Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next > Jump to: Bottom Last Post
AmyNicoleduh Female, 18-29, Eastern US
   1014 Posts
|
Saturday, April 04, 2009 7:16:01 AM ditto. |
|
omgRAH Female, 13-17, Western US
  58 Posts
|
Friday, April 03, 2009 8:59:09 PM "video removed." god dammit. |
|
aliachloe Female, 13-17, Southern US
   189 Posts
|
Friday, April 03, 2009 1:57:51 PM I agree with Arkolyte. It should be common knowledge that possession or distribution of a nude picture of an underage person is illegal, regardless on whether it is of yourself or not. It's a bit odd they would want her to register as a sexual predator, as she isn't, really, but she should know better. Plus, if she wanted her boyfriend to see it, as she says is her reason, why not just get naked in front of him? Really. Poor judgment skills there. She could have just cut out the intermediary and never have gotten in trouble. |
|
Arkolyte Male, 18-29, Eastern US
4 Posts
|
Monday, March 30, 2009 7:40:31 PM Question the intelligence of our law enforcement?! WTF? I think maybe we should be questioning the intelligence of the girl who was stupid enough to put nude pictures of herself on fricken' Myspace! Granted, I don't believe she should be charged as harshly as she is, but it's her own fault she's in trouble at all. |
|
TKD_Master Male, 18-29, Midwest US
   1747 Posts
|
Monday, March 30, 2009 5:20:14 AM "Charging a child (in the eyes of the law ) with possession and distribution of child pornography is insane enough, but the ultimate irony would be if they attempt to try her as an adult.Think about it, it will blow your mind!" wow i hadnt thought of it that way...that does blow my mind. izza paradox! |
|
Happy-dude Male, 13-17, Australia
   163 Posts
|
Sunday, March 29, 2009 11:29:20 PM Sex is a stupid face. There, now I'm a sex offender too. |
|
Pyroo Male, 18-29, Europe
  53 Posts
|
Sunday, March 29, 2009 1:19:25 PM Oh, sweet freedom of A... |
|
Tratheyas Male, 13-17, Western US
   218 Posts
|
Sunday, March 29, 2009 10:14:36 AM I'm not even going to get started on this. It's beyond moronic. XDBecause, you know, the instant I watch a video like this, I question the intelligence of our law enforcement. I mean, really. Yes, some pedo probably searches for girls this insecure and beats his half-inch to it, but counting this as possession and distribution of child porn is laughable. Posted on a massive site or not. |
|
ADMFlapplap Male, 18-29, Western US
   161 Posts
|
Sunday, March 29, 2009 6:01:50 AM Charging a child (in the eyes of the law ) with possession and distribution of child pornography is insane enough, but the ultimate irony would be if they attempt to try her as an adult.Think about it, it will blow your mind! |
|
Kaleotera Female, 18-29, Eastern US
   253 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 10:14:33 PM To bananajojo: Im not saying that there should be complete abstinance, but that there is a lack of thought when it comes to sexual encounters. Hence my last comment. Of course don't get me started on the number of welfare babies because of a young woman getting pregnant. Im just saying that there is a serious problem with people today, when did people stop thinking things through before doing something? Moreover, why do these kids want to grow up so fast? Trust me, the real world isn't that great, enjoy being a kid. |
|
OrangeCrow Female, 18-29, Western US
   928 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 8:10:17 PM "I can understand arresting her on charges of distributing child porn, but seriously, possession? If possessing pictures of herself is illegal, wouldn't dressing in the bathroom mirror constitute some form of rape?"Haha. This does seem really weird. o_o; But damn, kids need to stop whoring themselves out like that... It's really pathetic and stupid. -.- |
|
Syrup Female, 13-17, Canada
   166 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 7:02:25 PM why was that guy looking at teenage girls' myspaces anyway? |
|
BrandySnap Female, 18-29, Australia
   143 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 6:55:35 PM Hahaha take that. But if they think she's the only underage teen taking naughty pictures of herself they clearly need more moderators. Wait...did that sound like I was referring to myself? |
|
Angilion Male, 40-49, Europe
   1451 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:40:07 PM "Child porn is ALMOST understandable, but sex offender? This is bullpoo. How the hell is she a sex offender? Did she sexually molest herself?"A sex offender is someone who has broken a law which is any way involves anything sexual. So if she has broken any child porn laws by having a photo of herself, she is automatically a sex offender because possession of child porn is a sex offence. You're completely mistaken about the meaning of "sex offender". Say, for example, you and some other adult were having sex outdoors and that's illegal where you live (it probably is). That would make both of you sex offenders. |
|
Angilion Male, 40-49, Europe
   1451 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:32:23 PM "tsust me sysdecayexe no one. and i mean no one. will read such enourmous comments. get to the point. such as."I would far rather read comments of moderate length than your few lines of semiliterate scrawling. Yes, moderate length. Sysdecayexe's comments were not long, although they would no doubt seem so to people who have difficulty reading. Although Sysdecayexe's comments were badly written as well. Nowhere near as badly written as yours, but still badly written. They were just some baseless conspiracy theory stuff, anyway. Aliens in the USA, stuff like that. Not worth the time it would take you to read them. Not even worth the time it would take a fully literate person to read them. |
|
Angilion Male, 40-49, Europe
   1451 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:26:50 PM "She should have just -emailed- them. Stupid. >.<"That's true, but it wouldn't have changed anything other than the chance of anyone finding out. It's just as illegal and there are people like her awaiting trial for it already. I think the key issue is whether or not it should be illegal to photograph yourself if you're under 18, not how stupid it is to not know that a "private" page on Myspace isn't private. |
|
airsofter1 Male, 18-29, Midwest US
   877 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:23:54 PM tsust me sysdecayexe no one. and i mean no one. will read such enourmous comments. get to the point. such as.dumbass kid y would u do that. bad traning by the parents |
|
Angilion Male, 40-49, Europe
   1451 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:20:18 PM "ooh.. IAB comment forum gets creepy with old guys.."You list yourself as 13-17, Peterboner. That's not old. Are you an "old guy" lying about your age? |
|
Angilion Male, 40-49, Europe
   1451 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:19:09 PM "where were the parents while she was snapping away?"I think that's an unfair question nowadays, given how widespread digital cameras are. She probably had a mobile phone with a camera built into it - they're hardly uncommon. Should parents forbid adolescents having mobile phones at home unless supervised by parents? Even if they did, it would be rather hard to enforce given the size of a mobile phone. It's not like it's hard to hide one in a pocket. |
|
mehh Female, 18-29, Australia
   529 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:09:29 PM SysDecayExe, I refuse to read ur many enormous comments |
|
SysDecayExe Male, 18-29, Europe
4 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:04:13 PM *You know who you are*This question goes directly to the people who think the law is drated up or the system is corrupt. #1. NASA trying to condemn Gary McKinnon to a 70 year life sentence, whom seen and attempted to take public information about the existence of ET that is being kept secret and destroyed on NASA's 1.6 Million dollar budget to keep conspiracy. NASA then accusing the man of Damaging hundreds of their computers and servers without evidence he did it. or #2. A 14 year old that has 30 nude pictures of herself on the computer and is going to be booked in the sex offender DB for distributing pictures. Which of these situations handled by law is more corrupt? It's not any different since they both involve the law, so answering this will be direct without changing the question. Don't play the blame game, Blame it on your poor judgment in government. It has claimed lives of 2 women who died of extreme radiation, no justice for the family just to cover up a pro |
|
SysDecayExe Male, 18-29, Europe
4 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 4:29:54 PM Everything has a limit and privacy is always invaded sometimes for the safety of one. People that keep bending the rules you are just taking one step forward to where it will be law for every computer receiving an online connection to be key-logged and your drives scanned without consultation by the government.I'll have to agree with Shellie84, that she will do it at 18. I talk to an online friend, shes only 16 but is bombarded with,"Nude Requests" from teenagers. I had the opportunity on one situation to report a kid who harassed her and threatened to find her information. I contacted the authorities in the area in which he lives by tracing his IP address which was quite accurate, narrowing down to a radius of 3 houses and I presented them with the chat log conversation of the boy along with the age of the girl whom he was harassing. Turns up authorities arrested a young man, 17 years of age, after searching his computer. Never heard from him again. You know who |
|
SysDecayExe Male, 18-29, Europe
4 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 4:06:51 PM There is no need to remind people that she is 14 years of age. Why the need to possess nude pictures at all at that age as for the ages of 16. Age 17 still, but one more year and you can feel free to drat up your life on the internet by posting trash to pleasure a People that "Jerk to live" or "Live to Jerk". Suggestion to be made, just by this we are all bound to be headed toward a law where it will be legal for the government to monitor any online computer and scanning its contents.I am quite astonished by the majority not knowing that it is law and ILLIGAL that you CANNOT have ANY nude material of yourself under 18. Even for someone in possession of nude pictures of someone under 18 whether it be your girlfriend or not; However, you are free to do so, but it is illigal and you WILL get time for it if caught with that material. Second suggestion, If you date online and your partner is not of legal age, 18, then either wait the time or break up. |
|
SysDecayExe Male, 18-29, Europe
4 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 3:29:02 PM There must be a great possibility that someone was involved in the happening. Whether she made the decision to ruin her life online or just to pleasure some kid or man that harasses Myspace girls frequently. They need to investigate further into this case because there is something that just doesn't add up.If this shifts to a Harassment case, I would strongly suggest whoever might have been responsible for it, boy, teenager, or man, be used as a posterboy, Name and Information booked in the State DB for either attempting, acquiring, or pressuring for the production of child pornography with 10 years of prison time with Restricted access to any computer. If the harasser is of age 15 or 16, Information should be booked into StateDB, restricted access to computer and when reached the age of 18, begin his prison sentence of 10 years which is 3650 days. |
|
Valark Male, 13-17, Western US
   76 Posts
|
Saturday, March 28, 2009 3:23:46 PM I can understand arresting her on charges of distributing child porn, but seriously, possession? If possessing pictures of herself is illegal, wouldn't dressing in the bathroom mirror constitute some form of rape? |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next >
|