Yet another high school pedo >_>

[Takumi Fujiwara]

Adding to the list of seemingly rediculous child porn case (the girl who got busted for nude pics of herself and the underaged couple busted for e-mailing nude pics to their own e-mail boxes). Comes this story here...story link (http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/beaconnews/news/1497718,Man-child-st-charles_AU032609.article#Comments_Contai ner)
March 27, 2009
By DAN CAMPANA dcampana@scn1.com

ST. CHARLES -- The discovery of nude pictures and video of a 16-year-old girl on a high school computer has led to charges against a former student.

After what St. Charles police described as a three-month investigation, Piotr Rybak, 18, of the 1900 block of Wessel Court, was arrested this week on three counts of possession of child pornography.

He was held in Kane County jail until being released on a $10,000 recognizance bond Thursday.

Officials at St. Charles East High School found nude images of the girl, described as a former girlfriend of Rybak, during a routine check of computers used by students in the school's learning resource center.

A School District spokesman said Rybak was not a student in January when the images were found.

A resource officer assigned to the school contacted police, who began an investigation that eventually identified Rybak as a suspect. Police arrested Rybak at his home without incident Wednesday.

Rybak has a brief record as an adult that includes city violations for truancy and disorderly conduct. He is scheduled to appear in court on April 9.

I mean damn, I get it he's obviously not the brightest bulb in the box (what dipshit puts naked pics of his GF on a school computer >_>). But it seems a little excessive that he's getting charged as a pedo, when he's really at most 2 years older then his ex-GF. I'd be willing to bet most married couples are more than 2 years apart.

[Lacan]

We are starting to live in a world were a person who is 2 months older then their lover will we charged as a pedophile. I won't be surprised that there was a guy who just turned 18 years old getting arrested for being out with a girl who is 17 years and 10 months old.

That's why I will always hate the term "The Law is the Law" because the laws are made by braindead baby boomers who should retire and let the younger generation who are against this, to run the world instead.

[Takumi Fujiwara]

I totally agree, it's pretty sad really, I could understand if it was some 30+ year old dude who picked her up and "had some fun" and took pictures of it. But hell this dude could have (sadly it doesn't say) been 17 when he took the pictures, so they both would have been underage. I just think it's so ignorant that basically a high school senior (who's 18) has almost no one that he can date at his own school, except other 18 year old seniors or people that got held back a grade. Yet a 50 year old perv can pick up a 18 year old girl and do whatever with her, cause that's not weird >_>.

[Lacan]

That's why I am waiting for these people who makes these laws and enforce them to retire as fast as possible. Even if the kid does get on the sex offender list right now. There should be a new law in the future, made by the new generation, to remove him and other innocent people like him from the sex offender list.

I'm hoping everyone who wants to run the country and become a judge, a cop, politician, etc in the future, is reading this, to make sure we don't repeat these same mistakes, as the old farts who are doing it now.

[Shiroiyuki]

When I was a senior in high school there was this freshmen chick that dated a guy who, for lack of a better term, was generally regarded as 'that weird-*** old guy who like, graduated what? five years ago? six? and has no life besides hanging around the band room and pretending to be cool'. It was creepy.

They are married now.

It is still creepy.

She was about 15 at the time and he was well over 25, but no one (not even her parents) thought it was strange. *shivers violently*

[The Million Dollar Prons]

When I was a senior in high school there was this freshmen chick that dated a guy who, for lack of a better term, was generally regarded as 'that weird-*** old guy who like, graduated what? five years ago? six? and has no life besides hanging around the band room and pretending to be cool'. It was creepy.

She was about 15 at the time and he was well over 25, but no one (not even her parents) thought it was strange. *shivers violently*

If no one thought it was strange then why did they call them a weird *** old guy.


But anyway, I find it weird that there's so many 18 year-old peophiles. Makes me wonder if we need to add some sort of 12 motnh grace period on this ****

[Leader Desslock]

We are starting to live in a world were a person who is 2 months older then their lover will we charged as a pedophile.
Um... no we don't?

Pedophilia is a mental illness, not a law. One can be diagnosed with it, not charged with it.

Of course, we do have a variety of laws like Statutory Rape, as well as quite a few laws dealing with the production, possession and distribution of child pornography. I suggest that you reread the article one more time, because it sounds like the defendant was charged with one of these.

