Honestly, I agree with you on pretty much everything you say.
I ALSO think that this whole "Prosecuting teenagers who take nude pics" thing is stupid. It's an overreach of the existing laws and a way for some local cop or Prosecutor to make a name for themselves.
However, that doesn't mean the CP laws should be thrown out, it just means they should be adjusted.
If you read up the thread a bit you will see where I suggested that CP laws be tied to Age of Consent. IE: Pics of a LEGAL adult are not CP, even if the legal adult in question is a teenager. It's absolutely insane that you can screw a 16 year old in some states but not take a picture of the act OR of them naked.
The only complication comes in when you have someone who goes to a country where the Age of Consent is significantly lower than it is in your home country, and they bring images back of the deed or person. Under the law, is it CP or not? A provision would have to be made to deal with that. I suspect that the law would err on the side of caution and go with "It is CP" to eliminate complexity and legal loopholes, but I could be wrong on that.
Either way the CP laws do need to be looked at and brought into some sort of logical sane order that still protects children from the depredations of Adults, and (to a very limited extent) from their own foolishness and irresponsibility.
The third choice, the one you conveniently forgot to mention, is that a teenager sending pictures of himself/herself out of his/her free will should NOT be a crime of any sort, irrespective of where he/she sends them, puberty or not! You've seem to have already forgotten, in your mad rush to defend arbitrary bullshit, that the entire and only purpose of sane "child protection" laws is to prevent rape and abuse of children by adults. Controlling what the children do themselves out of their own free will is not the purported objective here, or else, inevitably you will have to define these children as the criminals and lock them up!
Cool! So NOW, when the pervs get arrested with CP, they can use the "They sent it out of their own free will" argument! Nice loophole you've added in there pal.
Of course, if you close that loophole by saying "well, they can send it, but you can't receive it" NOW you are simply moving blame from the creator to the recipient. Nice way for a teenager to go after a teacher they don't like. Just get all their friends to send a nude cell-cam shot to the hated teacher's e-mail! Yeah!
But of course we all know that it is the real "stealth" objective stemming from the attempts at codifying in law of the dominant religious doctrine by all these self-appointed "child defenders" and you slipped and let it show in your "arguments".
And HERE we have the REAL reason you are reacting so angrily. Talk about "Letting things slip"! NOWHERE in ANY of my posts have I mentioned religion. For all you know I'm an Atheist! Yet somehow this is all about religion. Those eeeeevil religious people are coming to get you!
Take the tinfoil hat off bub. Not everything is about religion. Some of us just want sane and reasonable laws, and are willing to work within the system to get them.
Oh wow I feel so stumped... How about simply include a provision in all these abuse codes that excludes minors within 4 years of age of each other? Or bring porn laws into sync with the age of consent?
I also think that teenagers being prosecuted is stupid and crazy. But I also think it's necessary to get the process of change started. People don't notice a problem until it starts to affect them. If people see teenagers being prosecuted for Felonies for taking pictures of THEMSELVES it will aid in prompting change.
I wish it wasn't necessary. I wish that we were all wise enough to fully see the complete ramifications of every law we write. But that just isn't the reality we live in. I hate to see kids branded with the "Sexual predator" label. but the realist in me knows it's necessary, and ultimately a good thing IF it helps bring about change.
As far as the rest of your post, I really think that the whole "magic age" argument is a straw man. It's not about a "Magic Age". It's about a generally accepted average age where one is expected to have the maturity to make decisions related to a given activity. The generally accepted age varies from culture to culture. Which is why different countries have different ages.
But I've already gone through all this. Read up and down and you will see more of my posts on that subject. No need to rehash the entire argument.
Determining if a individual in a photograph is 17 years + 346 days old instead of 18 years + 1 day old is "clear and simple" where as determining if an individual is prepubescent or not is "murky and complex"?
It is, if the photo is a self-pic done by a known and identifiable teenager. Remember, this is where we came in. It is far easier and less invasive to check the meta-data on a photo to determine it's date (particularly one from a camera, as it's not easy to modify the meta-data in a camera - camera or camera - email transfer) and compare that date to the registered birth date of the individual concerned.
We can either have:
- Teenager takes nudie pic of themselves, sends to boy/girlfriend, parents and authorities find out and investigation begins.
- Meta data on the photo is compared against the records from the phone company to determine the date the photo was taken, sent and received.
