Girl Charged With Child Porn

[dwightfry]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@23 April 2004 - 07:34
But if she were having sex with her 40 year-old "boyfriend," he'd be charged with statuatory rape. amoung other things.

And he should. He's 40. If she sent picture of herself to adults then, they should be prosicuted.

Children 'experimenting' with other children is completely natural. But children 'experimenting' with adults is wrong, on the adults part. Children don't know any better. The fact that she did this over the internet is dangerous, but not surprising.

[Keikan]

Originally posted by vidcc+20 April 2004 - 23:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 20 April 2004 - 23:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Keikan@20 April 2004 - 20:05
Ya but what are you worried about him accessing? Porn? He&#39;s 16 come on.

Hmm...are you a parent?

So what exactly is this thread about?...a girl of 15 posting pornographic pictures of herself on the net.....do you think this would happen if her parents did as i do?
I have kept a check on him always, i like to think i am a good parent. I don&#39;t particularly want him to look at porn, but it&#39;s only natural for a young man to be curious, he knows all about sex and has a healthy like of girls...he also has a healthy respect of them because i tried to raise him to be a gentleman and respectful. When he is an adult and has his own place he can do whatever he wants..until then he abides by my rules. I am not a tyrant, i do negotiate on most things and treat him with the same respect i like him to give me, but sometimes being a good parent is not about being too easy going. [/b][/quote]
Well I&#39;m just saying, He&#39;s 16 so I assume he should already know about sex and stuff. So I don&#39;t see anything wrong with porn, aslong as he know it&#39;s only pure entertainment of course. But other than porn I can&#39;t think of anything else that bad on the internet. Or maybe your worried about who he is chatting with? Chatting with some bad people?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Keikan@24 April 2004 - 08:49
But other than porn I can&#39;t think of anything else that bad on the internet.

There are many things which are bad on the interweb, just as there are in real life. Indeed on the interweb it can be worse, as you cannot see the person you are chatting to, or who made the site you are looking at.

Think of anything you will find in real life and it is on the net, it gives a voice to those who could be ignored. There are sites about Racial Hatred, Sectarianism, Terrorism, just about everything you could think of.

Bear in mind that some sites like this are easy to spot, because the owner wants it to be obvious what they are about. There are others which look perfectly reasonable. However when one looks at some of the individual parts, we see that they are anything but. Their filth is hidden amongst normal and reasonable material, which is in effect little more than camouflage.

The reader goes thro&#39; the stuff presented and is accepting it, when their little nuggets appear it is much easier just to accept those as well. Particularly if it is well done.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@24 April 2004 - 00:55
There are many things which are bad on the interweb, just as there are in real life. Indeed on the interweb it can be worse, as you cannot see the person you are chatting to, or who made the site you are looking at.

Think of anything you will find in real life and it is on the net, it gives a voice to those who could be ignored. There are sites about Racial Hatred, Sectarianism, Terrorism, just about everything you could think of.

Bear in mind that some sites like this are easy to spot, because the owner wants it to be obvious what they are about. There are others which look perfectly reasonable. However when one looks at some of the individual parts, we see that they are anything but. Their filth is hidden amongst normal and reasonable material, which is in effect little more than camouflage.

The reader goes thro&#39; the stuff presented and is accepting it, when their little nuggets appear it is much easier just to accept those as well. Particularly if it is well done.

on this we agree 100% (bet you never thought that would happen)

Keikan
Jpol pretty much made the point (darn that&#39;s annoying )
the rules i set were agreed on by us both as a condition that he could have his own computer in his room a few years ago....he has had 2 computers since then and i gave him acccess to the broadband which he uses to the full with online gaming and his X.box. I do cut a lot of slack, i know he looks at pictures of naked women, FHM type picture are his favourites, but he knows he would be in trouble for looking at hardcore porn.
He is a typical teenager, he seems to have lost the use of his arms and doesn&#39;t seem to know why he did things, however his grades are excelent and he knows he has to keep them up to enjoy certain priviledges.
i appreciate what you are saying, i believe you are about the same age ?. But my point is that as a parent we have to know that our children are not up to mischief such as the case of the girl in the original thread.

[Keikan]

ok.

[sArA]

Originally posted by vidcc+24 April 2004 - 16:43--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 24 April 2004 - 16:43)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@24 April 2004 - 00:55
There are many things which are bad on the interweb, just as there are in real life. Indeed on the interweb it can be worse, as you cannot see the person you are chatting to, or who made the site you are looking at.

Think of anything you will find in real life and it is on the net, it gives a voice to those who could be ignored. There are sites about Racial Hatred, Sectarianism, Terrorism, just about everything you could think of.

Bear in mind that some sites like this are easy to spot, because the owner wants it to be obvious what they are about. There are others which look perfectly reasonable. However when one looks at some of the individual parts, we see that they are anything but. Their filth is hidden amongst normal and reasonable material, which is in effect little more than camouflage.