I won't be surprised that there was a guy who just turned 18 years old getting arrested for being out with a girl who is 17 years and 10 months old.
You should be surprised, since merely "being out with" isn't illegal.

I'd be surprised if such a hypothetical case had anything to do with the actual story we're discussing, however.

...the laws are made by braindead baby boomers who should retire and let the younger generation who are against this, to run the world instead.
Yeah, that's a good plan. :rolleyes:

[Takumi Fujiwara]

Pedophilia is a mental illness, not a law. One can be diagnosed with it, not charged with it.

-_-; oops that was probably my fault :P, I read the article in the newspaper then looked for it online, I couldn't remember what he was actually charged with, or if the article said (it does, it was 3 counts of possession of CP), so I just said "charged as a pedo" I'll take the blame.

[Shiroiyuki]

If no one thought it was strange then why did they call them a weird *** old guy.


But anyway, I find it weird that there's so many 18 year-old peophiles. Makes me wonder if we need to add some sort of 12 motnh grace period on this ****

Oh no don't get me wrong, there were a few of us that thought he was strange (he graduated five or six years prior but still hung around the band room like he might pick up his instrument and join in or something. Of course we thought he was strange), but considered a 15 year old dating someone his age to be perfectly normal.

<_<

[Holy Knight]

This reminds me of a story I'd read a year or two ago in the newspaper. There was a guy who was killed by a deranged man who had gone on a killing spree of sex offenders.

Turn out the guy who was murdered was arrested for having sex with his 15 year-old girlfriend on the day before her 16th birthday. He was 17 or 18 at the time, I think.

I agree the law needs to be amended to take into account age difference. They did so for Canadian law a while ago, and I hear its been regarded as much fairer for the parties involved.

[Takumi Fujiwara]

I agree the law needs to be amended to take into account age difference. They did so for Canadian law a while ago, and I hear its been regarded as much fairer for the parties involved.

It seems only right that there be an "age difference" clause attached to cases like this. It's insane to think that someone who is 18 can't be sexually involved with anyone younger than themselves. That's not to say I support the idea of sexually active jr. high kids, I'm just pointing out the facts. Of course there has to be some limit (since unfortunaly most human beings seem incapable of making resonable decisions by themselves). Then again where would you draw the line 3 years? 5 years? an 18 year old and a 13 year old... it sounds kinda creepy, but is it really any creepier then a 45 year old dude having a mid life crisis and ditching his wife for a 22 year old college girl, I don't know.

[max payne]

We are starting to live in a world were a person who is 2 months older then their lover will we charged as a pedophile. I won't be surprised that there was a guy who just turned 18 years old getting arrested for being out with a girl who is 17 years and 10 months old.

That's why I will always hate the term "The Law is the Law" because the laws are made by braindead baby boomers who should retire and let the younger generation who are against this, to run the world instead.

Braindead baby boomers?

You're all braindead, regardless of age.

You just happen to be more braindead than the rest of them.

He was arrested for owning child pornography, you gormless cockwit.

Pictures of a 16 year old girl is child porn, I'm sure you'll agree? Or do you want to dispute that as well?


________________________________________ _

How about that 16 year old girl that got arrested, for posting pictures of herself nude through texting and is now condemned to be branded as a pedophile.

No, the guy who was looking at her was condemned a pedophile.

I'm far from braindead,

That's debatable.

I am aware whats happening and it looks like we are getting more intolerant in society and starting to treat everyone like criminals, even though they only did something that isn't worth a criminal offense.

Well, what do you think is a criminal offense? Where does it start and where does it end?


If it was a 50 year old looking at pictures of teenagers nude, then I would understand its child porn and should be illegal. But it was a boyfriend of that girl who was 17 and then he became 18 that look at it. Well ex boyfriend now.

16. She was 16, tard. You assume too much.

Well I admit it was insanely stupid of him to look at the pictures on the school computer.

Well at least you're not as braindead as he is.

My beliefs are different then yours and most of the mainstream. You can call me an idiot all you want. I want to see a future where people get away from that failed Red and Blue only ways of beliefs and start going into completely different belief systems.

