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.

(STLToday)   High school students under investigation for spreading nude selfies. Clearly, they do not understand the rules of BIE   (stltoday.com) divider line 159
    More: Dumbass, Fort Zumwalt East High School, high schools, Fort Zumwalt, investigation, public information, teens  
•       •       •

7606 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Apr 2014 at 10:33 AM (23 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-05 06:50:45 PM
ShatteredMinds:
...stuff, snipped because it's right above this...

I'm going to agree with you all down the line, with this difference: I would add (and I think you implied this, but I'd state it explicitly) that I don't think something should have to have "provable artistic, moral, or social value" in order to avoid censorship or legal issues. We don't apply that standard to any other form of entertainment, or to any other genre, so why impose it on sexual content?
 
2014-04-05 06:51:00 PM

armor helix: This is beyond stupid.

Why can't we have harsh penalties for adults that victimize children without creating high school witch hunts across the country?

High school students are sexually active and make poor decisions. That's a well known fact of life. How is ruining kid's lives by putting them on a sex offender registry going to benefit anybody?


Cops have quotas to meet and prosecutors need to be tough on crime to get reelected.

Everyone else is just little people, and these kids won't be voting with a felony conviction, so it's pretty much a win for the only people that count.
 
2014-04-05 06:54:18 PM

mariner314: LeroyB: LeroyB: BIE is a myth. They don't exist. I've been here over 11 years but I've never received any requested BIE w/EIP. :-(

My birthday was last Wednesday the 2nd and Fark was nice enough to put a red banner across the top wishing me a happy birthday but it would be really nice if I got some BIE.

Here's a challenge to all legal-aged Farkettes. I say BIE Is a myth. Prove me wrong. EIP.

Oh my. BIE Fairies do exist.  Thank you. :-)

But did you follow rule #7?


I guess I'm ready, but there's rule #3
 
2014-04-05 06:58:56 PM

LeroyB: mariner314: LeroyB: LeroyB: BIE is a myth. They don't exist. I've been here over 11 years but I've never received any requested BIE w/EIP. :-(

My birthday was last Wednesday the 2nd and Fark was nice enough to put a red banner across the top wishing me a happy birthday but it would be really nice if I got some BIE.

Here's a challenge to all legal-aged Farkettes. I say BIE Is a myth. Prove me wrong. EIP.

Oh my. BIE Fairies do exist.  Thank you. :-)

But did you follow rule #7?

I guess I'm ready, but there's rule #3


My understanding is you follow rule 3 normally. But if BIE occurs 7 is expected.

However I tend to ask if they want reciprocation.
 
2014-04-05 06:59:02 PM

HeartlineTwist: I don't think the person who took the picture of themselves OR the person they sent it to should be prosecuted or criminalized.

However, I think if the recipient then sends it to others, the recipient should be prosecuted for that distribution. I don't think current laws are adequately written to do this very well.

Note: yes, minors SHOULD know better; parents SHOULD be raising and supervising their children better; and a teen sending a picture to their significant other that magically makes its way around the school is the most foreseeable outcome BUT

Why do any of those 3 things change how the situation is handled?


All the law can prove reliably is who created it. So should not the producer of "child porn" be the one prosecuted? Also, you assume that they weren't meant to share or that consent wasn't given, what if it was? There are some who I don't know post nude pics because they have no problem with being nude or *gasp* are proud of their bodies and aren't ashamed of them. How about we as a society get over our pathological fear of nudity and sexuality and grow up some. All your suggestion does is create criminals who may or may not have had permission to share those pics and who may or may not know that the subject didn't want those images shared. Your forcing the law to assume things they have no real proof about. Crime by association.

Lets also think about hacking, sharing phones, and all kinds of possibilities like apps that auto-upload or distribute that would make criminals of absolutely innocent teens that had no idea about what they were receiving before it appeared on their phones.

Lastly, THESE ARE FREAKING KIDS!! Kids don't think they react, they do stupid without knowing or thinking about the consequences. They have undeveloped brains and are full of hormones and have to deal with peer pressured that most of us can no longer understand or relate to because we haven't been kids in a long long time. As times change so do the stupid things that kids do and what they think of as normal and acceptable. Branding kids with legal repercussions for the rest of their lives is just stupid and we ADULTS should know that and stop acting like kids are just little adults. At one point we were smart enough to let parents, teachers, and communities deal with these problems instead of ruining kids futures. Of course there are exceptions, and we should not let truly illegal activities get swept under the rug by allowing parents and communities deal with it; and by deal with it I mean ignore, deny, and harass the actual victims. But, on issues like selfies I think the law just becomes part of the problem instead of a solution.
 
2014-04-05 07:01:24 PM

Secret Agent X23: I'm going to agree with you all down the line, with this difference: I would add (and I think you implied this, but I'd state it explicitly) that I don't think something should have to have "provable artistic, moral, or social value" in order to avoid censorship or legal issues. We don't apply that standard to any other form of entertainment, or to any other genre, so why impose it on sexual content?


By provable I meant that the court had to prove, as in innocent until proven guilty. So, yes, we agree.
 
2014-04-05 08:24:30 PM

RodneyToady: SpdrJay: Nudity is not pornography.
 Drawings of nudity can be child pornography.  (Link is SFW)


This is interesting....

"any kind of visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor  "

Its my humble opinion that simply standing there naked.. isn't in an of itself sexually explicit conduct.
conversely... rubbing one out for example.. even fully clothed with no exposure... probably is.

I have a feeling I'm wrong though from a cops standpoint. "ITS ALL BAD ! BAD ! BAD!   "
 
2014-04-05 10:24:42 PM
I know the rules and follow them including reciprocation if requested.
eip for bie
I think there should be a punishment for juveniles that does not include sex offender status that will follow them into adulthood.
 
2014-04-05 11:31:22 PM
Is this still going?

/EIP just in case
//I think...
 
Displayed 9 of 159 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report