Teenagers send each other naked pics...

[ryan256]

Mere production of these videos or pictures may also result in psychological trauma to the teenagers involved.

So you remedy it by dragging them through a trial and putting them in jail?? Oh yeah.. that won't traumatize them at all. :disgust:

 

[GTaudiophile]

Did you know the vast majority of males living/working in Washington, DC are lawyers? Something like over 25% at least!

No common sense > something "bad" happens > the PC movement dictates that you are not the victim, there are no victims, someone/thing harmed you in some way > you sue that person/thing > person/thing writes a law/rule that has no common sense > society must follow new law/rule > dumbing down of society continues...

Who is at the center of this downward spiral? Lawyers!

Stupid society, stupid people, stupid government, stupid is as stupid does...all thanks to lawyers!

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Did you the vast majority of males living/working in Washington, DC are lawyers? Something like over 25% at least!

No common sense > something "bad" happens > the PC movement dictates that you are not the victim, there are no victims, someone/thing harmed you in some way > you sue that person/thing > person/thing writes a law/rule that has no common sense > society must follow new law/rule > dumbing down of society continues...

Who is at the center of this downward spiral? Lawyers!

Stupid society, stupid people, stupid government, stupid is as stupid does...all thanks to lawyers!

7/10

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Did you the vast majority of males living/working in Washington, DC are lawyers? Something like over 25% at least!

No common sense > something "bad" happens > the PC movement dictates that you are not the victim, there are no victims, someone/thing harmed you in some way > you sue that person/thing > person/thing writes a law/rule that has no common sense > society must follow new law/rule > dumbing down of society continues...

Who is at the center of this downward spiral? Lawyers!

Stupid society, stupid people, stupid government, stupid is as stupid does...all thanks to lawyers!

7/10

???

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Did you know the vast majority of males living/working in Washington, DC are lawyers? Something like over 25% at least!

No common sense > something "bad" happens > the PC movement dictates that you are not the victim, there are no victims, someone/thing harmed you in some way > you sue that person/thing > person/thing writes a law/rule that has no common sense > society must follow new law/rule > dumbing down of society continues...

Who is at the center of this downward spiral? Lawyers!

Stupid society, stupid people, stupid government, stupid is as stupid does...all thanks to lawyers!

Lawyers write laws these days?

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Did you know the vast majority of males living/working in Washington, DC are lawyers? Something like over 25% at least!

No common sense > something "bad" happens > the PC movement dictates that you are not the victim, there are no victims, someone/thing harmed you in some way > you sue that person/thing > person/thing writes a law/rule that has no common sense > society must follow new law/rule > dumbing down of society continues...

Who is at the center of this downward spiral? Lawyers!

Stupid society, stupid people, stupid government, stupid is as stupid does...all thanks to lawyers!

Lawyers write laws these days?

The majority of politicians are/were lawyers.

 

[Freshgeardude]

HERE ARE THE PICS

forget it dont go here

NSFW or anywhere

---

Please take two weeks elsewhere to grow up.

AnandTech Moderator

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Did you know the vast majority of males living/working in Washington, DC are lawyers? Something like over 25% at least!

No common sense > something "bad" happens > the PC movement dictates that you are not the victim, there are no victims, someone/thing harmed you in some way > you sue that person/thing > person/thing writes a law/rule that has no common sense > society must follow new law/rule > dumbing down of society continues...

Who is at the center of this downward spiral? Lawyers!

Stupid society, stupid people, stupid government, stupid is as stupid does...all thanks to lawyers!

Lawyers write laws these days?

The majority of politicians are/were lawyers.

Man I feel that there is a politician/lawyer joke somewhere in there.

 

[Fayd]

Originally posted by: AgentJean

Originally posted by: SagaLore
You people must realize, if everyone started voting at age 18, there would be a big shift in our legislature. Instead most of you site back and relax, let the government run itself off of a minority of liberals and ultracons, then complain when the crap hits the fan.

The next presidential election I am asking for an anandtech effect.

I vote.


The guy I voted for in November lost.

the guy i voted for in november won

 

[Toastedlightly]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
HERE ARE THE PICS

forget it dont go here

NSFW or anywhere

that takes nuts. I applaud you.

