?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

More on this Sexting bullshit

Listen to this fucking guy!

Just read the article. I swear to god, no amount of context is going to help anything there. Listen to this guy. He must be the most idiotic man I've ever heard of. He's literally arresting three girls - 13 at the time, something like that? - because he feels the need to reassert the powers of his office. This man still has a job? Well, last I checked, DAs were electable, so that won't be the case for long.

I like how he justifies himself. "Well, we didn't WANT to bring these teenage girls up on felony charges for being child pornographers and associate them with paedophiles that rape and molest children, but we wanted them to go on probation and go to a class on it! They didn't take the offer!" Nowhere in his mind does "you're charging kids for taking pictures of themselves!" enter into this equation; he's so caught up in the law and powers of his office and offers and the fact that in his mind, he's somehow a GOOD guy because hey, he offered a class, that no common sense plays into this!

This just seems to me like someone who sees a technology he can't control, can't monitor, and doesn't even begin to understand, and has to fight it in any way he can, even if it means stretching the law to it's tilt. This doesn't mean that there isn't a lesson in a lot of this to teenagers that do this; there is, obviously. I almost want to find that stupid 7chan thread I saw and show them that. "Yeah, see all that? See the girls doing the wet T-shirt thing in the shower? Notice how I saw that accidentally? That could be you. Some of your friends aren't as trustworthy as you think". When I was a kid, teenagers learned this lesson, usually through some awful secret that went out, like "oh, Rick likes Jen" or something equally as innocuous. Nowadays, not only is it common knowledge that 13 year old Rick likes 13 year old Jen, there's a pretty good chance Jen's already gone down on Rick. In a sense, things are vastly different than they were when I was that age sixteen years ago (Jesus, it's been that long?), but it's also not much different; the kids have been desensitized, and the technology's improved, but the basics of human interaction are no different, and the only difference between a teenager and an adult is that the adult is better at concealing his or her true nature through practise.

The way to handle acts like this is by letting things play out... then letting the parents have the kids that fuck up. You spank their asses, either figuratively or literally speaking (though I'd hope a kid at that point is beyond spankings...). You don't put them in jail to let grown, vicious women do the spanking! Unreal. The only thing this should make me wish is that we had this technology when I was in my teens.

EDIT: I just remembered! I've seen Sexting in play! A while ago, I was researching an article, and saw some salacious pictures of a teenage girl and her friends in their underwear, taken with their cell phones.

I wonder if anyone's going to do something about that girl... I mean, shit, they have her name and everything. I think it was Miley something.

EDIT2: This one's even worse: A 15 year old was arrested in Pennsylvania - what is it with that state? LG, is there something in your water? - for sending explicit pics of herself to someone she met over MySpace. The person was 27 years old.

Time the fuck out. Fifteen year old girl gets sends nude pics to 27 year old man... and it's the GIRL that gets arrested!? Have we gone fucking bonkers? OK, nice, he got arrested too, but what the fuck? That girl doesn't need a record, she needs therapy!

EDIT3: Pennsylvania! Wow, I knew that sounded familiar!

Comments

( 13 comments — Leave a comment )
dmajohnson
Mar. 30th, 2009 04:38 pm (UTC)
In Tunkhannock, a town about 130 miles north of Philadelphia, Skumanick met with about 20 students and their parents last month and offered them a deal: The youths wouldn't be prosecuted if they took a class on sexual harassment, sexual violence and gender roles.

Yes, because teaching the socially mandated differences between men and women will definantly stop this vicious cycle of sexting.

...lol wut?...

The year-old photo of Nancy Doe, meanwhile, shows her just out of the shower, with a towel wrapped around her waist and her breasts exposed.

If a guy had his picture taken in the same manner, there wouldn't be a stink about it. Double standard much?

The ACLU's lawsuit claims both photos are protected First Amendment speech.

