Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is being described sounds very sick. Makes one wonder if there isn't a database somewhere of such photos.
There is. Microsoft had a big hand in developing it. Basically used by law enforcement to help 'match' images that are child porn. Probably not as sick as you're thinking.. It's actually a decent tool and has its place. What the police are trying to do here.. Not so much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251
Its not the registry that is the problem, it is who is put on it any why.
It's alot of things. We could start with how the registries are basically unconstitutional, regardless of what any court says. Their argument that gets them around double jeopardy is basically "Well, it's not double jeopardy if it's not punishment, and the registries are not punishment". Now, someone convicted AFTER the registries were created, and ordered by a judge to be on it as part of their sentence.. I have no problem with. But.. Someone convicted of.. Whatever.. We'll say rape.. in 1952 should not be forced to be on a registry.
The other part of the problem is that.. They don't do any damn good. I mean, really.. If you check it and see there's someone convicted of.. CSC with a minor who lives 2 doors down from you.. What do you do? First off.. CSC can mean a number of things.. You don't know the details of what happened. I mean, it could be a just turned 18 year old with a 16 year old. Or.. Indecent exposure, which lands some people on registries.. But.. again.. What are you going to do? Tell your kids be careful around that person? The far more dangerous person is the one who is NOT on the registry. You should be telling your kids to be careful around EVERYONE. Not to mention that the vast majority of sex assaults on kids is done by a close family member or family friend, not a stranger. So, fundamentally, a registry is basically worthless.. Short of giving someone a warm and fuzzy feeling, which is generally misplaced.
I've said this one before.. No child porn laws should ever be applied to someone for pictures of themselves.
There is. Microsoft had a big hand in developing it. Basically used by law enforcement to help 'match' images that are child porn. Probably not as sick as you're thinking.. It's actually a decent tool and has its place. What the police are trying to do here.. Not so much.
It's alot of things. We could start with how the registries are basically unconstitutional, regardless of what any court says. Their argument that gets them around double jeopardy is basically "Well, it's not double jeopardy if it's not punishment, and the registries are not punishment". Now, someone convicted AFTER the registries were created, and ordered by a judge to be on it as part of their sentence.. I have no problem with. But.. Someone convicted of.. Whatever.. We'll say rape.. in 1952 should not be forced to be on a registry.
The other part of the problem is that.. They don't do any damn good. I mean, really.. If you check it and see there's someone convicted of.. CSC with a minor who lives 2 doors down from you.. What do you do? First off.. CSC can mean a number of things.. You don't know the details of what happened. I mean, it could be a just turned 18 year old with a 16 year old. Or.. Indecent exposure, which lands some people on registries.. But.. again.. What are you going to do? Tell your kids be careful around that person? The far more dangerous person is the one who is NOT on the registry. You should be telling your kids to be careful around EVERYONE. Not to mention that the vast majority of sex assaults on kids is done by a close family member or family friend, not a stranger. So, fundamentally, a registry is basically worthless.. Short of giving someone a warm and fuzzy feeling, which is generally misplaced.
I've said this one before.. No child porn laws should ever be applied to someone for pictures of themselves.
This I was aware of. What I was referencing as "sick" was what the LEOs were attempting. However, indeed maybe they are hoping to create some matches to build their case. Which also sounds sick and possibly abusive. Makes one wonder about how such a database can be used/abused. Certainly child porn should not apply in this case.
This is outrageous. He's 17 and she's 15 - not a huge difference in age. She sent him nude photos of herself, but only the boy is being charged. And medically-inducing an erection so the police can take a picture of it? It's more than outrageous, actually. It's sick.
These cases vex me so much, especially when they end up on the sex offender registry for life. I am not saying statutory rape is not a true crime. A 30 year old having sex with a 15 year old is illegal, even if she consents. A 17 year old having sex with a 15 year old should not be.
This country is so strange sometimes. This sounds like a story out of Dubai or something...
Who really cares what two teenagers send to each other, when so many kids that age are having sex already to begin with. Both are underage, so why is one being held to a higher standard? What a load of crap...
We should care but not like this. There are very good reasons to get involved so that underage teens are taught the reasons why this isn't very bright, but holy cow, the answer to every thing now seems to be "arrest them".
Someone so lacking in common sense aren't capable of teaching teens anything.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's more than outrageous, actually. It's sick.