Your reconciliatory words are much appreciated. I also feel honored you'd see me as an excellent judge, lol.
Where you and I have a falling out of opinion, ultimately, is how we see this pertaining to children.
You see this case as an instance of 'unlawful' behavior causing no harm or victim, so what could the harm be while I see it as a violation of a rule or law that guards against hurting oneself when one is a minor.
These are kids and teens in this scenario, some undoubtedly lacking the experience of their seniors who can take advantage of them.
In this case you said it caused no harm, but for the law to serve the people and be fair and not serve an individual, all cases must be trialed/charged equally....thats why law governs the masses while judgement and mercy cater to the individual.
I see your point, still I'll have to offer "agree to disagree" here. Even with children/minors, I do not think that it should be the business of the state/laws to protect them from hurting themselves. It should certainly be seen a job parents/guardians should perform, bringing kids up in a way to not have them
want to hurt themselves - but if someone does make that decision, I think the law has no business to interfere, no matter if they're 5, 15, or 55.
This case for instance in Wisconsin...there are a handful of minor males who were assaulted by an 18 year old male in Mukwanago or Waukesha Wisconsin. They were playing the wooing internet game's equivalent of the childhood version of Doctor and sent nude/explecive material to a guy who was posing as a girl on a social network site. The 18 year old man then used the images to blackmail the kids into sex acts or he'd show everyone what they sent him. The breaking point was when the monster tried to force one of his victims into making their younger brother pose.
Still think it her case not being prosecuted is harmless?
Yes, I still say it's harmless, and I say these boys have done nothing that should be considered illegal.
The 18-year old, however,
has clearly perpetrated a crime - but I see absolutely nothing that would make this situation any different from if it had been, say, a bunch of 22year old college girls sending the pictures. Up until the blackmailing, I'm absolutely fine with it, regardless of the age of the people on the photos; after that, he should be made to face court for it,
again regardless of the age of the extortees.
Why? Because although her action did not hurt her, it could have and has had for others. that is why child pornography is illegal, consented or not. Youths can be easily duped...so can adults, but they do not enjoy the same leniency as children do.
I don't agree that her action in itself (and that is the only thing
she should ever be held accountable for) could have hurt her in any way. Worst thing that could have happened? Some weirdo getting, as JCC put it, "hand happies" by looking at a pic of her boobs. And since she took the photo herself, she obviously was ok with that. No harm done, no rights violated, no need for the state to even take notice.
If the weirdo doing abusive and exploitative thing to the girl
after this, it is nothing the girl is responsible for anymore... or else we're back to the horrid justifications à la "she deserved to be raped, look at that miniskirt she wore" - a standard which modern society has
finally started to leave behind.
That example JCC posed about the hand happies and no harm being does not look at the law, merely this solitary infraction. It does nothing to curb illegal reckless behavior either.
[...]
See, if the law put the fear of consequence into these kids, they may not have sent those pictures. The girl in this story broke a law and got of lucky. I don't believe her lucky streak should continue and she be allowed to get off scott-legally-free.
Another point where we disagree. IMO, it's not the job of laws to act as deterrent. There's more than enough evidence that fear of punishment does little, if anything, to keep crime down.
Basically, I do not believe in the idea of punishment. Laws and courtrooms, IMO, should not exist to "punish evil doers" (yes, I know that the judicial system still sees
part of its job as just this, but frankly, I consider that a relic from less enlightened days past), but to serve as protection for peoples' right and to ensure amends and recompense wherever said rights are hurt. In the case where other people's rights continue to be threatened by someone, he/she has to be locked away - this is the
only valid reason I see for jail sentences, everything else should better be handled by fines, smart money, and/or unpaid community service.
If however, as in this case, nobody's rights were ever violated, there's no need for a law in the first place.
Just like a youth can not drink or smoke, there are some activities they should not engage in until they are of legal age.
Oh and a side not, laws are meant to be simple to avoid loop holes in the like. You say kids can produce pornography if it is voluntary and I bet the numbers of it's availability skyrocket. I'd also wager those voluntary cases are few and far between, that the child is being threatened or paid off, or whatever and its not a simple case of...behold, my nakedness!
Oh, I wholeheartedly agree that those cases are few and far between. Look at my above point of "0.x%". But for the minuscule percentage where it
is the simple case of "behold my nakedness", I still have one thing to say:
Just legalize it - instead of wasting courtroom time on pointless lawsuits.
I disagree that laws should be kept as simple as possible - they should be at least complex enough to allow for discerning situations as this, where
clearly nobody got wronged, to make sure no DA, judge and jury ever get bothered with it. If you bring someone to court only to have them cleared of charges, that's a waste of time and money. Tax payer's money.
And I agree there are things you have to keep illegal because a minor, even if agreeing to them, has no scope of the harm being done. This is why I make a sharp destinction as to
who took the photo. Naked 14 year old girl posing sexily in front of camera? I see
no reason to have that be illegal if said girl takes the picture herself, alone in her room, and I don't care what she does with it afterwards. Nobody is harmed.
Legalize it, even if it's child porn.
Exact same picture, made by a 30 year old person
of the girl? Call the cops and try your best to get the pic off the net if it got put up.
Exact same picture, but
worlds apart in relevance.
Point is, what you do yorself with your own body should never be illegal,
no matter your age. Or else, a 12year old masturbating should
indeed be in for child molestation.
And it should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway: All of this discussion is just about
nude pics. The moment we have depictions of minors actually
having sex with someone, the line is absolutely crossed, and regardless of whether or not the kid consented to have the porn made, you're faced with evidence of abuse, period.
That's where manipulation, exploitation, and the limited ability of a minor to see the consequences come into play heavily. But also note that it then is
not a case anymore of things you just do yourself with your own body.