As nice as it is that they're taking the case, I wish the idiots would stop using their blanket term version of "FREE SPEECH! FREE SPEECH!" on everything.

"He punched the man in the face and then peed on his face while he was down."
"IT WAS HIS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT! FREE SPEECH! FREE SPEECH! WHEE~!"

Skumanick said swimsuit-clad kids have nothing to fear from him.

Which is ironic, considering a lot of swimsuits these days--even for younger teen--cover more than underwear does (which is what the other girls were wearing when photographed). Granted, in our culture underwear carries more of a personal connotation to it, but still.

I like how the pedophile witch hunts over the past decade (which aren't exclusive to North America, either) turn anyone and everyone into the enemy. For example, last year a man in the UK was verbally assaulted in a public park for taking pictures of clothed children--his own children. And that's still not half as funny (and scary) as the woman in New York charged for sitting down in a public park because it was restricted to people with children only.

"They said it's against the law, you have to be accompanied by a child to sit in a kitty park and they were giving me a summons. I said 'you're kidding right?' and he said 'no.'"

And so the officers, [obviously] well-trained at sensing a dangerous situation when they encounter one, did the only thing sensible. While they were writing this dance instructor a summons, they called for back-up.


As someone else pointed out elsewhere, the rule itself it absurd because a real pedophile would likely be with the children where authorities would just assume they were a parent.
shotglass
Mar. 30th, 2009 05:21 pm (UTC)
This is just too fucking much. What are they even thinking? Part of me just wants to say that these kids are just going to find more subversive ways of doing it. If teenagers want other people to see them naked, they're really not going to let the law stop them. Not to say that we shouldn't try to educate them as to more healthy approaches, but putting them into juvy and giving them records... that's just going to make them better criminals. It's proven that a good many teens, once they come out of there, only find their way back in because they spent the past however-long associating with people more deviant than they are. And labeling a teenager as a sex offender is obviously a great way to get them to not do it anymore. Give someone that young a label and before long they start to believe it.

It's like these morons have some kind of disconnect between their ideas and how the human being behaves/how society works.

Edited at 2009-03-30 05:25 pm (UTC)
lordglenn
Mar. 30th, 2009 07:39 pm (UTC)
After reading about 7/8s of the first article, I'm glad to say that I live on the other side of the state, away from this fucking idiot. While I don't necessarily agree that he's caught up in the law and powers of his office (he is, to some extent, because he's taking something so stupid and juvenile to extreme measures), he IS just a complete and total moron.

Sure, young teenage girls shouldn't be taking quasi-nude (or nude) pictures of themselves or their friends and sharing them (or letting other people use their phones who could see and send them), but that sounds like yet another case of politicos (be they Legislative or Executive) trying to take control of something that PARENTS should be watching out for. It's just like with all of the bullshit violent video game legislation that states have been trying to pass (regardless of the fact that there are already ratings on the games). These are things that deal with parental upbringing. As many have said, these girls don't need criminal charges or probation! They need their parents to do their fucking jobs and pay attention to what their kids do. (They do still need to realize the severity of what could happen with photos like those, so the class I could feasibly understand.) They're fucking 13 years old. While that age was only 7 years ago for me, I certainly did a few stupid things when I was that age. It's a fact of life that people (should) mature as they get older. I'm sure this D.A. probably did something when he was 13 that is equally as stupid.

Main point? D.A. is a dumbass who likely won't win the lawsuit because he's trying to incarcerate teenagers over something that is clearly not worth spending taxpayer's money on and because the action in question is something that doesn't need to be policed in this manner (registering kids as sex offenders (when they weren't even close the level of a pedophile?) for something juvenile like this?) and should be handled by their parents.

"Basically what they're seeking is, they're seeking a federal judge to say whether or not I can file criminal charges against them," he said. "So frankly what they're asking the federal court to allow is, is to allow you to go out, commit a crime, run to the federal courthouse before you can be arrested, and file papers saying, 'Please don't allow them to arrest me, it's going to violate my civil rights.' That's not how the system can possibly work.

