Ridiculous law regarding teen sex...

[Baron Von Crowder]

I'm not sure that I have a problem with her being in trouble. There's no valid reason for her to have pics like that, even if they are of herself. Once she was old enough to know better, she should have deleted them.

And I dont see any issue with her having and keeping them.

[jluv]

And I dont see any issue with her having and keeping them.

Really? Pornographic pictures of a 13-year old?

[Baron Von Crowder]

Really? Pornographic pictures of a 13-year old?

that she took of herself and keeps to herself? What's the problem?

[jluv]

that she took of herself and keeps to herself? What's the problem?

The problem is that she had a collection of pornographic pictures of a 13-year old. I don't see how them being of herself makes it any different at all.

[Baron Von Crowder]

The problem is that she had a collection of pornographic pictures of a 13-year old. I don't see how them being of herself makes it any different at all.

what makes them pornographic? Because she is nude? Naturalists would argue against that.

[jluv]

what makes them pornographic? Because she is nude? Naturalists would argue against that.

Now I know you're trolling.

[cool cat]

Is any minor that is masturbating a pedophile? After all they are committing sex acts with a minor?

[Baron Von Crowder]

Now I know you're trolling.

No sir, I dont believe that pictures that she took of herself for herself are any of our business. Now if she is sending them/selling them to others, sure, I have a problem with that.

Is any minor that is masturbating a pedophile? After all they are committing sex acts with a minor?

yep, same thing.

[jluv]

Is any minor that is masturbating a pedophile? After all they are committing sex acts with a minor?

No.

[Sleeper]

I dont have kids but my 2 cents are once your youngins hit around 15 they know what the fuck they are doing. Just gotta teach them to be safe.

Ask your dads how much freshman tail they plowed in hs.

[jluv]

No sir, I dont believe that pictures that she took of herself for herself are any of our business. Now if she is sending them/selling them to others, sure, I have a problem with that.

Interesting. I think that's absurd, but whatever. Stuff happens. Pics get out. If they didn't, how would anyone know that this chick had them in the first place?

yep, same thing.

That's funny. Not even close to the same thing. If a 13-year old takes a nasty picture of herself, gets caught, you destroy the pic and discipline her as you see fit as a parent.

If a 19-year old holds onto an extensive portfolio containing freaky pictures of a 13-year old, then she should face charges that any other adult would for having those pics. It makes no difference who the 13-year old is in the pictures.

[Baron Von Crowder]

Interesting. I think that's absurd, but whatever. Stuff happens. Pics get out. If they didn't, how would anyone know that this chick had them in the first place?



That's funny. Not even close to the same thing. If a 13-year old takes a nasty picture of herself, gets caught, you destroy the pic and discipline her as you see fit as a parent.

If a 19-year old holds onto an extensive portfolio containing freaky pictures of a 13-year old, then she should face charges that any other adult would for having those pics. It makes no difference who the 13-year old is in the pictures.

I guess It's a matter of perspective. I had a good friend that I played hockey with when I was in middle school, and his family were naturalists. I knew the whole family for several years, and they were very private about it. His sister spilled the beans to be one day, and it opened up conversation about the subject. I wont say that I share their views on the subject, though a different way of thought is surely interesting.

They went to naturalist resorts for family vacations. These werent big orgy's, just families able to be the way they felt nature intended them to be, and be comfortable around others that felt the same way. They had pictures (that I never saw) of their family vacation, sports being played, etc. Are they criminals?

[jluv]

I guess It's a matter of perspective. I had a good friend that I played hockey with when I was in middle school, and his family were naturalists. I knew the whole family for several years, and they were very private about it. His sister spilled the beans to be one day, and it opened up conversation about the subject. I wont say that I share their views on the subject, though a different way of thought is surely interesting.

They went to naturalist resorts for family vacations. These werent big orgy's, just families able to be the way they felt nature intended them to be, and be comfortable around others that felt the same way. They had pictures (that I never saw) of their family vacation, sports being played, etc. Are they criminals?

Weirdos, but not necessarily criminals in my mind, but some may see that differently. It should depend on the context of the photos. I don't know that it does, but it should, imo.

Apples and oranges, though. You said it yourself that the naturalists weren't doing anything freaky. The post above says this chick was.

[71chevellejohn]

If the pictures are determined to be sexually suggestive, then the law considers them to be child porn. The naturalist family photo album isn't(shouldn't be) sexually suggestive.

http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/citizensguide/citizensguide_porn.html

[Baron Von Crowder]

Weirdos, but not necessarily criminals in my mind, but some may see that differently. It should depend on the context of the photos. I don't know that it does, but it should, imo.

Apples and oranges, though. You said it yourself that the naturalists weren't doing anything freaky. The post above says this chick was.

freaky because she has a baseball bat in her ass or because she was 13?