullet, two locations are required so that number is visible on the outside and hidden on the inside of the completed cartridge to prevent easy removal of the serial number, Laser etch the serial number on the inside and outside of the casing, two locations required for the same reason as above.  Then bring the correct casing and bullet together so they match billions of times a year.  Then put them in a box that lists all the serial numbers of the bullets on the packaging.  If that process gets 1 round out of sync at anytime the whole thing is for naught as any bullets or casings collected at a crime scene can't be trusted.  Or there will have to be massive production shutdowns and recalls until they are sure what's going out is accurate again.

The patent holder has no idea how to do this.  He just wants the law passed so that the manufacturers have to figure out how to do it and then pay him.

Oh and it would also outlaw reloading because your hand loads wouldn't be properly serialized.
 
2014-03-03 11:37:24 PM
Never, ever type anything into a website, chat client or forum that you wouldn't say to 20,000,000 over a 10,000 watt PA system at noon, in broad daylight.
 
2014-03-03 11:39:08 PM
*giggle fit*

*gasp!*
 
2014-03-03 11:40:56 PM

natgab: Don't forget the Waybackmachine webpage (http://archive.org/web/ ).  That is also a treasure trove of past mistakes:


robots.txt
 
2014-03-03 11:43:48 PM
Translation: they're trying to see if it's possible so politicians can find a way to delete their embarrassing posts from the internet.

Good thing it's not.
 
2014-03-03 11:51:00 PM

nyseattitude: OgreMagi: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.

Something being impossible or not legally enforceable has not stopped the politicians in this state before.  Why would they care now?

Care to elaborate?


Unlike almost every other state (except Wisconsin and maybe a couple others), California's age of consent is 18 with no close-in-age exceptions. Two 17-year-olds having consensual sex with each other can both be prosecuted for a misdemeanor in California.
 
2014-03-03 11:52:39 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-03 11:57:48 PM

Nem Wan: nyseattitude: OgreMagi: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.

Something being impossible or not legally enforceable has not stopped the politicians in this state before.  Why would they care now?

Care to elaborate?

Unlike almost every other state (except Wisconsin and maybe a couple others), California's age of consent is 18 with no close-in-age exceptions. Two 17-year-olds having consensual sex with each other can both be prosecuted for a misdemeanor in California.


Callous: nyseattitude: OgreMagi: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.

Something being impossible or not legally enforceable has not stopped the politicians in this state before.  Why would they care now?

Care to elaborate?

California has tried to pass bullet serialization bills several times.  The only problem is that no one can demonstrate how to do it in production.  The patent holder has demonstrated how to do it on a work bench by hand one bullet at a time but not in anything close to a production environment.

It's at least a 4 step process.  Laser etch the serial number on the side and back of the bullet, two locations are required so that number is visible on the outside and hidden on the inside of the completed cartridge to prevent easy removal of the serial number, Laser etch the serial number on the inside and outside of the casing, two locations required for the same reason as above.  Then bring the correct casing and bullet together so they match billions of times a year.  Then put them in a box that lists all the serial numbers of the bullets on the packaging.  If that process gets 1 round out of sync at anytime the whole thing is for naught as any bullets or casings collected at a crime scene can't be trusted.  Or there will have to be massive production shutdowns and recalls until they are sure what's going out is accurate again.

The patent holder has no idea how to do this.  He just wants the law passed so that the manufacturers have to figure out how to do it and then pay him.

Oh and it would also outlaw reloading because your hand loads wouldn't be properly serialized.


Thank you
 
2014-03-04 12:06:20 AM
Problem: Tween girl has naked selfies on Facebook.

PROPER Solution: Beat parents severely with baseball bat for giving her a phone that not only takes pictures but also has a button that instantly posts said photos directly to Facebook.

99% of the time any problem with a kid on the internet STARTED from a parent NOT BEING A PROPER PARENT. The other 1% is a kid that is way smarter then his parents just being a little shiat because he can.
 
2014-03-04 12:12:57 AM

generallyso: FTA: All websites, including social media giants Facebook and Twitter, will now be required to give those under 18 an opportunity to delete harmful photos and posts.

Because if there's one thing California needs its legislature to spend time on, it's unenforceable laws.


It's better than the alternative. At least this way they're not actively hurting anyone.
 
2014-03-04 12:31:05 AM

Zavulon: generallyso: FTA: All websites, including social media giants Facebook and Twitter, will now be required to give those under 18 an opportunity to delete harmful photos and posts.

Because if there's one thing California needs its legislature to spend time on, it's unenforceable laws.

It's better than the alternative. At least this way they're not actively hurting anyone.


They're still wasting taxpayer money.
 
2014-03-04 12:36:13 AM
All websites, including social media giants Facebook and Twitter, will now be required to give those under 18 an opportunity to delete harmful photos and posts.

I can see where this will fail immediately.

It's permissive, not mandatory. The duty falls upon the minor to request the photos to be removed, not upon the media provider to inform the minor that such photos or posts exist and ask if they wish them to be removed. The only duty imposed on the provider is that the minor be advised that such opportunity exists, which duty could be (and likely will be) achieved by legal wording buried in the TOS.

Oh, and there's a handy out, in case you're wondering how reposts would be affected: They're not. The relevant language:

(d) An operator shall be deemed compliant with this section if:
(1) It renders the content or information posted by the minor user no longer visible to other users of the service and the public even if the content or information remains on the operator's servers in some form.
(2)  Despite making the original posting by the minor user invisible, it remains visible because a third party has copied the posting or reposted the content or information posted by the minor.

So, this bill is feel-good b/s that imposes no duty on anyone, can be enforced by no one, and is, essentially, worthless. Full text of the bill and the incorporation into California's Business and Professions Code here: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=2 0 1320140SB568
 
2014-03-04 01:08:54 AM
Who would possibly think that requiring the largest internet companies to have a way to remove things permanently from the internet is a good idea? Does no one stop for a second, think, and say "aha, you almost got me there, sneaky government! Bad government, no censorship for you!" The government is constantly looking for ways to hang you, stop giving them rope no matter how innocent or beneficial sounding they make it sound.
 
2014-03-04 01:09:42 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com
Why didn't the former Governor think of this?
 
2014-03-04 01:22:09 AM
Am I wrong, or do there appear to be people in here operating under the belief that it is possible to delete something from the internet?
 
2014-03-04 01:27:10 AM

cyberspacedout: Zavulon: generallyso: FTA: All websites, including social media giants Facebook and Twitter, will now be required to give those under 18 an opportunity to delete harmful photos and posts.

Because if there's one thing California needs its legislature to spend time on, it's unenforceable laws.

It's better than the alternative. At least this way they're not actively hurting anyone.

They're still wasting taxpayer money.


Once they're elected they get paid no matter what. They're incapable of rational, constructive legislation, so the next best option is ineffectual buffoonery.
 
2014-03-04 02:04:47 AM
Gyrfalcon:   It's permissive, not mandatory. The duty falls upon the minor to request the photos to be removed, not upon the media provider to inform the minor that such photos or posts exist and ask if they wish them to be removed.

We agree it is bad policy, maybe not for the same reasons.  Surely it would be as bad or worse if there were a "duty ... upon ... the ... media provider to inform the minor that such photos or posts exist"?  Because in that case FB and the others would have to hire people to search through their archives and find the objectionable content.  How on earth could they find a bunch of underemployed malcontents willing to do this?

The legislatures in others of the United States do pay attention to what CA does, especially in the area of internet regulation.

How is law enforcement or a court supposed to determine whether a site is directed at people in the target range 13-17?  Teens like some of the same things we do.  Also, when federal privacy law began regulating sites aimed at children under 13, it was messy to comply and most sites avoided compliance or ignored the law -- some to their lasting regret.  The category of child-specific sites that comply with the federal guidelines is narrow.  This law is a desperate attempt by parents to create a category of teen sites, or a teen section of FB et al., to counter the fact that new free communications services for teens spawn faster than parents can follow.  They want to know where the teens are and what they are doing online.

Teenagers.  They have near-zero political power because they can't vote.  Parents will vote for just about think they think will help them have more control over the teens because to them, that's good parenting.  Public (excuse me 'government' as rightist independents now prefer) schools and their advocates also like this kind of thing. These are the same folks who, when not-so-little Timmy gets out of line, figure calling 911 will teach him a good lesson.
 
2014-03-04 02:07:30 AM
Are California and Iowa trying to out-stupid each other?
 
2014-03-04 02:22:43 AM

Gyrfalcon: All websites, including social media giants Facebook and Twitter, will now be required to give those under 18 an opportunity to delete harmful photos and posts.

I can see where this will fail immediately.

It's permissive, not mandatory. The duty falls upon the minor to request the photos to be removed, not upon the media provider to inform the minor that such photos or posts exist and ask if they wish them to be removed. The only duty imposed on the provider is that the minor be advised that such opportunity exists, which duty could be (and likely will be) achieved by legal wording buried in the TOS.

