We have yet another case of child porn, this time in Florida. With the evolution in technology has come a new round of problems. A group of kids in south Florida took to Instagram to solicit other kids to take revealing selfies and post them.
Its stupid, its wrong, but is the child porn charge the correct one? If a thirteen year old chooses to have sex with another thirteen year old, would that warrant a charge of indecent liberties with a child? Not in a sane world! If a child that young can have sex with their peers, that means they can expose their bodies to them. Why is the next step, sending lewd pics worthy of a label that will follow them for life?
We need to get prosecutors out of doing parents jobs. The kids who started this mess deserve the same treatment they would get if they were caught in that tweens bedroom late at night. Their permanent teeth would become less permanent, and they might get home with rock salt imbedded in their ass, but its not rape.
We were all kids once. We all got just as stupid as technology and our parents allowed us to get, and most of us survived it. Last time I checked, the bruise on my ass from dads boot was just about healed.
Parents need to be parents. If that was an adult coercing the kids to take those photos, that is one thing. He or she should be taken out and shot almost dead, then left for the coyotes. Kids doing it is another. I can remember parties when I was a teen where girls around my age got up in the back of a pickup and did a strip routine that was as bad as any club by a military base can have. That was in the 70's, and was about as high tech as we could get. Some one snapped a few polaroids, and those got passed around her school all of the next year. As I remember, the guy with the camera had to out run her, and later her dad.
Heck, there are tons of pics on the internet of children running around nude that are not porn. The naturist sites are full of them. The supreme court ruled in favor of the naturists: The depiction of adults and
children nude in the visual media has enjoyed constitutional protection in the United
States since 1958, when the Supreme Court vacated a Court of Appeals finding that Sunshine
& Health magazine could be obscene (Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, Postmaster
General, 355 U.S. 372). The right to depict adults and children in innocent nude poses has
been upheld without a pause for 41 years. In case after case, the Supreme Court and lower
courts have always upheld the constitutionality of "nudity without more,"
specifically referring to the nudist depiction as a fully constitutional form of
I see no difference here. Boys through the years have masturbated to the lingerie section of the J.C.Penny catalog. Does that make it porno?
The kids who post these selfies are being dumb. its a sad state of affairs when the persecutors and Poorlice decide to be dumber.