Sexting

[Beavah 205]

Yah, the parent thread seemed to go off a bit into responses to sexting, and I was quite surprised that the response from other scouters mirrored the sort of random (and to my mind, nutty) responses that we have seen in da legal system. It seemed like a good thread to spin off, even though the other thread has more than run its course.

 

For folks who have been livin' in a bubble, "sexting" is the practice of teens taking pictures of themselves with their phones or computer cams and sending 'em to a boyfriend or girlfriend. The photos are, shall we say, "promiscuous". Several surveys have established that around 20% of teens have "sexted" at least once, or about 5 or 6 million U.S. teens. That's probably a low number.

 

Of course, under federal and state law, if an underage minor sends a "sexted" photo of herself, it's child pornography, eh? Now suddenly she is a trafficker, her 14 year old boyfriend is a possessor, and the boyfriend's computer which is also used by dad makes him a child pornographer too. Those are "hard time" felonies, eh? Even plea deals down to lesser charges quite possibly put the kids and adults on the sex offender registry, with all the school, college, and employment implications of that. (Remember that folks on the sex offender registry can't live or be near any school, eh? Makes it hard to finish high school.)

 

Now, yeh might think that prosecutors and law enforcement officials would be somewhat rational about this, eh? Many are, and some state legislatures and appeals courts are startin' to weigh in. But that's only because some prosecutors and law enforcement officials (there are always some...) haven't been rational about it. In hundreds of cases now across the nation kids and adults have been charged with felonies for this stuff. We do, after all, have some pretty "tough on crime" folks servin' as prosecutors in much of the land, and da role is often an elected one filled by folks who have to be politicians as well as attorneys.

 

Personally, I'm in favor of being rational. Seems like a young lady of 16 sending a photo of herself to a beau of age 17 is a poor and immature choice, but it falls quite a bit short of trafficking in child pornography, or really of any felony or crime that puts yeh on the sex offender's registry. Seems like more the sort of thing that gets yeh grounded and your phone taken away. But then I'm a fellow who likes balance, and would prefer to see the lass's parents use their savings to pay for college rather than a legal defense.

 

What do the rest of yeh think?

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[SeattlePioneer 144]

I'm with Beavah.

 

 

It's bogus to try to protect the privacy of young women who voluntarily give it up by jailing the men to whom they send their pictures.

 

The fact is that young people are sexually active at age twelve or thirteen these days, and treating them as children is a futile thing to try to do. If they have the brass to take sexually explicit pictures on their own initiative and send them out to be consumed by the world, they have lost any claim to deserving protection of their privacy by the law.

 

 

[Trevorum 24]

I feel that our government - bless it for our freedoms - has nonetheless always been overly intrusive into peoples private lives, especially when it comes to matters of sex. We of course are responsible for our government and as a collective people, we are downright prudish. The government has no right to tell me who I may or may not sleep with, or marry, or show pictures of my nakedness to - as long as it's also OK with that other person (or persons). .... (I suppose on some issues I do support the Libertarian Dr. Paul after all. :0)

[packsaddle 753]

Beavah, answer this question:

Who was the person in the parent thread who first raised the 'sexting' topic?

As far as I can find, that post occurred on Thursday, 2/23/2012 at 8:51:17 AM. Am I wrong?

[Beavah 205]

Yah, packsaddle, I was the first person who raised sexting in the parent thread.

 

I thought it was an obvious example of a crime, a felony even, where any adult who works with kids would immediately recognize that calling law enforcement to pursue the legal punishment for a fourteen year old boy was foolish.

 

Can yeh even imagine what it would do to law enforcement and the courts if every adult who encountered one of the 6 million kids sexting opted to treat it as a mandatory reporting offense?

 

And yet, here we are. Despite havin' strong opinions on the matter, I really am interested in what other folks think.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[packsaddle 753]

Sorry Beavah, I was struck by the importance that you seem to attach to this particular topic. I would have posed a similar inquiry if SeattlePioneer, for example, had spun a new thread on penis amputations.

 

To respond to your question, I have no good resolution to this problem other than to employ a 'legal passive aggressiveness': meaning that if we DID deluge the courts with a few million of these cases, including offspring of legislators, I suspect that would "break that dog from sucking eggs". It probably wouldn't do the youth much good though.

 

I'm glad you understand the problem in the terms that you stated. Technology has given us access to many behaviors that 'the law' seems unprepared to address. So help me out with it. Tell me what an officer of the court thinks is the solution to this.

 

Working with a scenario similar to the one you proposed in the other thread: a juvenile female has 'sexted' to a juvenile male. You detected this behavior. What should be your response as an officer of the court? Should this be a model for those of us who are not in that position?