Oh, and there's a handy out, in case you're wondering how reposts would be affected: They're not. The relevant language:

(d) An operator shall be deemed compliant with this section if:
(1) It renders the content or information posted by the minor user no longer visible to other users of the service and the public even if the content or information remains on the operator's servers in some form.
(2)  Despite making the original posting by the minor user invisible, it remains visible because a third party has copied the posting or reposted the content or information posted by the minor.

So, this bill is feel-good b/s that imposes no duty on anyone, can be enforced by no one, and is, essentially, worthless. Full text of the bill and the incorporation into California's Business and Professions Code here: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=2 0 1320140SB568


Even more fun: I see nothing in the bill offhand that would make the following scenario non-compliant:
User posts
User requests post be removed
Operator flags post publicly as being flagged for removal by author.
Operator requests verification that user is, in fact, a minor.
Third party sees the request, screencaps/quotes post.
Operator removes post.

After reading the bill, I think it's passing more for the idiotic advertising restrictions involved(Section i of the bill).
 
2014-03-04 02:22:53 AM

DigitalCoffee: Problem: Tween girl has naked selfies on Facebook.

PROPER Solution: Beat parents severely with baseball bat for giving her a phone that not only takes pictures but also has a button that instantly posts said photos directly to Facebook.

99% of the time any problem with a kid on the internet STARTED from a parent NOT BEING A PROPER PARENT. The other 1% is a kid that is way smarter then his parents just being a little shiat because he can.


*Ding Ding*  Winner
 
2014-03-04 02:27:50 AM

Sticky Hands: seems like it would be easier to just ban minors from the internet.


I have argued this for years. Just ban them.

Let each education district have a intranet for students but never ever let them on the internet.  Seems such a simple solution.

Personally I do not like playing online games with children, so keep them away.
 
2014-03-04 03:21:04 AM
Young people do stupid things on the internet?  Last night I saw a girl (woman?) who's been 18 for a whole two weeks naked on a public cam site.  If its not bad enough that she's still in high school, she pulled out a bottle of vodka and started downing it.  She ended up saying her real name and the high school she goes to and talked about some of her teachers in an inappropriate way.  If anyone got a recording of that there could be serious consequences.  I think rather than than laws, we really need to teach cause and effect, responsibility, and consequences.
 
2014-03-04 03:30:21 AM
More unnecessary legislation. If you want your embarrassing photos taken off the internet just call the cyber police, have them back traced, and for anyone who refuses to delete them consequences will never be the same.

/RIP Crazy man
 
2014-03-04 03:49:14 AM

4tehsnowflakes: How is law enforcement or a court supposed to determine whether a site is directed at people in the target range 13-17? Teens like some of the same things we do. Also, when federal privacy law began regulating sites aimed at children under 13, it was messy to comply and most sites avoided compliance or ignored the law -- some to their lasting regret.


Well, that's the thing. There is no requirement here for anyone to determine anything. All that has to happen is for the site to post an alert somewhere that says "Any minor may have embarassing content removed if desired; click here" and they're covered. There's no requirement for the site to ban, restrict, or even notice if there are kids there--just let them know that if THEY want to, they can have content removed. After that, it's all on the kids to have the stuff taken off. There's no penalty for failure to remove the content if the minor does not request it; and there is no penalty if the site removes requested content but leaves archived, reposted or 3d-party posts of the same content.

It's a b/s regulation with no compliance required by anyone, except that it permissively allows minors to ask that naked selfies be taken off because mommy and daddy thought it's possible to do that; while at the same time acknowledging that the site has no control over whether someone else posted it. It's legal semantobabble.
 
2014-03-04 04:01:10 AM

Camus27: Young people do stupid things on the internet?  Last night I saw a girl (woman?) who's been 18 for a whole two weeks naked on a public cam site.  If its not bad enough that she's still in high school, she pulled out a bottle of vodka and started downing it.  She ended up saying her real name and the high school she goes to and talked about some of her teachers in an inappropriate way.  If anyone got a recording of that there could be serious consequences.  I think rather than than laws, we really need to teach cause and effect, responsibility, and consequences.


Or, you know, not crucify people for being fallible and human. There's that option too.
 
2014-03-04 04:05:18 AM

super_grass: God-is-a-Taco: super_grass: [img.fark.net image 177x278]

truly epic 4chan meme, bro

You saying it like half of the mee-mees on Fark aren't stolen from Reddit, which was stolen from 4chan, which was stolen from elsewhere.


IT' MEME. PRONOUNCED MEEM.

It's a real word. Rhymes with gene and refers to the gene-like properties of thought patterns passing through a population.

I know the kids on reddit and 4chan don't know how to say it but we're better than that here!

