Should kids be charged with child pornography and forced to register as child molesters for taking nude photos of themselves? Is society becoming over-zealous and harming those it seeks to protect?
by 
RC loves ice cream
ANSWERS: 7
-
This refers to dozens of stories like: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28679588/ http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5995084&page=1 http://news.cnet.com/Police-blotter-Teens-prosecuted-for-racy-photos/2100-1030_3-6157857.html These girls (and some boys) were found to have taken photos of themselves which they then sent to their boyfriends/girlfriends. When authorities found out, they were charged with child pornography and may be forced to register as child molesters for a minimum of 10 years.
-
no they aren't awear of all the consequences of taking pictures of them selfs, i think they should be warned of all the problems it can cause and be educated on the matter. charging them with child pornography is just silly, and not helping any one.
-
No, I don't believe they should be charged. Child pornography laws are in place for the protection of children, and putting children on the sex-offender registry is NOT protecting them.
-
It is insane. In the UK there is a widespread hysteria about child pornography, which is being fed by the media. What this means is that adults are now scared of talking to children, teachers cannot touch their pupils, even if they are upset, and as someone who enjoys photography, I cannot now take pictures of children without arousing suspicions. The result of this is that a whole generation of children is growing up without adult contact, apart from their parents. And when those parents are lacking in parental skills, the child is destined to grow up dysfunctional. God knows what will come of this, but I hope I will not be around when these children grow into adults.
-
Child molesters start young. I worked with juvenile sex offenders for three years. They were some pretty scary young men, and if you met them, you would agree. Some of them did respond to treatment, and they were not required to register. They have never turned up on the adult registry, and I check frequently. One of them didn't respond to treatment, and I was very afraid of him. He has turned up on the adult registry and is currently in the penitentiary for three separate rapes of children. Don't assume that because someone is a kid, they aren't dangerous. This kid started at thirteen that we know of. The first step an offender usually takes is to show mild pornography to a child and then they wait to see if the child tells on them. At this point, they can back out and say they were only joking and they'll usually get away with it. If the child doesn't tell on them, the move on to molesting the child. So don't assume that because the naked pictures are of themselves, they don't have intent to harm a child. Its just another layer of deniability.
-
I thought your question was ridiculous until I read that this actually happens, it sounds like this should be a decision deffered to parents and not to the law
-
It's interesting how only a few years ago has the public interest has started to soar in juvenile offenders of child pornography, even though this sort of thing has been happening since the 90s without much criticism from either public officials or the people themselves. It has begun to coincide with the advent of mobile technology where to send a picture of yourself is becoming all the more easier than, say, ten years ago. What was once considered by society as immutably wicked and reprehensible beyond the merit of moral defense is beginning to challenge our understanding of what exactly we object in "our zealous rush to stamp out child prurience".
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC