That was debunked several pages ago.
No one with a brain in their head is going to do that. I mean, that would be child pornography if they did that, right? (The filming of underage children engaging in sexual acts, even having the photographs, let along actually taking the pictures, could get anyone into some serious legal trouble.)
Huh? When did I agree to that? Said no such thing!
When I said that I am in favor of a law regulating sex between teens, I was thinking of fornication. Penetration. Exchange of bodily fluids and DNA.
I mean, you want to talk about a law what could be ABUSED! Where do we NOT enforce this law? Breast groping? Hand holding? French kissing?
No, I think any law that is going to criminalize sexual contact between minors is going to have to make it pretty clear that actual genital contact and fluid exchange has either occurred, or was PROVABLY ABOUT TO OCCUR, within a reasonable doubt.
Two teens frenching and groping in the balcony, or in the front seat of a car is not sex. Certainly, it’s friggin’ conducive, but it is not sex.
Two nude teens in a bed is another matter.
So I can safely put you in the “dangerously naive” camp.
Still don’t know where to put CanvasShoes.
Your argument that taking pictures could cause legal troubles is ridiculous. First of all, the malicious third party could be a teen themself - perhaps an ex of one of the teens. Second, it might never be necessary for the malicious third party to actually report the teens in order to harm them, thus they would never be in legal trouble. Third, pictures were only one small example of how a third party could abuse this law! I never said pictures would be involved in most abuses of the law, just that they were one method of abusing the law and doing evil. If you make teens into sex criminals, and give everyone the power to have them convicted of sex crimes, OF COURSE you are leaving them extremely vulnerable to immense harm! Malicious third parties could come up with any number of ways to abuse the law and do great evil, especially since teens are by no means legal experts, which your already extremely weak argument assumes.
Incidentally, I have noticed that a lot of your objections amount to “nobody with a brain would do that.” Guess what - a lot of people are pretty stupid, or just so malicious that it overcomes their good sense.
Why do adult males father most children born to teens? Surely if they had a brain they would make sure that didn’t happen?
BUT IT DOES.
That is the point.
Once again, I am arguing against the law this thread is based on. That law criminalizes all sexual contact between teens, not just intercourse.
To understand why, simply remember the real reason the law was made - to protect teens from adults.
I think we can agree that we don’t want adults “frenching and groping” with kids.
But this law applies that to other kids as well, which is yet another reason it is a disgustingly bad law that should never become widespread or enforced.
At the least, these changes need to be made:
Mandatory warning, from either parents or judge, in order to make teens less scared, give them less need to be sneaky, make sure the law is a last resort, and not the abuse of choice for sickeningly lazy parents.
Only the legal guardian of a teen can have them charged under the law, in order to prevent the unspeakable evil that would result if anyone could report them.
The teens should not have a sex crime on their record, because we are trying to help them, not write them off, and because it insults victims of real sex crimes.
Rewrite the law so it only applies to intercourse, or attempted intercourse, not “sexual contact.”
A teenage girl has sex with a boy her own age.
Her stepfather secretly takes pictures.
Then the stepfather tells the girl that he can have her convicted of sex crimes any time he wants, and thus has her in his power.
Of course, if we trust in the intelligence and goodness of everyone on the planet this would never happen.
Can we?
And the girl only has to retort, “Go ahead, and you will also be found guilty of owning child pornography.”
Seriously. How could it anything but child porn? Two children, having sex. Underage sex. Child Porn. Who do you think has more to lose if those photos are found?
Seriously. WHY do you think anyone would take photos of underage kids having sex? Anyone hear what kind of shitstorm Pete Townsend got into for downloading child porn for “research”? And you think someone is going to sneakily take pictures of underage children having sex and not put themselves at terrible risk?
How do you explain this?
Is there some law that protects teenagers from prosecution from the law if they possess child porn? So what if a peer takes pictures of the teens having sex. It still qualifies as child porn, doesn’t it?
Well, yosemitebabe, maybe I was wrong. Maybe you are fiendishly barbaric, rather than dangerously naive.
You have completely ignored the point that:
The 14 year old girl is not a legal expert.
The 14 year old girl doesn’t want to be convicted of sex crimes! Having the guy get arrested too doesn’t make her happy to be convicted!
Taking pictures is just one small example of how this law could be abused by malicious third parties. You continue to ignore this. Why?
Not all 14 year old girls are as smart as you. Many could easily be intimidated by an evil adult male who threatens them with sex crime charges.
THE GIRL SHOULD NOT GET CONVICTED BY THIS SICK VILLAIN! NOT EVEN IF HE GETS CONVICTED TOO! UNDERSTAND?
Your “nobody with a brain” argument is laughable. Why do we need laws at all in your fantasy world? Why do adult males father most children of teen mothers? Don’t they have brains? BUT IT HAPPENS ANYWAY. IT IS A FACT. Deal with it!
If malicious third parties get to abuse this law and harm kids, that hurts parents too, who you are supposedly trying to help!
We have to deal with reality, not your dreamworld where all 14 year old girls are law experts who cannot be intimidated, and who do not mind getting sex crime convictions, and all adults are too smart to ever commit a crime.
I’m sorry, you are really disturbing me here. I don’t know how anyone could be so callous.
If you’re so concerned about what happens to the parents, why not concentrate on that, instead of going after consensual acts that have no consequences 99% of the time? Why not just minimize or eliminate the parents’ liability for the remaining 1%?
Well, could we be more melodramatic?
So the girl does not watch the news? The girl has no friends, no peers, NO ONE who has told her about the grave stigma against child porn? The girl’s living in some hole somewhere?
All the girl has to do is tearfully tell someone, anyone of this man’s blackmail plot, and then that person can turn him in. Why would the guy take that kind of risk? She’s an unknown quantity. Who knows what she’ll do with the information that he possesses child porn? Not only that he possesses it, but that he took the photos?
You are not thinking of this from the right perspective.
The guy isn’t even going to THINK about photographing her, unless he is a pervert anyway. And even then, if he wants to photograph her, unless he wants to be put in jail on child porn charges, there’s nothing in it for him to tell her about it in an attempt to blackmail her. The risk is too great. Child porn charges are severe. Scary severe. He’d have to be crazy to risk it. He has much more to lose than the teenagers.
After all, He took photos of minors having sex. Off to the clink for him. And I have no doubt, he’ll get a lot of jail time. And it’ll be a REAL jail, not a “halfway house.” And it’ll be on his permanent record. Forever.
Another thing—it would be very easy for the girl to claim that her sleazeball stepfather forced her to pose for those photos. Hey, why not claim that? What has she got to lose? The guy’s obviously a perv anyway, to photograph underage children like that. She could just say that he made her and her boyfriend pose for the photos, and that he (the stepfather) then masturbated to the photos. Because he’s obviously a sick perv. Hey—I’d buy that story.
And even if she didn’t think of accusing him of that, it’s not unlikely some other “advisor” of her’s would. Who is more sympathetic—a waif-like teenager, or a sleazeball man who photographs underage teens having sex?
So, I ask again—what person in their right mind would put themselves in that vulnerable of a position? To exert their “control” over the minor child? Well, what would be the point? If they get caught with the photos, they end up in jail. So much for “control” from jail.
It doesn’t hold water. You are being very naive about the stigma and FEAR most people have about anything connected child porn if you think any differently.
Calm down. You’re going to burst a blood vessel over this.
You really do live in a fantasy world, don’t you?
There are harsh consequences for an adult who has sex with a 13 or 14 year old girl too. And yet most babies born to teen mothers have adult fathers! With younger girls, the age difference is even bigger!
You STILL refuse to respond to this simple, proven fact.
You still stubbornly persist in your dream that people are too scared to break the law.
And you still refuse to respond to the fact that taking pictures was just one small example of how someone could abuse this law to harm a teenager.
If you make teens sex criminals, and you give everyone the power to have them convicted of sex crimes, then you are setting them up to be harmed. It’s that simple. Stop ignoring that, and only responding to one example of this harm.
Yes, I am getting very upset over your repulsive and callous defenses of a law which sets teens up for this harm.
I am extremely upset by your disgusting idea that they have to pretend that they were forced into sex to avoid charges, which is not only perjury but is just a despicable idea in the first place. Your assertion of this as a reasonable way to avoid abuse of the law makes me realize that argument with you is futile.
You clearly do not care a whit about the safety of teenagers. You have no problem with making them all sex criminals, putting them at the mercy of the most evil in our society. You have no problem with taking away the power to raise them from their parents, and giving it to any stranger who decides to take it.
This is the kind of hellish action that is guaranteed to get me upset. I admit it. I find the ideas that you have expressed in this thread abhorrent and loathsome, and as much as I wish I could forget that I ever read them I feel impelled to make it clear just how vile your opinions are.
You honestly think that ANYONE should have the power to have a teenager convicted of sex crimes, and that the teen should have to pretend that they were forced to have sex in order to avoid the charges? You honestly think this is not reprehensible? Excuse me, I have to go close my eyes and try to forget the monstrous sludge that you have spewed forth in this thread.
Yosemitebabe, your insane belief that nobody would ever harm children is easily disproven:
Child porn HAPPENS.
IT HAPPENS.
Some people are NOT too scared to do such evil things.
You are giving them ANOTHER weapon to use, ANOTHER line to use, ANOTHER way to intimidate and abuse children.
You are giving every malicious neighbor, every child molester, every angry ex, every evil person in the country a way to exert their evil will with the force of the law!
You are taking away the power to raise a child from his/her parents, and giving it to every psycho out there!
PLEASE stop. For my sake, at least stop posting such despicable things in this thread. Please stop saying that people are too “scared” to do such evil things.
Because some people aren’t. Some people would gladly turn in some kids across the street, and some people would gladly use the abililty to turn them in to intimidate the kids.
Yeesh, Nightime, calm down. Put a cool cloth on your forehead or something.
I am not debating that with you. I’m pretty burned out on this thread.
I was just debunking the “taking child porn photos to blackmail” myth.
Get a grip then, and start actually reading my posts instead of flipping out and hyperventillating over them.
I’m just pointing out that your delusions of adults blackmailing teenagers by taking child pornography of them is silly. Because the adult has much more to risk than the child. Their record won’t be expunged like the child’s will. Child porn crimes carry a horrible stigma and they are not something that anyone would do lightly. Child porn charges are far worse than anything that could be brought against the kids.
If the adult is a pervert who wants to manipulate the child, they are going to do that anyway and there are laws to stop them.
But if we are talking about a person who does NOT want to sexually molest a child, has no perverted intentions, but merely wants to “control” the child, then why would they go the route of taking CHILD PORN as a way to manipulate the child? What person would do this unless they were deranged? And if they are deranged, then once again, they are going to do whatever deranged thing that they want to do anyway, until the law catches up with them.
But, if it will make you happy, I would happily support a policy that would prevent parents from using CHILD PORN as a means of incriminating teenagers of “sex crimes,” since you are so deeply concerned that a whole lot of people would run out and do that. And while we’re at it, we can make it a policy to outlaw the use of DEATH THREATS and TERRORISM as a form of blackmailing children too. Happy now? :rolleyes:
I think the odds of anyone thinking that they could use CHILD PORN to blackmail a kid are pretty remote. Probably much more remote than kids getting STDs, having kids, and so forth. But you’re OK with that risk, aren’t you?
Then why are you arguing this point? Why are you causing me such distress? Do you just enjoy torturing people for fun?
How many times now have I said that taking pictures was just one small example, and how many times have you talked only about that to the exclusion of everything else?
And an adult who has sex with a 14 year old has much more to risk too.
BUT ADULTS ARE STILL THE FATHERS OF MOST BABIES BORN TO TEENAGE MOTHERS!
Get that though your head! Please!
The law does NOT scare everyone!
But you are supporting a law that HELPS them manipulate and intimidate children!
And I NEVER said they would actually take pictures to the police. They could merely have the pictures to prove to the kids that they KNEW. That they knew that the kids were sex criminals.
So you have some malicious people who will turn kids in. This in itself is quite evil, and takes away the rights of the parents to raise their own kids.
Then you have some even more evil people, who will use the law to intimidate and manipulate kids. They may take pictures to prove that they know about the “sex crimes.”
You are sitting there making strawman parodies that I never said, laughing while you support a law to help evil people and to harm and abuse kids. It’s disgusting.
Again, I never said anyone would actually take pictures to the police.
They could turn in the kids without pictures.
Or they could use the pictures just to show the kids that they knew they had commited “sex crimes” and could turn them in if they wanted.
And again, there are ALREADY adults who manipulate and intimidate kids. Why give them MORE power? It’s just despicable… I wish you would just stop.
What? Are you some petite delicate flower who is going to get the vapors by what you read on this thread?
If that’s the case, step away slowly from the comptuer before you pop a cork.
Sheesh, man.
BECAUSE THAT’S ALL I AM TALKING ABOUT.
I am merely debunking the “child porn” hysteria roll you are on.
The rest of it, you take up with someone else.
What? Are you dense?
POSSESSING CHILD PORN IS A SERIOUS CRIME. If they show the pictures to someone else, especially to the police, they are basically turning themselves in as child porn perverts.
Wow. I see the light now! Swarms of parents will voluntarily turn themselves in as possessors of child porn! It makes so much sense now! :rolleyes:
But if the parents are deranged perverts, they’ll do what they are going to do. And I hope that they get the book thrown at them.
If they are not a deranged pervert, they are very unlikely to use child porn as a way to manipulate. Unless you are trying to tell me that it’s likely that non-perverts are going to think that turning themselves in for owning child porn is a good plan to keep their kids in line.
I’m just debunking your hysteria over “child porn as blackmail.”
That’s all. Just the child porn. That’s all. Just that.
Got it?
I’ve also said that I would fully support a law that prevented parents from using CHILD PORN as a means of blackmailing their own children. What more do you want from me on this “photographs as blackmail” thing you are frothing over?
The rest of it, you are getting all lathered up on your own. Hey man, knock yourself out. But remember that it’s your responsibility if you do that. I am not making you flip your lid simply because I find it highly doubtful that parents would use CHILD PORN as a method of blackmail. But hey, I’ll repeat—I’m all for making the use of CHILD PORN illegal as blackmail. As if it isn’t already illegal or something… :rolleyes:
What? Are you some petite delicate flower who is going to get the vapors by what you read on this thread?
If that’s the case, step away slowly from the comptuer before you pop a cork.
Sheesh, man.
BECAUSE THAT’S ALL I AM TALKING ABOUT.
I am merely debunking the “child porn” hysteria roll you are on.
The rest of it, you take up with someone else.
What? Are you dense?
POSSESSING CHILD PORN IS A SERIOUS CRIME. If they show the pictures to someone else, especially to the police, they are basically turning themselves in as child porn perverts.
Wow. I see the light now! Swarms of parents will voluntarily turn themselves in as possessors of child porn! It makes so much sense now! :rolleyes:
But if the parents are deranged perverts, they’ll do what they are going to do. And I hope that they get the book thrown at them.
If they are not a deranged pervert, they are very unlikely to use child porn as a way to manipulate. Unless you are trying to tell me that it’s likely that non-perverts are going to think that turning themselves in for owning child porn is a good plan to keep their kids in line.
I’m just debunking your hysteria over “child porn as blackmail.”
That’s all. Just the child porn. That’s all. Just that.
Got it?
I’ve also said that I would fully support a law that prevented parents from using CHILD PORN as a means of blackmailing their own children. What more do you want from me on this “photographs as blackmail” thing you are frothing over?
The rest of it, you are getting all lathered up on your own. Hey man, knock yourself out. But remember that it’s your responsibility if you do that. I am not making you flip your lid simply because I find it highly doubtful that parents would use CHILD PORN as a method of blackmail. But hey, I’ll repeat—I’m all for making the use of CHILD PORN illegal as blackmail. As if it isn’t already illegal or something… :rolleyes:
What? Are you some petite delicate flower who is going to get the vapors by what you read on this thread?
If that’s the case, step away slowly from the comptuer before you pop a cork.
Sheesh, man.
BECAUSE THAT’S ALL I AM TALKING ABOUT.
I am merely debunking the “child porn” hysteria roll you are on.
The rest of it, you take up with someone else.
What? Are you dense?
POSSESSING CHILD PORN IS A SERIOUS CRIME. If they show the pictures to someone else, especially to the police, they are basically turning themselves in as child porn perverts.
Wow. I see the light now! Swarms of parents will voluntarily turn themselves in as possessors of child porn! It makes so much sense now! :rolleyes:
But if the parents are deranged perverts, they’ll do what they are going to do. And I hope that they get the book thrown at them.
If they are not a deranged pervert, they are very unlikely to use child porn as a way to manipulate. Unless you are trying to tell me that it’s likely that non-perverts are going to think that turning themselves in for owning child porn is a good plan to keep their kids in line.
I’m just debunking your hysteria over “child porn as blackmail.”
That’s all. Just the child porn. That’s all. Just that.
Got it?
I’ve also said that I would fully support a law that prevented parents from using CHILD PORN as a means of blackmailing their own children. What more do you want from me on this “photographs as blackmail” thing you are frothing over?
The rest of it, you are getting all lathered up on your own. Hey man, knock yourself out. But remember that it’s your responsibility if you do that. I am not making you flip your lid simply because I find it highly doubtful that parents would use CHILD PORN as a method of blackmail. But hey, I’ll repeat—I’m all for making the use of CHILD PORN illegal as blackmail. As if it isn’t already illegal or something… :rolleyes:
OK, I see where I missed that the parents wouldn’t necessarily turn in the photos.
It still doesn’t wash.
Non-pervert parents are not going to be so irrational as to keep copies of CHILD PORN in their house. They can’t risk that their kids won’t tell someone, they can’t risk that someone will find out the nasty, dirty trick that they’ve pulled on their kids. Because if they are caught with child porn, it’s all over.
Perverts are a different matter, and as I said before, we all hope they get the book thrown at them.
But hey—I’m all for forbidding parents using child porn against anybody. Just like I’m against them using death threats, terrorism, torture, or any manner of other illegal things as blackmail against their kids.
Good grief. The board really spit out the multiple posts this time, didn’t it?
Which is why I NEVER SAID THAT.
In almost every one of your posts you lie about what I said.
I NEVER SAID THEY WOULD SHOW THE PICTURES TO THE POLICE.
Clear enough?
What I said was that they could either:
Turn the kids in without any pictures, taking away the right to parent from the actual parents and harming the kid.
Show pictures to the kids to prove they knew about the “sex crimes”, and threaten to turn them in. But then they could burn the pictures if they wanted. I never said they would actually use them for anything but manipulation, deceit, and intimidation.
And again, you are being extremely dishonest. I said pages ago that the pictures thing was just an example of how this law could be used to harm kids.
The bottom line is that if you make teenagers sex criminals, and give everyone the power to have them arrested, then you set them up to be harmed and abused by malicious people.
It is possible that the malicious person might take pictures to prove they knew about the “sex crimes” and thus intimidate and manipulate the kids, but that is as far as the pictures would be used.
Since you are incapable of posting anything but lies, and since you refuse to respond to my actual point, I really want to just forget your sickening contributions to this thread exist. It is a failure of mine that I am not able to stop fighting against the repulsive and nauseating ideas you keep presenting, such as saying that teenagers should have to pretend to have been forced into sex in order to avoid being turned in by a malicious person.