No, they're suing you because you're arresting them when they committed no crime whatsoever. Their MOTHER of all people even said that there was nothing wrong (in terms of pornography) with the pictures. I honestly hope that those girls win the lawsuit and that the D.A. gets so much damn negativity from the populace that he either resigns or gets ousted from his office.

With the second article, all I can say is a nice "WTF?". Normally, when pedophiles get underage females to give them nude photographs, the girls aren't charged with pornography. How do we know that she wasn't coaxed into sending the photos? Even if it was of her own consent, she doesn't need jail time. In fact, neither do the kids mentioned at the bottom of this article. What, you'd rather that the kids, instead of simply sending the pictures to other kids, meet up and just go at it? Because, as a youth, with "sexting" ruled out, that's about the only other viable option. And, I'd personally rather the pictures than even more teenagers running around having sex, having children while in high school, and even possibly spreading STDs as a side-effect. That seems a whole lot worse to me.

Plus, what do all of the D.A.s and police forces think they're going to accomplish with this, other than further ruining the lives of tons of children? Hell, I don't even know why they're bother with all of this, when there are far bigger and even more accessible areas to find this kind of stuff: the INTERNET. Prosecuting a bunch of kids who aren't mature enough to see what they're doing is stupid is piddly compared to the amount of shit out on the Internet that is even easier to get access to.
lordglenn
Mar. 30th, 2009 07:39 pm (UTC)
As for something in the water, it's possible. Luckily, Western PA has only had one major news headline in recent weeks with that 11-yr old kid that shot his father's pregnant fiancée (his soon-to-be stepmother) while she was sleeping with a youth model 20-gauge shotgun, which is disturbing enough. But, for the most part, it's those Easterns that cause all of the problems. ;[
lordglenn
Mar. 30th, 2009 08:00 pm (UTC)
EDIT - I actually have a well at home, so maybe the lack of city water saved me from all of this craziness. Or, maybe it was the iron in my water. Who knows. XD
burning_phoneix
Mar. 30th, 2009 08:53 pm (UTC)
superbus
Mar. 30th, 2009 08:57 pm (UTC)
You're from Saudi Arabia! You're one to talk!
burning_phoneix
Mar. 30th, 2009 08:58 pm (UTC)
Yeah but I couldn't find one for Saudi Arabia. :P
burning_phoneix
Mar. 30th, 2009 08:59 pm (UTC)
That and we still haven't executed a sassy teenage girl (A judge in Iran literally executed a 16 year old girl for talking back to him)
samuraiter
Mar. 31st, 2009 01:24 am (UTC)
o_O How authoritarian countries maintain positive population growth figures is beyond me.
samuraiter
Mar. 31st, 2009 01:26 am (UTC)
*facepalm*

This is taking it too far. Prison takes normal people who make one mistake ... and turns them into real criminals.
superbus
Mar. 31st, 2009 03:59 am (UTC)
That's what people seem to miss. Everyone's in such a hurry to lock up non-violent criminals - sometimes, not even real criminals - in a place that's pretty much Lord of the Flies. Does no one realize how fucked up prisons really are? Or do they think every prison is white collar? Has no one heard of the Stanford Experiment?

It's either mass ignorance, or mass ignoring of the facts to get cheap labour. Considering the people making the decisions, I have to say the latter more and more every day.
shotglass
Mar. 31st, 2009 07:11 pm (UTC)
Has no one heard of the Stanford Experiment?

Unfortunately, whenever I bring up that or Zimbardo to people who aren't majoring in sociology, psychology, or anthropology, I get a lot of blank stares. People aren't as informed as we'd like to think, especially in the areas of science and research.
( 13 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

Mr. Met
superbus
Superbus the BRAVE!!!
Superbusnet

Latest Month

July 2013
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner