Taking pictures of yourself is ... illegal

[quadalpha]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03...xting_lawsuit/

"Re-education" is surreal.

[pevergreen]

Just stupid.

As long as they werent selling them for money, it should just be ignored.

Of course, in reality they shouldnt be sharing them around. Especially not to older people, but...

>_> Nothing wrong has been done by the girls or their parents, IMO.

[Major Robert Dump]

Just stupid.

As long as they werent selling them for money, it should just be ignored.

Of course, in reality they shouldnt be sharing them around. Especially not to older people, but...

>_> Nothing wrong has been done by the girls or their parents, IMO.

I disagree. Doesn't matter if adults are involved or not; and underage drinker is an underage drinker, child molestation is child molestation. Saying kids can photo kids as long as adults don't take part is putting far too much protection on the child perpetrator in a world where kids are already over protected.

Child porn in most communities is defined as pictures of a minor which are meant to be viewed in a sexual manner. There doesn't even need to be nudity, just suggestion. Furthermore, a legal photo can become an illegal photo if the person viewing it is doing it for lavicous purposes.

But what bothers me is the sex offender thing here is that:

-the pictures are really stretching the definition of pornography, even using the above explanation. when I think of using CP laws to keep minors in check I'm thinking about cops going after porn porn, not girls in bras and towels. It's a total waste of time, the pictures really aren't going to be ruining anyones lives or shaming the girls forever, and they can't even prove the lavicous intent of the boys viewing them based on what I know of the case

-Being a sex offender is no laughing matter, and again the law is being abused here as this will go on the permanent records of the girls. Oddly enough, the riske' pics arent enough to shame the girls for life, but the resulting sex offender status is. This is another case of the law being stretched to an extent that it ruins peoples lives, like being charged as a sex offender for peeing in the alley behind the bar or being a stripper in a strip club who shows too much meat curtain. When I think sex offender, child porn etc, I think victim-predator, not girls in bras, guys peeing in an alley or a stripper.

No one was victimized here

Of course the DA is up for re-election. He should go hang out at some lacrosse parties while he's at it