---

That takes stupidity. Please join him for the next two weeks elsewhere.

AnandTech Moderator

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
The majority of politicians are/were lawyers.

I'd say the majority of laws are created due to special interest groups and not lawyers. Politicians (no matter what profession they come from) will forever be pressured by those who offer the most support for the livelihood of said politician's campaign.

 

[bennylong]

Wow, thank god we didn't have these stupid laws when I was a kid in the 80's.

I used to steal Playboy from the grocery store and sell it to classmate for $20 each when I was 9 years old. I would imagine I would be a registered sex offender today if I was caught or possibly spending life in prison for selling Playboy to 10 years old kid as a 9 year old kid.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: bennylong
Wow, thank god we didn't have these stupid laws when I was a kid in the 80's.

I used to steal Playboy from the grocery store and sell it to classmate for $20 each when I was 9 years old. I would imagine I would be a registered sex offender today if I was caught or possibly spending life in prison for selling Playboy to 10 years old kid as a 9 year old kid.

I think you might've missed the point of the article.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: wetcat007
LOL I hacked the internet! This is extremely stupid, they're 16 and 17 years old. o noes nudity and sex is teh end of the world!!!!!!! But violence is excellent, unless it's in a video game then it's terrible!!!

Lets teach them a lesson to never do that again for the next 1-2 years of their life until they can legally do so!!! lol

don't forget that they'll also be sex offenders for the rest of their lives.

'least intrusive' method to promote a state interest, my ass. labeling someone as a sex offender is extremely intrusive.

"minors who are involved in a sexual relationship, unlike adults who may be involved in a mature committed relationship, have no reasonable expectation that their relationship will continue and that the photographs will not be shared with others intentionally or unintentionally."
what a pompous douchebag. he is really giving adults far too much credit.

"further, if these pictures are ultimately released, future damage may be done to these minors' careers or personal lives" so lets subject them to the humiliation of a trial, jail, and sex offender status to prevent that damage by making sure they have no career or meaningful personal lives!

Yep, that's my take on the idiocy of this prosecution. Sex between teenagers is all right under the law, but if they take pictures, then they could be hurt by the unauthorized dissemination of the pictures so let's punish them severely because they took a risk against themselves. Therefore, in place of the theoretical harm they've done to themselves, let's give them tangible harm from the judicial system.

I hope their parents don't live too close to the school, or they'll have to move. Here's exactly why I decided to stay out of the legal profession.

 

[bennylong]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: bennylong
Wow, thank god we didn't have these stupid laws when I was a kid in the 80's.

I used to steal Playboy from the grocery store and sell it to classmate for $20 each when I was 9 years old. I would imagine I would be a registered sex offender today if I was caught or possibly spending life in prison for selling Playboy to 10 years old kid as a 9 year old kid.

I think you might've missed the point of the article.

I didn't even read the article. You know, this is ATOT afterall, where we post before reading the article.

 

[jagec]

The law should really draw a line between "minors" (everyone under 18) and "children" (everyone under, say, 12 or so). It's moronic to lump them all in one category, and results in stupid cases like this one.

 

[topslop1]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Sounds like grownups want to punish teens for having sex...

They're jealous. ; D

 

[DaShen]

Stupid IMO

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: jmdeathsquad
only in floriduh...

Fixed.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
HERE ARE THE PICS

forget it dont go here

NSFW or anywhere

holy cow i'm glad i didn't have anyone looking over my shoulder when i clicked that link. how are you not banned?

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
HERE ARE THE PICS
forget it dont go here
NSFW or anywhere

holy cow i'm glad i didn't have anyone looking over my shoulder when i clicked that link. how are you not banned?

DAMN! Sorry I missed the pics.
Seriously guys, the topic was about naked kiddies, a guy posts saying "here are the pics" and you get mad that it wasnt labeled NSFW?!?
He wasnt smart but SWEET JESUS! I would think someone with 65000 posts on Anandtech would learn by now.