Mainstream? What's your encore? You gonna call me conformist? Also, again. I live in England. We don't have just Red and Blue. We have multiple parties in our elections.

And society programs people into whats right and whats wrong. Go into 3rd world countries and you will be surprised how their beliefs and morals are different then here, due to their own society.

You couldn't be more white if you tried, could you?

Besides this has no relation to topic, at least in it's current state.

That's why you fail at politics: you don't bother connecting you ideas with such things as logic and grammar. You let spill out in an incoherent torrent.

And don't think you can keep running away from arguments by deleting posts. Grow some balls.

[The Million Dollar Prons]

Pictures of a 16 year old girl is child porn, I'm sure you'll agree? Or do you want to dispute that as well?



According to the current law I guess it is. I kind of wonder if it should be changed though. If you're like me, you love to take photos of your girlfriend naked, why should that be a crime? I mean if you're a 15 year old guy and have naked photos of a 16 year old girl, you'd get high-fived in my Bro Court.



Oh no don't get me wrong, there were a few of us that thought he was strange (he graduated five or six years prior but still hung around the band room like he might pick up his instrument and join in or something. Of course we thought he was strange), but considered a 15 year old dating someone his age to be perfectly normal.

<_<



He sure did pick up his insturment, and then a 15 year old girl did it too!

[Lacan]

I admit I did screw up badly with my argument. I mean to say that the boyfriend was 17 and now 18.

And the 16 year old girl who was texting herself part was from another incident not related to this one.

I also admit that I suck at explaining things.

Edit: I should just give up and stop making a fool of myself. Maybe someday I will improve my intelligence, then I can explain my views or new views by then correctly, and understand things better.

[Shiroiyuki]

^No, I think you mostly lose credit when you delete about 3/4 of everything you post within the day.

That doesn't show a very strong backbone in a debate, I've gotta say.

[The Million Dollar Prons]

The spawn forum (we all post about how no one reads spawn comics anymore) has this neat feature where you can see what edits people made to posts, so you can see the UNALTERED POST.

We should have something like this for this forum you guys would be a lot more manly.

[Shiroiyuki]

^Then what's the point of even having an edit feature?

[The Million Dollar Prons]

^Then what's the point of even having an edit feature?

There is none because frankly I don't need a condom to surf the internet.


Prons has edited this post on 3/3/2009 at 9:20 am

[Tidusauron12]

2^I don't know, but it would be fun to go back and look at the fail that others tried to cover up. :lol:

[Lacan]

I'll probably get in deep trouble in half of my stuff were shown. Remember my views do change. So if someone sees a post of mine 5 years ago or so, remember that I might represent those views anymore.

The posts that I usually delete or edit is when I was in a deep emotional state or anger.

Edit: I added an S, so I do correct grammar too.

[Tidusauron12]

I'll probably get in deep trouble in half of my stuff were shown. Remember my views do change. So if someone sees a post of mine 5 years ago or so, remember that I might represent those views anymore.

The posts that I usually delete or edit is when I was in a deep emotional state or anger.

Edit: I added an S, so I do correct grammar too.

That's stupid. If your "view" is shifting every five minutes, then it's not really your "view", now is it? Part of becoming a better poster is thinking about things on a higher scale than "ME ANGRY" before you hit the submit button.

If you actually take the time to think about what you're about to say, you'll find that most of your post will make more sense to others. When you respond to things with blind swift emotion, that's when you end up saying a lot about something you don't know a damn thing about.

[Shiroiyuki]

So if someone sees a post of mine 5 years ago or so, remember that I might represent those views anymore.

Yeah, but I'm not talking about posts made five years ago.

I'm talking about posts made, like, today that are no longer there because you deleted them.

Deleting posts within in the same day because you 'might not represent those views anymore' isn't very good when trying to form a credible argument.

[Trefellin]

Pictures of a 16 year old girl is child porn, I'm sure you'll agree? Or do you want to dispute that as well?


It may be legally but I'd never personally consider it as such.



Sorry Lacan, your debating skills are terrible. Your arguments are like a roller coaster made of balsa wood and twist ties. A boat made of salt. A house built on sand... Uninformed, hastily assembled sand.