I'd be interested in the opinions of nldscout and NJCubscouter as well if they're 'listening'.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, sorry packsaddle, your question isn't clear.

 

Are yeh askin' my professional opinion on what the proper legislative solution is to this issue? That's a complex policy question, because yeh at once want to create a safe harbor for teens while at the same time not wanting to create a loophole that allows mechanisms for protecting genuine child pornography (though SeattlePioneer and Trevorum both make excellent points).

 

Or are yeh askin' what I personally would do with a kid I "caught"?

 

I thought I'd been clear on the latter. I would behave like a competent and caring scouter or parent, and address the issue in that fashion. What I do in my professional life isn't particularly relevant, other than to confirm me in my knowledge that is both the correct example and the proper course of action.

 

As to what an "officer of the court" thinks of anything, well for that I reckon yeh have to hire competent counsel in the jurisdiction of the competent court, eh? Talkin' to anonymous internet fellows named after furry rodents may be cheaper, but shouldn't be relied on as anything other than what you'd expect from such a fellow that only used to be a Beavah, and a good ol' Beavah too!

 

Beavah

 

[SeattlePioneer 144]

Unfortunately, there is also predatory behavior of the following kind:

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/02/teacher-aide-who-sent-nude-photos-to-students-convicted.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lanowblog+%28L.A.+Now%29

[SeattlePioneer 144]

I might add that I recently received a couple of e-mails from a former Cub Scout parent that presented me with adult porn when I opened them.

 

Presumably someone had hacked into her e-mail account and sent out e-mails to her list of contacts.

 

That's distasteful, but it's easily deleted.

 

 

But suppose it was kiddie porn that I didn't open or delete? Is that grounds for a criminal charge?

 

 

 

 

[acco40 95]

Adults abusing children for their own purient interests or for monetary gain should be criminal.

 

Two sixteen year-old's practicing their "night moves" should be a concern for their respective parents, not the legal system.

[SeattlePioneer 144]

Hello Acco,

 

 

That seems like a reasonable proposition.

 

But it has difficulties. Is sending out a message a criminal act?

 

Does one really know where an e-mail or text message may be going, or to whom?

 

There are plenty of sexually sophisticated teenagers. Trying to be a judge of their age in person may be difficult or impossible --- how much more difficult when they are the addressee of an e-mail?

 

As I said, I was offended when I received a sexually explicit e-mail apparently from a Cub Scout parent --- although presumably from a hacked account. But while that's offensive and fraudulent, should the message itself be criminalized?

 

There is plenty of room for abuse if we go that way too, I think.

 

I don't pretend to have the answers here. But easy answers may not be good ones.

[Eamonn 61]

About a year or so back Sexting made the headlines. There was a story about it on the CBS Sunday Morning show.

The story wasn't so much about Sexting as a crime but how unreasonable the punishment was.

Clearly the laws on the books had not kept up with the times and hadn't taken into account modern technology.

Not long after, here in PA someone brought a bill to the house that would change the law. - I'm not sure what happened?

While I do think that people who deal in child pornography need to be punished and we need to protect our children from child pornographers. It did seem that the laws on sexting just didn't fit the crime.

I do have an issue with :

" But that's only because some prosecutors and law enforcement officials (there are always some...) haven't been rational about it."

While I see this sexting thing as something foolish that some young people do. I also think that law enforcement officials are bound to do their job when a crime is reported and that prosecutors also need to do their job. We don't pay the police and the prosecutors to be rational, we pay them to follow and enforce the law.

There have been cases where a girl has sent her boy friend a photo which very quickly is passed around to a very large number of people in the area where she lives. This in turn has led to the girl being teased and made fun of and the girl has killed herself.

Sure this is the odd case, so while sexting can look like a victim-less crime, something which most of the time is seen (Even by me) As not much more that a foolish teenage lark, it can and sometimes does have far reaching consequences.

The speed that a photo that is texted and the number of people who can receive it can be mind boggling.

Ea.

 

[qwazse 4342]

I heard a survey of teens showed that sexting behaviors are extremely rare. Maybe we should think of it as an abnormal psychology?

 

Get the kids help, not lock-up.

[boomerscout 35]

I am not sure where sexting fits in with being morally straight.

Perhaps Boys Life could feature a centerfold Girl Scout each month to increrase readership.

[SeattlePioneer 144]

 

 

 

That's certainly a risk. But that's why foolish behavior is foolish --- it has negative consequences.

 

At a minimum, perhaps the person taking the picture and initially sending it should be prosecuted for making and disseminating child pornography. That's where the problem really originates.

 

Suppose a youth takes a nude photo of themselves and mails it to someone else, and the person receiving it shows it to several other people. Is that a crime? If so, who are the criminals?