As for my opinion: I find it very amusing that two kids can have sex but taking pics of each other is illegal.
When we were in junior high me and my buddies (called "homies" back then) were having this same discussion. Its illegal for a girl to buy a Playboy or Penthouse but she can go home and strip naked and look at her own goodies in a mirror. And some of those junior high girls were already filling out nicely. For some reason she couldnt view material filled with stuff she already had right at home.
These were the kind of things we couldnt understand at that age but later we'd learn the wrong people were making laws in America.
Of course, by the time I entered senior high the internet was in many households and anybody could view tons of nakes pics all over the place. And this was when parents didnt know anything and there werent any net-nannys or cyber-sitters around.
I miss those days, when information exchange was truly free and unregulated. It didnt last long.

/rant

 

[Dritnul]

RPFLMAO

10/10

 

[locutus12]

Thank god im in England. Its just a pity they are not as the Age of consent = 16 for all. an age of consent of 18 is just absurd, dear god i and most of my friends were getting our rocks off by the time we were 13, never mind 18. If these laws were able to be truly enforced, most of the teenagers of the world would be in prison.

Its a very very sad story, made worse by some very very backwards and misguided adults. Education is what is needed, not prosecution.

 

[CountZero]

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: SirStev0

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: chambersc
Hmm, interesting route that justice took. I like it.

Sarcasm detector engaged.

- M4H

I dunno... look at his siggy

No, I agree with the majority opinion as emphasized and quoted by Vic.

mplicit in A.H.?s argument is that article I, section 23 protects a minor?s right
to have sexual intercourse and that this right of privacy extends to situations where the
minor memorializes the act through pictures or video. We cannot accept this
argument.
...
The question before us is, even assuming that the privacy
provision of article I, section 23 of the Florida Constitution extends to minors having
sexual intercourse, whether that right extends to them memorializing that activity
through photographs.
...
A number of factors lead us to conclude that there is no reasonable expectation
of privacy under these circumstances.
...
Second, the photographs which were taken were shared by the two minors who
were involved in the sexual activities. Neither had a reasonable expectation that the
other would not show the photos to a third party. Minors who are involved in a sexual
relationship, unlike adults who may be involved in a mature committed relationship,
have no reasonable expectation that their relationship will continue and that the photographs will not be shared with others intentionally or unintentionally.
...
In addition, a number of teenagers want to let their friends know of their sexual
prowess. Pictures are excellent evidence of an individual?s exploits. A reasonably
prudent person would believe that if you put this type of material in a teenager?s hands
that, at some point either for profit or bragging rights, the material will be
disseminated to other members of the public.
Distribution of these types of photos is likely, especially after the relationship
has ended. It is not unreasonable to assume that the immature relationship between
the co-defendants would eventually end. The relationship has neither the sanctity of
law nor the stability of maturity or length. The subjective belief of these codefendants
that the photos might not be shared is not dispositive.

The last paragraph is the problem. He basically goes on to say that because they are minors it can be expected they will be distributed and therefore should be charged. Not that it was but that it will, in the judge's opinion, certainly be passed around.

Do you not see an issue with this type of thinking? How about we bring in broke minority kids from the city and the judge can say that in his opinion they will probably commit armed robbery so lets charge 'em. This is the problem. Even if say the person was brought in for posessing a firearm illegally you still couldn't say that you think it likely they will commit a crime and charge them for it.

Essentially the judges opinion damns them for a crime they did not technically commit.

And to add insult to injury it says that this is for the protection of the children in case this material ever leaked. I'm sure explaining this situation to every person you interview with for the rest of your life will not negatively impact you. Not to mention the charge probably competely bars them from various jobs, will make living anywhere a huge pain and essentially stunts their adult life. Way to go!

The opinion stinks of the idea that kids having sex should be punished. I'd hazard a guess the judge doesn't agree with the decision that minors could legally engage in sex this is his chance to dissent against the idea that kids having sex is not illegal.

 

[Alonelymuffin]

I may note that several states, have a range in which statutory rape doesn't apply. in my home state of washington, there is a two year limit, making it okay for a 18-year-old to have sex with anyone from age 16 and up without legal repercussions. florida lacks anything like this.

Oh, and I believe the playboy-selling person would be applicable for a charge or two of "corrupting a minor". maybe.