[waltsoph3]

Oh yeah i also heard about that 14 yrear old with the myspace stunt..that was just real stupid. Just for her BF? Psh..what a crock. If it was just for the BF then why put your pics on myspace.

Ok about this one..You know i gotta say this story is a true screwed up mixed bag of tricks. I meen on one point..you have the guy arrested for possessing underage photos of an "ex" girfriend while scanning them on a school computer. So what the heck was he trying to do?

Gloat, or maybee blackmail revenge?

I dunno but i also gotta say that was real bad move. Some things just NEED to stay private. So in a ways i hate to say it but he dug his own hole in this one and has to pay the penalty of the law.

Now please understand theres sometimes i dissagree with the law. This though i have to say was a fair and right call.

In a ways though i think the main reason this guy was busted wasn't because of the dating..it was because of what he had in his possession.
Certain intimate moments in a person's life should stay as a memory only. But thats just me.

[goddessofanime]

Dear High Schoolers:

Keep your sexing private and then maybe no one will call the cops on you.

[RecentMidget]

http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj241/MCHesh420/Kimura2.jpg

anyone else see the connections?
:lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo3Tpw-zLkM&feature=channel

[Lacan]

Yeah, but I'm not talking about posts made five years ago.

I'm talking about posts made, like, today that are no longer there because you deleted them.

Deleting posts within in the same day because you 'might not represent those views anymore' isn't very good when trying to form a credible argument.

I fear I will cause further drama or get banned, that's why I delete alot of my posts. Most of my arguments are rushed and done in a burst of emotion, and I quickly regret it, minutes later.

[Victory]

Dear High Schoolers:

Keep your sexing private and then maybe no one will call the cops on you.I can't agree with that. That's very American too. There's a bunch of videos of kids fighting on youtube and I don't see anyone getting charged with assault.

[goddessofanime]

I can't agree with that. That's very American too. There's a bunch of videos of kids fighting on youtube and I don't see anyone getting charged with assault.

I don't agree with the law either for this. Hell, kids will be kids. But that's the hyprocrisy(can't spell) right there in this society: violence? S'ok...but whenever sex is involved.. OMG SOCIETY IS GOING DOWNHILL BECAUSE OUR TEENS ARE HAVING SEX SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!

But still...if you're stupid to leave nudie pixs of your girl on the SCHOOL COMPUTER then you deserve to be suspended just for being stupid. And if I was that dude's girlfriend, I'd be a little pissed if nudie pics meant for him only were on my school's computer.

[Takumi Fujiwara]

Holy crap, wtf happend in here when I was gone, drama, drama, drama.:P

Certain intimate moments in a person's life should stay as a memory only. But thats just me. I agree, I honestly never understood the whole "lets take pics/vids" for one thing who's watching? you, your GF/BF...it seems kinda lame honestly when you could, ya know, just have sex >_>.

I don't agree with the law either for this. Hell, kids will be kids. But that's the hyprocrisy(can't spell) right there in this society: violence? S'ok...but whenever sex is involved.. OMG SOCIETY IS GOING DOWNHILL BECAUSE OUR TEENS ARE HAVING SEX SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!

I don't get it either, what it is that's so horrible about sex that isn't so horrible about everything else? Is it cause it's fun? it's cause it's fun isn't it America! you hate fun don't you!? you up tight bastard! :P.

[Haro!]

Wait.. I'm a pedophile? I'm sorry but 16 years old should be acceptable. I mean that's my cut off point. Have you seen these 16 year olds these days? I'm not saying they should vote at 16 but they know what they're getting into. I mean if they come up to me while I'm reading at the park (close to a university and a high school) its not my fault.

On topic, what would drive someone to put nude pictures in a school computer? This is stupid on many levels. The most obvious is the possibility of getting caught with this stuff. Secondly, the girl's dignity is important. I mean if she took or posed for nude photographs for you, then it is your responsibility to keep that **** private and in a place where only you would have access to it. (As a gentleman you should also never spread this sort of stuff around even in the event of a bad break up.) On another note, I think the age difference shouldn't be enough to consider this guy a pedo. If he were over 20, yeah. (oh **** I'm over 20...)

[DavenIII]

its really ridiculous, shouldn't they be spending time and resources on the 30-40+ year olds picking up 8-12 years olds instead of this?

they are really pushing the limits, soon child porn will be looked at no differently then a speeding ticket.