- Age of teenager is checked against public records
- AG's office makes recommendation based upon easily verifiable hard facts and the law.
OR
- Teenager takes nudie pic of themselves, sends to boy/girlfriend, parents and authorities find out and investigation begins.
- Teenager is young enough that they might or might not have gone through puberty yet.
- In order to determine if a the teenager is a minor or not, an invasive and privacy violating procedure is ordered to determine if the teenager has actually begun puberty.
- Meta data on the photo is compared against the records from the phone company to determine the date the photo was taken, sent and received.
- Puberty onset tests are inconclusive. AG makes a judgment call based on "best guess".
Which would you rather have?
Age of Consent has already been determined by societies and the courts as the simplest and most accurate method of dealing with the "Puberty" issue. It has worked for hundreds of years and has survived multiple legal challenges. It's not perfect, but until there is a definitive method of telling someone's physical maturity with accuracy, it's the best option we have.
One last thing, let's not forget that some people go through puberty very early, and puberty is happening at ever earlier ages due to the much healthier diet we have these days (or possibly due to growth hormones in food, depending on who you ask). Is a 9 year old girl who hits Puberty really old enough to consent? What about a woman like my wife, who didn't hit Puberty until she was 16? Is it fair to allow the 9 year old to start having sex while the 16 year old cannot? Who is to say a 9 year old is mentally ready for sex but a 16 year old, who had 7 YEARS more to psychologically mature, is not? How does THAT make any sense?
This is why using Puberty is actually MORE arbitrary than Age of Consent. Not only is the age range of Puberty VERY wide and moving down the scale to younger ages all the time, but simply using the age at which your body is ready to make babies does NOT take into account your MENTAL state and whether you are psychologically ready for the responsibilities that are inherent in running a baby-making machine.
This ties back to the teenage Nudie pics again. Just because a teenage boy or girl has started Puberty does not then also mean that they have the maturity to understand the implications and ramifications of flashing their new "adult" bits to the world. If anything, these legal cases prove that some teenagers are LESS responsible and should be restricted MORE. However, since the law cannot feasibly be customized on an individual basis, we make a Sociologically based decision about how old we think that people IN GENERAL need to be to be able to comprehend their actions, and pass laws accordingly. It won't fit everyone, but it fits MOST people, and works in MOST cases. That's the best we can hope for with Human law.
Certain cases of CP would be more difficult to prove, but the cases of very young children would not have that problem. Aren't those the cases we really need to focus on anyway?
My problem is that by doing what you suggest, we would be introducing murkiness and complexity into a situation where we need clarity and simplicity.
It's already hard enough to prosecute Child Abuse and Child Porn cases without adding to the burden by adding the gray area of "Is he/she a child, or not?" There needs to be a LINE drawn somewhere. That is what the Age of Consent is all about. Don't you think that MILLIONS of people throughout time have been thinking about this problem? That's how we came up with the concept of "Age of Consent" in the first place. Because the change from Childhood to Adulthood is a process that varies wildly from person to person, and in order to have sanity we must have a simple method for societies to draw that line in the sand between Childhood and Adulthood. Using a variable and random ruler like the onset of puberty is just a recipe for disaster.
I understand the idea you are trying to pursue, but the method just won't work.
Oh, wait. You didn't even read the summary. Here, I'll post it for your edification:
Yeah, yeah. You said "task forces". Great. Fantastic. So you didn't really fail at reading comprehension, you just really, really suck at staying on topic.
Next time, try paying attention to what you're saying, at least when you're apparently responding to an article that has absolutely nothing to do with your agenda.
Ok,
First of all I was responding to another poster who was talking about how Child Porn laws are just hysteria and not sensible. I wasn't responding to the original article, this was a separate sub-discussion. IF you had actually read the post I was responding to, you would have seen that. What was that about reading comprehension?
Secondly, the guy in question was convicted on OBSCENITY charges, NOT on Child Porn charges, even though the judge in the case spoke about the PROTECT act in his sentencing. I think you mentioned something about READING THE ARTICLE in your post?
My post was part of a separate discussion that was partly related to the original topic. Like many Slashdot discussions, tangents often appear and people will follow them, as I was. One only has to read down the thread a bit to see the MANY tangents that have already appeared in this discussion. Apparently though, having a complex discussion on different but related topics is beyond your ken.
Look, if you want to Troll someone, At least have the intelligence to do it properly.