/once heard someone say "may-may"
//almost got a taste of my pimp hand
 
2014-03-04 04:41:06 AM

Gyrfalcon: 4tehsnowflakes: How is law enforcement or a court supposed to determine whether a site is directed at people in the target range 13-17?  .....

Well, that's the thing. There is no requirement here for anyone to determine anything ....


Sites have to make an initial determination whether they come within the coverage of the law.  If someone is accused of a violation, the same determination needs to be made.

It's a b/s regulation with no compliance required by anyone ... It's legal semantobabble.

It's Fark, so I'll take that as a bit of trolling me.  Various consultants, serious people, muffin-heads and charlatans get paid to advise businesses about exactly this kind of "b/s regulation" -- to say nothing of the fine folks in the significant, noble and socially meaningful practice of 'internet law'.
 
2014-03-04 05:33:16 AM

Callous: Yea, good luck with that CA.

So what relative of a CA politician owns a patent on "deleting shiat off the intwebz" and will now expect the ISPs to figure out how to do it and then pay him for it?


It may be more likely an influential parent who wants to be able to strip the pictures and/or videos of their teenage daughter passed out and pissing herself in a micromini, or flashing her tits, or giving a blowjob from the internets cause, well, it doesn't reflect well on mommy and daddy's parenting skillz, does it?
 
2014-03-04 05:33:42 AM
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-03-04 05:34:58 AM

Callous: Apparently California has never heard of The Streisand Effect.


Hah, you properly beat me to that reference. In fairness, I just scanned the thread for the pic.
 
2014-03-04 06:38:26 AM
theinternetdoesntworkthatway.jpg
 
pla
2014-03-04 06:40:35 AM
bunner : Never, ever type anything into a website, chat client or forum that you wouldn't say to 20,000,000 over a 10,000 watt PA system at noon, in broad daylight.

Back in the days of my youth, I got tossed from more than one K-Mart for helping myself to their PA system.  Close enough.

/ That said, I never admitted to felonies while doing so
// Can't help but think that dumb kids really have gotten dumber
 
2014-03-04 07:01:14 AM
Back in my day, we posted whatever we wanted using a thing called a 'handle' or 'nickname'.

If dimwit teenagers want to use their real names to let everyone know exactly how dimwitted they are, then let the chips fall where they may.
 
2014-03-04 07:09:29 AM

Callous: God-is-a-Taco: This ranks up there with "series of tubes". These people are in no position to dictate rules on something they cannot understand.

This is why we need term limits and younger blood in office.


While I agree, I'm not sure younger people would be any more technically competent.  Old people often comment about how good their kids are with computers when really all they can do is open whatever app or piece of software they need to use.  The technology itself is a black box for most people, even the young'uns who use it every day; they haven't the faintest clue how it actually works.

What legislators ACTUALLY need is to consult actual experts whenever they even get a glimmer of a thought about passing anything having to do with technology.
 
2014-03-04 08:47:25 AM

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.


The mark of a bunch of true politicians is the passing of obviously unenforceable laws.
 
2014-03-04 09:40:51 AM
The solution is really simple: never attach your real name or face to anything. Ever. And use separate emails for work and personal contacts, and another one altogether for signing up for things. Compartmentalization.
 
2014-03-04 10:07:17 AM

Gothnet: Camus27: Young people do stupid things on the internet?  Last night I saw a girl (woman?) who's been 18 for a whole two weeks naked on a public cam site.  If its not bad enough that she's still in high school, she pulled out a bottle of vodka and started downing it.  She ended up saying her real name and the high school she goes to and talked about some of her teachers in an inappropriate way.  If anyone got a recording of that there could be serious consequences.  I think rather than than laws, we really need to teach cause and effect, responsibility, and consequences.

Or, you know, not crucify people for being fallible and human. There's that option too.


It's easier I guess to say "personal responsibility" and "better parenting" that it is to recognize than say, a 13 year old boy has trouble understanding that some "funny" remark will haunt you FOREVER. The aforementioned scenario prior to internet would have been limited to just maybe the school district, at most. Now it's possible to search and find everybody, if you have the time and effort.
 
2014-03-04 10:41:36 AM

lycanth: Am I wrong, or do there appear to be people in here operating under the belief that it is possible to delete something from the internet?


I'm not arguing that things should be able to be deleted but rather that the consequences for being stupid as teenager have gotten out of control.  It used to be that doing something stupid mean spending a night in a cell with your buddy.  A funny story for later in life.  Now it seems that even the smallest of slip ups as for people as young as 12 can ruin your life permanently,  Perhaps there should be some middle ground where consequences exist but people are allowed to get second chances at being successful.
 
Displayed 50 of 102 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report