16 and 18 year olds have sex, hello, that's nothing new, infact its NORMAL, so if they video tape it, and it gets leaked because of technology today that shouldn't be a cause for anyone to get arrested.

[Soluzar]

On topic, what would drive someone to put nude pictures in a school computer? This is stupid on many levels. The most obvious is the possibility of getting caught with this stuff. Secondly, the girl's dignity is important. I mean if she took or posed for nude photographs for you, then it is your responsibility to keep that **** private and in a place where only you would have access to it.
Above all, this is what I was thinking when I read the first post. The boy in question is just seriously stupid, and irresponsible. His ex-girlfriend is going to be furious with him, and even if they aren't together any more she would never have expected this.

The idea of him being charged with possession of child porn does seem a bit excessive at first, but then the fact that it is on a school computer does make me wonder if he was planning to distribute the pictures... which makes a whole lot of difference.

[Phantom]

The law is strict in order to protect children from predators online and needs to be. This case falls on the extreme though with the party's having only a few years from each other plus the fact that these people were actually going out. This is a lot different from the laws main aim which is catching sexual predators and the people who distribute this kind of stuff online. Hopefully they will judge him accordingly.

[max payne]

Wait.. I'm a pedophile?


That's for the courts to decide!


The idea of him being charged with possession of child porn does seem a bit excessive at first, but then the fact that it is on a school computer does make me wonder if he was planning to distribute the pictures... which makes a whole lot of difference.

Pretty much.

[KatayokuのTenshi]

Wait.. I'm a pedophile? I'm sorry but 16 years old should be acceptable. I mean that's my cut off point.

Um... no?

A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).

B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.

C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.

Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.

Specify if:

Sexually Attracted to Males
Sexually Attracted to Females
Sexually Attracted to Both

Specify if:

Limited to Incest

Specify type:

Exclusive Type (attracted only to children)
Nonexclusive Type

The age of consent in a lot of places is 16 (Britain for example) although I think they have ancillary charges when the other partner is much older.

Surprisingly 302.83 and 302.84 are masochism and sadism (respectively)

On topic, what would drive someone to put nude pictures in a school computer? This is stupid on many levels.

I think you answered your own question there. Stupidity explains a lot.

The idea of him being charged with possession of child porn does seem a bit excessive at first, but then the fact that it is on a school computer does make me wonder if he was planning to distribute the pictures... which makes a whole lot of difference.

Or maybe he just didn't have a computer at home and thought "what could possibly go wrong?" -_-;

[waltsoph3]

I can't agree with that. That's very American too. There's a bunch of videos of kids fighting on youtube and I don't see anyone getting charged with assault.

Actually some people do get thrown in jail for it. I'm mostly talking about the people that are involved in the video. Still i don't condone this kind of stunt either. Its nothing more then a cry for attention.
Youtube seriously needs to crackdown on them.

Ok after reading what majotity of you are saying about this story...

ROFLOL! OMG. Seriously i can not belive some of you guys. You don't condone the acts of a older guy looking at what might appear to be anime/manga of child porn now being put on trail because he broke the law.

Yet when it comes to a teen ..keyword "teen". Posting underage nude pics of a "ex"GF at a school..again i might add public school. Then is charged with child porn for breaking the law..you guys are going..oh they gone too far!
Bull crap. I'm sorry thats just bull crap.

I'm now gonna take a page out of Desslock's book and call like it is.
He had in his possession of illegal underage nude photos. Its the law! He broke the law! He must pay the penalty.

Its common sense!

Funny how realty works. huh.

Serisouly i don't understand you guys..are you sarcastic? Or for real? If your serious please tell me why? Please.

What makes this teen no different from any other person that breaks the law with child porn in there possession? This isn't ment as a flame here guys i'm really curious.

[Takumi Fujiwara]

ROFLOL! OMG. Seriously i can not belive some of you guys. You don't condone the acts of a older guy looking at what might appear to be anime/manga of child porn now being put on trail because he broke the law.