In a case where an individual is charged with statutory rape, the status of the victim would be determined by medical exam (standard procedure for all rape cases, child or adult). I don't see why you would have any registration or random blood tests.
ONLY if the victim consents to the exam. The exams are completely voluntary. In order for your suggestion to work, the exams would have to either be INvoluntary (IE: Forced) or you would basically introduce a situation where it is nearly impossible to prove Child Abuse in a CP case. Your suggestion would lead to MILLIONS of children being abused and BILLIONS of extra expense in prosecuting Child Porn cases, not to mention the incredible extra burden placed upon a legal system already under strain, with NO additional improvement in the dispensation of Justice.
In other words, your suggestion makes it more complicated, more expensive, more invasive (for the victim), LESS fair and LESS Just for all involved.
Face it; It's a bad idea, unless you want to make it easier for pervs to get thier rocks off at the expense of children.
Your other ideas were good though.
Less arbitrary than an age which can vary from 9 to 21 years worldwide?
Last time I checked, US laws don't apply to the world, and vice-versa. The age of consent in other countries is not relevant.
-Keep the law out of people's private lives until there is a direct conflict that isn't solved through extended negotiation.
-Prosecute people for the result of their actions and not for their intent.
-Stop confusing justice and revenge.
Just a couple of suggestions.
Those aren't suggestions, they are generalities and complaints. I'm talking SPECIFIC suggestions about how the current laws should be adjusted vis-a-vis the issue of teenagers taking nudie pics of themselves.
Frankly, it's a complicated issue. You don't want to send kids to jail for doing something that was simply stupid, but at the same time you want to try and eliminate the possibility of someone using these nudes to take advantage of a child. I doubt there is a perfect solution, and no, just making it legal isn't a solution.
Just to show I'm not rabble-rousing, I'll give my own suggestion:
I would personally favor some kind of law tying age of consent to images. If one is old enough to consent to sex, then one is old enough to consent to pictures of sex. Also, trying minors who do self-pics AS minors would be an excellent start as well. It's illogical to try someone as an adult for taking pictures of themselves since adults taking pictures of themselves isn't illegal. I'd like to see some consistency there. Additionally, convictions of a minor AS A MINOR for self-pics would be an Infraction, not a Felony and would carry NO sexual predator repercussions. Basically, the idea would be a slap on the wrist and a warning for being stupid. Sort of a "scare them straight" approach, with escalating punishments starting at a warning and ending with psychiatric evaluation and/or community service.
I think those two suggestions would go a LONG way towards narrowing down the Child Porn laws in this area and balancing out an injustice.
* Setting an age of consent based on calendar age is arbitrary. The age of consent should be defined as puberty, as this is based on biology instead of politics.
* Initiating sex with a minor by force, coercion, abuse of power, deceit, etc is punished as rape (just like if the victim was an adult)
* Pornography is illegal if and only if it was created by performing an illegal act.
I think you have made a good start. But if I may, I'd like to point out one weakness here.
It's your first suggestion about age of consent. It is easy to tell when a female has reached Puberty, as she beings her menstrual cycle and it can be nailed down to a single day. How does one tell when a MALE has reached Puberty as there are no outward signs of Puberty for MONTHS after the process has begun? Do you propose that we require random blood tests for the increased levels of Testosterone that indicate the onset of Puberty? And for girls, will we require them to legally register as Adults within a week after their first menstruation? Shall we do it "For The Children"?
Do you see the problem here? As arbitrary as using a specific age may be, it is much LESS arbitrary than dealing with the confusion surrounding the onset of Puberty in males, the embarrassment and privacy issues of the onset of menstruation in girls and the variable ages at which Puberty can begin. Let's not even get into situations of a young girl who HAS had her first menstruation claiming she has NOT and getting some boy who broke her heart put in the slammer.
No, the definition of "age of consent" MUST be a specific age because to do otherwise is far too arbitrary and random, and introduces way too much instability into the system.
My faith in the system is not blind. It is eminently realistic, because I ALSO realize that working within the system is the only safe ans sane way to fix it. Impotently ranting about a problem while not trying to suggest or work towards a solution that benefits all is just so much pissing into the wind.
So, ya got anything but piss, or should I just put a raincoat on?
The Law is neither smart nor stupid, it simply is. It's the application of the law and the way in which we modify it that is smart or stupid.
I will posit to you the same question I did to another poster. You dislike the current law. What would you suggest as an alternative? What is you proposed solution?
I wasn't aware that there were arrests being made over this issue. Thank you for the link.
However, the arrests are not necessarily a BAD thing.
What we have here is another example of technology outracing the law. The Child Porn laws weren't intended to handle situations like this. However, it doesn't mean that you simply toss out all Child Porn laws. It means that you ALLOW cases like this to proceed, so that all the various issues surrounding teenagers taking nudie pics of themselves can be sussed out and the laws adjusted appropriately through adjudication and further legislation.
It's unfortunate that some (stupid) kids will have to go through this, but the law is not omniscient. It cannot possibly take into account every possible situation, particularly when technology is involved. Also, there is a specific process involved when dealing with the law, and the wheels of Justice turn slowly. This is part of the legal process, it MUST play out.
In the meantime, if you are a teenager with a camera-phone, please ensure you are CLOTHED when taking pictures of yourself.
I have not heard of any cases of Teenagers sending pictures of themselves to other teenagers being called Child Porn and there being ANY subsequent arrests and prosecutions on that basis. Not calling you a liar per-se, I just haven't seen that.
Do you have any evidence (news story, etc) to back that up, and can you link it?
I only ask because that sounds a bit "Snopesy", and somewhat like a straw-man argument.
Child porn laws are very narrowly defined, and in areas where they were too over-broad (the old PROTECT act, for example) litigation and further legislation has tightened that definition up quite a bit.
No. They're there to pander to the braying mob and instill a climate of fear. This does nothing other than having police chasing shadows, diverting their attention from real abuse cases. Very counterproductive.
Wrong.
Child Pornography laws are there to protect real children. Your beef is with "Obscenity" laws. Obscenity laws, while originally intended to prevent the PUBLIC display of material and behavior inappropriate for young people, have morphed (in many places) to be thought-crime laws. THESE are the bad ones.
Child Porn laws, on the other hand are designed to try and protect children by dismantling Kiddie porn distribution networks and arresting those that partake of and help support Child Porn. Let's not forget that Actual child porn involving real children IS abuse, and results in permanent harm (both psychological and physical) to a child. This is something that any healthy society should strive to prevent.
Lastly, it should be noted that one of the largest arrests in the WORLD on Child Porn was the arrest multiple members of a Global Kiddie porn ring, including 61 people in the United States (http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/12/12/porn.arrests/) Kiddie Porn is a Global problem, and the US is in no way immune.
This tactic was a roaring success in the war on drugs. In fact all drug dealers went broke during the first Reagan administration, and now there are no drugs to be had anymore.
While the "War on Drugs" has had only limited success, and is of questionable value, this is largely due to both a lack of focus (wasting time on Marijuana users and growers) and the high volume of individuals willing to purchase illicit drugs. Neither of these issues apply to Child porn laws in the United States. Child Porn task forces are highly focused units with very specific and narrowly defined missions. They are NOT out there after Hentai viewers, for instance. They are only after REAL Child porn, both it's purveyors and consumers. Also, CP has a highly limited audience. While that audience in sheer numbers is still large, when compared against the consumer base for illegal drugs, it is infinitesimally small. So it is a much more manageable problem.
Let us also not forget that while the use of recreational drugs (particularly marijuana) could rightly be said to be a "victimless" crime, Child Porn is most certainly NOT victimless, and the arguments used against the War on Drugs become hollow and vile when used against Child Porn laws and enforcement.
Ditto that. The "Forged Alliance" pack increased the CPU-GPU requirements even higher too. While I love playing Sup-Comm, The system requirements are so stiff that I am basically restricted to AI skirmishes with a 250 unit limit per side. Even then the battles can take several HOURS due to system slowdowns. (Yay for slideshow fighting!)
Also, The way the sup-comm AI works, if you can last long enough, it will stop attacking because it builds too many buildings and reaches the unit cap. Drives me nuts.
When you are throwing your parents in an old folks home this guy will be building an addition onto his house to take them in then installing various custom electronic systems to ease their daily lives.
Yes, because we all know that people who want to quickly and easily give their parents a Free (both kinds) and secure operating system to do some basic computing tasks on without having to worry about complex maintenance and extra expenses OR the frustration that a virus infected Win system will inevitably bring them are EXACTLY the type of people who callously toss their parents into an old-folks home. Riiiight.
Or could it be that some people simply DO IT SMARTER than others?
Nobody said you HAD to do the updates. Most of those are for locally exploitable security problems (not an issue if you are the only one using the machine) or just functionality updates to already installed software (not an issue if you like the software you are running as it currently is.) Heck, you can TURN OFF the updates right from the update manager if you want.
Besides, automated updates delivered to your system on a timely and regular basis hardly counts as "maintenance" of the sort you have to do with Windows.
When was the last time you had to Virus scan your Ubuntu machine? Or Defrag it? Or run a Spyware scan? Or run a registry cleaner to clear out the funk from some stupid freeware app? THAT is the kind of maintenance he's talking about. It just isn't a problem on an Ubuntu machine.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly, I agree with you on pretty much everything you say.
I ALSO think that this whole "Prosecuting teenagers who take nude pics" thing is stupid. It's an overreach of the existing laws and a way for some local cop or Prosecutor to make a name for themselves.
However, that doesn't mean the CP laws should be thrown out, it just means they should be adjusted.
If you read up the thread a bit you will see where I suggested that CP laws be tied to Age of Consent. IE: Pics of a LEGAL adult are not CP, even if the legal adult in question is a teenager. It's absolutely insane that you can screw a 16 year old in some states but not take a picture of the act OR of them naked.
The only complication comes in when you have someone who goes to a country where the Age of Consent is significantly lower than it is in your home country, and they bring images back of the deed or person. Under the law, is it CP or not? A provision would have to be made to deal with that. I suspect that the law would err on the side of caution and go with "It is CP" to eliminate complexity and legal loopholes, but I could be wrong on that.
Either way the CP laws do need to be looked at and brought into some sort of logical sane order that still protects children from the depredations of Adults, and (to a very limited extent) from their own foolishness and irresponsibility.
Cool! So NOW, when the pervs get arrested with CP, they can use the "They sent it out of their own free will" argument! Nice loophole you've added in there pal.
Of course, if you close that loophole by saying "well, they can send it, but you can't receive it" NOW you are simply moving blame from the creator to the recipient. Nice way for a teenager to go after a teacher they don't like. Just get all their friends to send a nude cell-cam shot to the hated teacher's e-mail! Yeah!
And HERE we have the REAL reason you are reacting so angrily. Talk about "Letting things slip"! NOWHERE in ANY of my posts have I mentioned religion. For all you know I'm an Atheist! Yet somehow this is all about religion. Those eeeeevil religious people are coming to get you!
Take the tinfoil hat off bub. Not everything is about religion. Some of us just want sane and reasonable laws, and are willing to work within the system to get them.
Actually, that's what I said back here: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1074933&cid=26258557
I also think that teenagers being prosecuted is stupid and crazy. But I also think it's necessary to get the process of change started. People don't notice a problem until it starts to affect them. If people see teenagers being prosecuted for Felonies for taking pictures of THEMSELVES it will aid in prompting change.
I wish it wasn't necessary. I wish that we were all wise enough to fully see the complete ramifications of every law we write. But that just isn't the reality we live in. I hate to see kids branded with the "Sexual predator" label. but the realist in me knows it's necessary, and ultimately a good thing IF it helps bring about change.
As far as the rest of your post, I really think that the whole "magic age" argument is a straw man. It's not about a "Magic Age". It's about a generally accepted average age where one is expected to have the maturity to make decisions related to a given activity. The generally accepted age varies from culture to culture. Which is why different countries have different ages.
But I've already gone through all this. Read up and down and you will see more of my posts on that subject. No need to rehash the entire argument.
Cheers!
It is, if the photo is a self-pic done by a known and identifiable teenager. Remember, this is where we came in. It is far easier and less invasive to check the meta-data on a photo to determine it's date (particularly one from a camera, as it's not easy to modify the meta-data in a camera - camera or camera - email transfer) and compare that date to the registered birth date of the individual concerned.
We can either have:
- Teenager takes nudie pic of themselves, sends to boy/girlfriend, parents and authorities find out and investigation begins.
- Meta data on the photo is compared against the records from the phone company to determine the date the photo was taken, sent and received.
- Age of teenager is checked against public records
- AG's office makes recommendation based upon easily verifiable hard facts and the law.
OR
- Teenager takes nudie pic of themselves, sends to boy/girlfriend, parents and authorities find out and investigation begins.
- Teenager is young enough that they might or might not have gone through puberty yet.
- In order to determine if a the teenager is a minor or not, an invasive and privacy violating procedure is ordered to determine if the teenager has actually begun puberty.
- Meta data on the photo is compared against the records from the phone company to determine the date the photo was taken, sent and received.
- Puberty onset tests are inconclusive. AG makes a judgment call based on "best guess".
Which would you rather have?
Age of Consent has already been determined by societies and the courts as the simplest and most accurate method of dealing with the "Puberty" issue. It has worked for hundreds of years and has survived multiple legal challenges. It's not perfect, but until there is a definitive method of telling someone's physical maturity with accuracy, it's the best option we have.
One last thing, let's not forget that some people go through puberty very early, and puberty is happening at ever earlier ages due to the much healthier diet we have these days (or possibly due to growth hormones in food, depending on who you ask). Is a 9 year old girl who hits Puberty really old enough to consent? What about a woman like my wife, who didn't hit Puberty until she was 16? Is it fair to allow the 9 year old to start having sex while the 16 year old cannot? Who is to say a 9 year old is mentally ready for sex but a 16 year old, who had 7 YEARS more to psychologically mature, is not? How does THAT make any sense?
This is why using Puberty is actually MORE arbitrary than Age of Consent. Not only is the age range of Puberty VERY wide and moving down the scale to younger ages all the time, but simply using the age at which your body is ready to make babies does NOT take into account your MENTAL state and whether you are psychologically ready for the responsibilities that are inherent in running a baby-making machine.
This ties back to the teenage Nudie pics again. Just because a teenage boy or girl has started Puberty does not then also mean that they have the maturity to understand the implications and ramifications of flashing their new "adult" bits to the world. If anything, these legal cases prove that some teenagers are LESS responsible and should be restricted MORE. However, since the law cannot feasibly be customized on an individual basis, we make a Sociologically based decision about how old we think that people IN GENERAL need to be to be able to comprehend their actions, and pass laws accordingly. It won't fit everyone, but it fits MOST people, and works in MOST cases. That's the best we can hope for with Human law.
My problem is that by doing what you suggest, we would be introducing murkiness and complexity into a situation where we need clarity and simplicity.
It's already hard enough to prosecute Child Abuse and Child Porn cases without adding to the burden by adding the gray area of "Is he/she a child, or not?" There needs to be a LINE drawn somewhere. That is what the Age of Consent is all about. Don't you think that MILLIONS of people throughout time have been thinking about this problem? That's how we came up with the concept of "Age of Consent" in the first place. Because the change from Childhood to Adulthood is a process that varies wildly from person to person, and in order to have sanity we must have a simple method for societies to draw that line in the sand between Childhood and Adulthood. Using a variable and random ruler like the onset of puberty is just a recipe for disaster.
I understand the idea you are trying to pursue, but the method just won't work.
Ok,
First of all I was responding to another poster who was talking about how Child Porn laws are just hysteria and not sensible. I wasn't responding to the original article, this was a separate sub-discussion. IF you had actually read the post I was responding to, you would have seen that. What was that about reading comprehension?
Secondly, the guy in question was convicted on OBSCENITY charges, NOT on Child Porn charges, even though the judge in the case spoke about the PROTECT act in his sentencing. I think you mentioned something about READING THE ARTICLE in your post?
My post was part of a separate discussion that was partly related to the original topic. Like many Slashdot discussions, tangents often appear and people will follow them, as I was. One only has to read down the thread a bit to see the MANY tangents that have already appeared in this discussion. Apparently though, having a complex discussion on different but related topics is beyond your ken.
Look, if you want to Troll someone, At least have the intelligence to do it properly.
Oh, and fuck you. Asshole.
ONLY if the victim consents to the exam. The exams are completely voluntary. In order for your suggestion to work, the exams would have to either be INvoluntary (IE: Forced) or you would basically introduce a situation where it is nearly impossible to prove Child Abuse in a CP case. Your suggestion would lead to MILLIONS of children being abused and BILLIONS of extra expense in prosecuting Child Porn cases, not to mention the incredible extra burden placed upon a legal system already under strain, with NO additional improvement in the dispensation of Justice.
In other words, your suggestion makes it more complicated, more expensive, more invasive (for the victim), LESS fair and LESS Just for all involved.
Face it; It's a bad idea, unless you want to make it easier for pervs to get thier rocks off at the expense of children.
Your other ideas were good though.
Last time I checked, US laws don't apply to the world, and vice-versa. The age of consent in other countries is not relevant.
Those aren't suggestions, they are generalities and complaints. I'm talking SPECIFIC suggestions about how the current laws should be adjusted vis-a-vis the issue of teenagers taking nudie pics of themselves.
Frankly, it's a complicated issue. You don't want to send kids to jail for doing something that was simply stupid, but at the same time you want to try and eliminate the possibility of someone using these nudes to take advantage of a child. I doubt there is a perfect solution, and no, just making it legal isn't a solution.
Just to show I'm not rabble-rousing, I'll give my own suggestion:
I would personally favor some kind of law tying age of consent to images. If one is old enough to consent to sex, then one is old enough to consent to pictures of sex. Also, trying minors who do self-pics AS minors would be an excellent start as well. It's illogical to try someone as an adult for taking pictures of themselves since adults taking pictures of themselves isn't illegal. I'd like to see some consistency there. Additionally, convictions of a minor AS A MINOR for self-pics would be an Infraction, not a Felony and would carry NO sexual predator repercussions. Basically, the idea would be a slap on the wrist and a warning for being stupid. Sort of a "scare them straight" approach, with escalating punishments starting at a warning and ending with psychiatric evaluation and/or community service.
I think those two suggestions would go a LONG way towards narrowing down the Child Porn laws in this area and balancing out an injustice.
Anyone care to sponsor a bill?
I think you have made a good start. But if I may, I'd like to point out one weakness here.
It's your first suggestion about age of consent. It is easy to tell when a female has reached Puberty, as she beings her menstrual cycle and it can be nailed down to a single day. How does one tell when a MALE has reached Puberty as there are no outward signs of Puberty for MONTHS after the process has begun? Do you propose that we require random blood tests for the increased levels of Testosterone that indicate the onset of Puberty? And for girls, will we require them to legally register as Adults within a week after their first menstruation? Shall we do it "For The Children"?
Do you see the problem here? As arbitrary as using a specific age may be, it is much LESS arbitrary than dealing with the confusion surrounding the onset of Puberty in males, the embarrassment and privacy issues of the onset of menstruation in girls and the variable ages at which Puberty can begin. Let's not even get into situations of a young girl who HAS had her first menstruation claiming she has NOT and getting some boy who broke her heart put in the slammer.
No, the definition of "age of consent" MUST be a specific age because to do otherwise is far too arbitrary and random, and introduces way too much instability into the system.
You other suggestions are excellent, though.
You have yet to offer a solution.
How do you suggest we fix the problem?
My faith in the system is not blind. It is eminently realistic, because I ALSO realize that working within the system is the only safe ans sane way to fix it. Impotently ranting about a problem while not trying to suggest or work towards a solution that benefits all is just so much pissing into the wind.
So, ya got anything but piss, or should I just put a raincoat on?
To avoid having the same discussion in two places, I refer you up a few posts to here: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1074933&cid=26257877.
I disagree.
The Law is neither smart nor stupid, it simply is. It's the application of the law and the way in which we modify it that is smart or stupid.
I will posit to you the same question I did to another poster. You dislike the current law. What would you suggest as an alternative? What is you proposed solution?
So what would you suggest as a solution?
The guy in the article was prosecuted under obscenity laws for the Cartoon porn. So no CP laws being abused in this case.
I wasn't aware that there were arrests being made over this issue. Thank you for the link.
However, the arrests are not necessarily a BAD thing.
What we have here is another example of technology outracing the law. The Child Porn laws weren't intended to handle situations like this. However, it doesn't mean that you simply toss out all Child Porn laws. It means that you ALLOW cases like this to proceed, so that all the various issues surrounding teenagers taking nudie pics of themselves can be sussed out and the laws adjusted appropriately through adjudication and further legislation.
It's unfortunate that some (stupid) kids will have to go through this, but the law is not omniscient. It cannot possibly take into account every possible situation, particularly when technology is involved. Also, there is a specific process involved when dealing with the law, and the wheels of Justice turn slowly. This is part of the legal process, it MUST play out.
In the meantime, if you are a teenager with a camera-phone, please ensure you are CLOTHED when taking pictures of yourself.
I have not heard of any cases of Teenagers sending pictures of themselves to other teenagers being called Child Porn and there being ANY subsequent arrests and prosecutions on that basis. Not calling you a liar per-se, I just haven't seen that.
Do you have any evidence (news story, etc) to back that up, and can you link it?