The reader goes thro&#39; the stuff presented and is accepting it, when their little nuggets appear it is much easier just to accept those as well. Particularly if it is well done.

on this we agree 100% (bet you never thought that would happen)

Keikan
Jpol pretty much made the point (darn that&#39;s annoying )
the rules i set were agreed on by us both as a condition that he could have his own computer in his room a few years ago....he has had 2 computers since then and i gave him acccess to the broadband which he uses to the full with online gaming and his X.box. I do cut a lot of slack, i know he looks at pictures of naked women, FHM type picture are his favourites, but he knows he would be in trouble for looking at hardcore porn.
He is a typical teenager, he seems to have lost the use of his arms and doesn&#39;t seem to know why he did things, however his grades are excelent and he knows he has to keep them up to enjoy certain priviledges.
i appreciate what you are saying, i believe you are about the same age ?. But my point is that as a parent we have to know that our children are not up to mischief such as the case of the girl in the original thread. [/b][/quote]
I agree,

I also feel that it is the lack of parental guidance which created this situation, and they should be considered responsible.

Perhaps they could be charged with &#39;incitement to child pornography&#39;, &#39;neglect&#39; and &#39;child abuse&#39;.

[J'Pol]

Sara

Sorry, I am not totally aware of the whole story or background. Could you perhaps enlighten me as to why we are now blaming the parents for this.

There are plenty of people who are raised in a less than satisfactory environment, who become good, worthwhile members of society. On the other hand there are those who are raised in a loving, caring environment who turn out to be delinquents or criminals. There are a great many factors other than parental control.

I am not saying that the parents are not the cause in this case, just that I have not seen the evidence to support this contention. I would be particularly interested in the evidence to support the allegation of incitement,

[Biggles]

I would agree with J&#39;Pol on this. Part of allowing one&#39;s children to grow up is to give them responsibility. It simply is not possible to monitor their behaviour 100% of the time. In fact, I suspect a teenager who was monitored 100% of the time might feel a little "controlled" and not at all happy.

Whilst not all 15 year olds experiment with smoking, drinking and sex a fair few do. It is also true that some parents worry less than others (which might explain the gang of drunken teenagers I saw staggering around town the other night). However, to suggest that parents should be charged with incitement because a) they bought her a computer and B) were content that she was not roaming the streets drunk so allowed her private time in her own room, is a bit harsh I feel.

Like J&#39;Pol I don&#39;t know the background to this, so if there is evidence that she was encouraged to do this then the matter takes a different complexion. However, the idea that every parent should make regular 15 minute checks on their teenagers in their rooms is a novel one (and a contentious one too I suspect).

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Biggles@25 April 2004 - 12:21
I would agree with J&#39;Pol on this. Part of allowing one&#39;s children to grow up is to give them responsibility. It simply is not possible to monitor their behaviour 100% of the time. In fact, I suspect a teenager who was monitored 100% of the time might feel a little "controlled" and not at all happy.

Whilst not all 15 year olds experiment with smoking, drinking and sex a fair few do. It is also true that some parents worry less than others (which might explain the gang of drunken teenagers I saw staggering around town the other night). However, to suggest that parents should be charged with incitement because a) they bought her a computer and B) were content that she was not roaming the streets drunk so allowed her private time in her own room, is a bit harsh I feel.

Like J&#39;Pol I don&#39;t know the background to this, so if there is evidence that she was encouraged to do this then the matter takes a different complexion. However, the idea that every parent should make regular 15 minute checks on their teenagers in their rooms is a novel one (and a contentious one too I suspect).

I can only support the following by anecdotal evidence, however in my experience adolescents who are over-controlled often have serious problems. Particularly with regulating their own behaviour.

A friend of mine has a teenage daughter. She and her other 16 year old friends were having a sleep-over. Jim has no problem with her having a couple of drinks (in the house) of a Friday night. It is in a controlled environment and takes away the great mystique. He was happy for the other girls to do the same, however only with their parents approval (directly to him or his good lady obviously). One set of parents refused and thought the idea a bad one. Jim gave them his word that their daughter would not get alcohol in his house, he ensured this was complied with.

Said non-drinking daughter is the only one who has been seen under the influence (and quite badly) walking the local streets. Short of locking them indoors or following them everywhere children, or young adults will tend to experiment. If they have a knowledge of the effects of alcohol and in particular it&#39;s delayed action effects, then they are better equipped to deal with situations. One can see how, if they do not have the experience, they will drink too much, too quickly. This goes for other things as well.

The point is that parents are only one of many influences on their children. When they are younger then the parent is the main influence. However as they get older the influences and how important they are change. A 16 year old is likely to be more influenced by peer pressure than by their parents. The important thing is how they were influenced when younger and the basic values they have. If they have the ability to regulate their own behaviour, which they were given gradually as they grew up, then they are well equipped to cope with situations.

[j2k4]

Good posts, guys (and Sara, too); I feel I must reiterate and stress what J&#39;Pol mentioned in passing-the demystification of select experiences and/or
substances can be a powerful tool in the hands of a responsible adult.

It doesn&#39;t get the play it should in the unofficial and unprinted Handbook of Parenting.