I only ask because that sounds a bit "Snopesy", and somewhat like a straw-man argument.
Child porn laws are very narrowly defined, and in areas where they were too over-broad (the old PROTECT act, for example) litigation and further legislation has tightened that definition up quite a bit.
Wrong.
Child Pornography laws are there to protect real children. Your beef is with "Obscenity" laws. Obscenity laws, while originally intended to prevent the PUBLIC display of material and behavior inappropriate for young people, have morphed (in many places) to be thought-crime laws. THESE are the bad ones.
Child Porn laws, on the other hand are designed to try and protect children by dismantling Kiddie porn distribution networks and arresting those that partake of and help support Child Porn. Let's not forget that Actual child porn involving real children IS abuse, and results in permanent harm (both psychological and physical) to a child. This is something that any healthy society should strive to prevent.
Lastly, it should be noted that one of the largest arrests in the WORLD on Child Porn was the arrest multiple members of a Global Kiddie porn ring, including 61 people in the United States (http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/12/12/porn.arrests/) Kiddie Porn is a Global problem, and the US is in no way immune.
While the "War on Drugs" has had only limited success, and is of questionable value, this is largely due to both a lack of focus (wasting time on Marijuana users and growers) and the high volume of individuals willing to purchase illicit drugs. Neither of these issues apply to Child porn laws in the United States. Child Porn task forces are highly focused units with very specific and narrowly defined missions. They are NOT out there after Hentai viewers, for instance. They are only after REAL Child porn, both it's purveyors and consumers. Also, CP has a highly limited audience. While that audience in sheer numbers is still large, when compared against the consumer base for illegal drugs, it is infinitesimally small. So it is a much more manageable problem.
Let us also not forget that while the use of recreational drugs (particularly marijuana) could rightly be said to be a "victimless" crime, Child Porn is most certainly NOT victimless, and the arguments used against the War on Drugs become hollow and vile when used against Child Porn laws and enforcement.
I've always wanted to do that. Seems like it would be fun to have something I can use to give people nasty or confusing messages with.
>:)
You need to close your "sarc" tags properly then. Can't detect something that isn't there, smart guy. ;)
1) It's called "Add Programs", a nice little gui utility in the main Ubuntu menu.
2) Ubuntu doesn't even come with vi installed as part of the base distribution. It does have Gedit though.
3) I haven't had to TOUCH an xorg.conf file in 3 years of using Ubuntu.
Welcome to 2008. How are things going back there in 2005?
Ditto that. The "Forged Alliance" pack increased the CPU-GPU requirements even higher too. While I love playing Sup-Comm, The system requirements are so stiff that I am basically restricted to AI skirmishes with a 250 unit limit per side. Even then the battles can take several HOURS due to system slowdowns. (Yay for slideshow fighting!)
Also, The way the sup-comm AI works, if you can last long enough, it will stop attacking because it builds too many buildings and reaches the unit cap. Drives me nuts.
Heh. I was thinking the same thing when I saw his post.
"Well I just did this... (insert 3 paragraphs of long and convoluted technical backflips needed to make Windows even semi-secure)"
OR
"Well I just installed Ubuntu."
I know which one I would pick.
Besides, I LOVE my Grandparents, they are neat people. Why would I torture them with "Windows Pain"?
Yes, because we all know that people who want to quickly and easily give their parents a Free (both kinds) and secure operating system to do some basic computing tasks on without having to worry about complex maintenance and extra expenses OR the frustration that a virus infected Win system will inevitably bring them are EXACTLY the type of people who callously toss their parents into an old-folks home. Riiiight.
Or could it be that some people simply DO IT SMARTER than others?
How the heck was that comment modded "troll"?
Can I get a mod fix please? That's just silly.
Nobody said you HAD to do the updates. Most of those are for locally exploitable security problems (not an issue if you are the only one using the machine) or just functionality updates to already installed software (not an issue if you like the software you are running as it currently is.) Heck, you can TURN OFF the updates right from the update manager if you want.
Besides, automated updates delivered to your system on a timely and regular basis hardly counts as "maintenance" of the sort you have to do with Windows.
When was the last time you had to Virus scan your Ubuntu machine? Or Defrag it? Or run a Spyware scan? Or run a registry cleaner to clear out the funk from some stupid freeware app? THAT is the kind of maintenance he's talking about. It just isn't a problem on an Ubuntu machine.