If your talking about the guy from Iowa, This guy (http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-11-24/lawyer-indicates-manga-in-iowa-obscenity-case-are-yaoi), then I think your slightly incorrect, IIRC he's not getting in trouble because it was anime/manga of child porn (that was what initially got the postmaster to call the police in on him), but with transportation of "obscene" materials using USPS. I'm pretty sure the only thing he's still in court over is whether or not what he was having shipped across state lines was indeed "obscene" or not. I'm pretty sure the whole "is it manga CP or not" part of the story was dropped by the judge already.

Serisouly i don't understand you guys..are you sarcastic? Or for real? If your serious please tell me why? Please.
it's the internet (there is no more explanation needed).

[waltsoph3]

@Takumi Fujiwara yes thats the exact story i was refering too. But your also missing the whole picture of my explination here.

The manga pedo was busted on "child porn". This guy was busted on "child porn". One of them you guys defend as being wrong and not to punish them for it yet the other one you do want punished.

Its "child porn" period! There is no difference. If they do indeed own underage nude pictures its breaking the law and they need to be punished thats the bottomline.

What truly baffels my logic is the fact you guys are defending the teen who has been busted flat out with the smoking gun in hand.

Ok let me put it another way..what ever happened to innocent untill proven guilty in a court of law. One of them theres proof the other one is still not truly defined. Whitch one should you question more on?

[max payne]

I'm not defending him.

And don't bring this **** up again.

I don't want to have another fantastic argument broken up by a sycophant circle jerk halfway through.

[Shiroiyuki]

I don't want to have another fantastic argument broken up by a sycophant circle jerk halfway through.

Are you using that word correctly? Because I don't remember any such person in either thread.

:uhh:

[Lacan]

http://parentingteens.about.com/b/2009/03/30/teen-arrested-for-sending-nude-pictures-on-myspace.htm

I am no longer backing down on this, and yes Robert on the comment section is me. I might start calling politicians next, I might even start mailing letters and try to get these laws changed.

My compassion is way too high for me to just stay on the computer and do nothing about this.

[Shiroiyuki]

....Empathy?


Don't you mean...sympathy? Because empathy would reveal everything we never wanted to know about you, and still don't.

[Lacan]

Yeah I should just call it compassion. Time to do that lame edit.

Edit: I thought the words Empathy, Compassion and Sympathy meant the same thing. Maybe I am thinking of them way too broadly.

Anyway I'm probably going to become the Anti Nancy Grace in the future. Sorta like how Superman has Bizarro.

[Soluzar]

Somewhat related:

http://news.slashdot.org/news/09/03/30/1249237.shtml

A county district attorney in Pennsylvania has threatened to file felony child pornography charges against three teenage girls for pictures that they took of themselves, even though the girls' lawyers say the pictures are clearly not sexually explicit and do not meet the legal definition of child porn. The American Civil Liberties Union has countered by asking a federal judge to block District Attorney George Skumanick from filing charges.

Skumanick won't show the pictures to anyone, including the girls' lawyers, but according to the reported descriptions, one picture shows two of the girls flashing the peace sign in their bras, and the other picture shows a girl wrapped in a towel with her breasts exposed after stepping out of the shower. Unless there's something very significant being deliberately left out of those descriptions, it sounds pretty obvious that the pictures do not meet the definition of child pornography, which requires sexual explicitness, not just nudity.

It brings a new and interesting point to the discussion. In order for the pictures to be considered illegal they must feature sexually explicit depictions of children, not just nudity. It's therefore entirely likely that the person in this case will not be charged or convicted if the pictures are just a girl flashing her boobs.

Followup:

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/09/03/31/215247.shtml?art_pos=8

"Wyoming [NJ] County District Attorney George Skumanick Jr. cannot charge three teenage girls who appeared in photographs seminude traded by classmates last year, a judge ruled Monday. US District Judge James M. Munley granted a request by the American Civil Liberties Union to temporarily stop Mr. Skumanick from filing felony charges against the Tunkhannock Area School District students."

So there is still some sanity in the law. Simple nudity alone is not pornographic, even if it does happen to be an underage person who is posing nude. If the pictures are sexually explicit, however, that would be different.

[Takumi Fujiwara]

^ I think there may be a little bit of "grey area" going on in that case though.

a) it says they were in their bras not topless/nude, and the one wearing the towel had her "breasts exposed" that doesn't mean she was totally topless (in other words nipples and all) we don't have much problem with top/side/bottom of breats being shown, but the nipple that's a whole 'nother issue (I honestly don't know what's so evil about the nipple?).

b) It doesn't say how old they are/were, just that they're "teenage" that's a big range for illegality (13-17) if they were 13 it'd probably cause a lot more drama than if they were 17. Since the "age of consent" in most states is 16-18, but as far as I know no where is it 13. Not that age of consent would really save you either since as far as I know it's 16 in Illinois (where the original story is from), yet the dude is still busted for possesion of child porn... so it was legal to have sex with her, but not take pictures/videos? Or was it the possibility of distribution (putting them on the school PC) that really pushed it over the edge, I'm not sure.

I do agree that the arguement that they were simply pictures of nudity and not sexually explicit is an interesting point against the claim of child porn, but in all honesty I think you'd have a really hard time not getting jail time if you got busted with a bunch of naked kid pics and your defense is "Look, it's not kid porn, it's just a bunch of random naked 14 year old girl pictures". And if that actually worked, you'd probably be watched like a hawk for the rest of your life just waiting for you to slip up.

[Soluzar]

You might have a point regarding partial nudity... it would be nice to think that only truly sexually explicit photographs or images present a problem for the law, though. There are so many borderline cases, like this... or like manga (Ranma 1/2) which features non-sexual nudity which shouldn't really fall under the definition of child porn.

I'm not saying that nude pictures of underage girls are OK for everyone to look at, I'm saying that there's no sense prosecuting relatively teenagers for being teenagers.

[Leader Desslock]

There are so many borderline cases, like this... or like manga (Ranma 1/2) which features non-sexual nudity which shouldn't really fall under the definition of child porn.
The non-sexual nudity in Ranma 1/2 isn't on the borderline in US law. It is clearly, unambiguously legal to possess and distribute, with full First Amendment protection.

[waltsoph3]

The non-sexual nudity in Ranma 1/2 isn't on the borderline in US law. It is clearly, unambiguously legal to possess and distribute, with full First Amendment protection.

First amendment may not even matter anymore. But thats a discussion for a different thread or just PM me if you want to know(nothing what so ever to do with this topic.) I hope that won't come to pass.

@ Soluzar
Hmmm. Thats defently an intresting point you brought up. But would it even matter to some states and there laws..it does make me wonder. Still its defently not looking too good for the guy with the evidence and the story involved. So..even if we do question the pictures content(like that may even matter depending on the judge) ..it was still at a public school. Thats not good and he is gonna get the hammer just for that alone.

But it does make me question this..what about the ex and the content? Are they gonna charge her with anything in this matter? I meen hey..they just didn't magicaly appear. Just saying.

@ Lacan
Hey seriously man. Don't be afraid to speak your mind. Sure they grill me sometimes when they don't agree with my words. But its better then not being able to speak your mind at all. After all this is a forum and if you keep your words clean and mature they have no reason to ban ya? Am I right guys and lady mods?

[Soluzar]

First amendment may not even matter anymore.

Walt, you need stop reading, watching or listening to whatever it is that has you convinced that George Orwell's 1984 will become the reality sometime soon. The constitution is still American law, along with all the amendments. It's no weaker now than it has ever been...

I'm just saying... America isn't going to throw the Bill of Rights out the window any time soon. Sometimes there are miscarriages of justice and abuses of power, but that doesn't really change the underlying laws, it just means that they should be better applied.

The non-sexual nudity in Ranma 1/2 isn't on the borderline in US law. It is clearly, unambiguously legal to possess and distribute, with full First Amendment protection.
I should perhaps say cases which bear close examination then. It's easy to simply read "naked pictures of underage girls" and be shocked by that. If the pictures aren't sexually explicit in nature, then there's no question of them being considered pornographic by an accurate interpretation of the law.

That applies as much to Ranma 1/2 as it would to topless pictures of a teenage boy's underage girlfriend. I'm well aware that there are also other reasons why Ranma 1/2 is safe from the law, but that's in addition to, rather than instead of this reason.

[Leader Desslock]

First amendment may not even matter anymore. But thats a discussion for a different thread or just PM me if you want to know(nothing what so ever to do with this topic.)
If you're saying that the First Amendment may not matter in relation to some subsequent piece of legislation that is not a passed Amendment with specific language to rescind the First Amendment, then you are 100%, unambiguously wrong.

If you want to hear why you're wrong, PM me. I don't intend to PM you to find out what piece of paranoid, fearmongering propaganda you've decided to swallow hook, line and sinker this week.

To word this in a manner you might understand: If the US Legal System is a game of Rock, Paper, Scissors, then the US Constitution is Galactus. Galactus eats Rocks, Paper and Scissors.

The Constitution always wins. Always. By definition. That's why a law is thrown out when it's found to be unconstitutional.

I'm well aware that there are also other reasons why Ranma 1/2 is safe from the law, but that's in addition to, rather than instead of this reason.
I knew you knew the difference; my post was aimed more at folks who didn't. Not to mention any names specifically. *cough*

[waltsoph3]

Walt, you need stop reading, watching or listening to whatever it is that has you convinced that George Orwell's 1984 will become the reality sometime soon. The constitution is still American law, along with all the amendments. It's no weaker now than it has ever been...

I'm just saying... America isn't going to throw the Bill of Rights out the window any time soon. Sometimes there are miscarriages of justice and abuses of power, but that doesn't really change the underlying laws, it just means that they should be better applied.




I love the old school war of the worlds. Great movie i might add.

No no don't get me wrong here. Thats why i said PM me or just wait. Sigh i guess i'm just gonna have to just let it out even though it has nothing to do with this..but then again maybee it might in future cases.

Have you ever heard of.."International Law"? I sure didn't consider it untill i learned about it on Glenn Beck yesterday. ( i meen sure there those treaties and other political things we agree and sign on)

What i'm talking about is the fact that a guy "on the hill"(as they call the slang in washington) to be incharge of the judicinal system who was recently sworn in is seriously consdiering the US to start using and follow international law to decide court cases in the US!

Heres what i meen..lets say..an issue goes to supreme court and the supreme court strikes the ruling down..normaly that should be it. Whoops hold on here if this guy gets his way..we would then have to apeal it to one more court. The world would decide the verdict meening our US constution, 1st amendment, bill of rights..everything that we follow here in america would meen deedly..ahem. You know the rest of it.

If you think i'm making this up here it is go check it out:
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/23372/?ck=1

Feel good pondering that your case could be decided on some Sharia law instead of the constitution in reality? Hey I'm not the one doing this stuff ok. I just follow common sense..yet honestly i don't feel too comfterable knowing this..do you guys?

[Bernard_Monsha]

Walt, you need stop reading, watching or listening to whatever it is that has you convinced that George Orwell's 1984 will become the reality sometime soon.

Well considering we already have people believing the choco ration is going up from 30 to 25 grams we are closer than ever.

[Leader Desslock]

Have you ever heard of.."International Law"? I sure didn't consider it untill i learned about it on Glenn Beck yesterday.
Why do you listen to Glenn Beck? Why? WHY?

We're talking about a media pundit. I don't care if he's conservative, liberal, an athetist, a theologian, the head of Al Qaida, the leader of the Latter Day Saints, a PETA mouthpiece, etc. He's just a Media Pundit. Not a Journalist, a Pundit.

He's a personality who spouts commentary in order to get ratings, to make money. That is what he is. That is all he is. He's a performing monkey, and Fox is turning the crank on his Hurdy-Gurdy. How could you possibly mistake that for real journalism?

( i meen sure there those treaties and other political things we agree and sign on)
It would be illegal for lawmakers to enter the US into a treaty that violated the US Constitution or its amendments.

Crimes committed in the US are subject to US law, and ultimately the US Constitution. Sharia law in backwards districts of Afghanistan are not used to define US legal precedent.

You know the rest of it.
Yes. We do. You don't.

If you think i'm making this up here it is go check it out:
Why should I check it out when you're linking to a fearmongering pundit's rant?

I just follow common sense.
Everything I said to Lacan in the other thread applies to you now.

i don't feel too comfterable knowing this..do you guys?
I feel completely comfortable ignoring it as idiocy, if that's what you're asking.

[Takumi Fujiwara]

I only hate it when razor blades are so hard to find, my beard grows too fast for this GIVE ME MY RAZOR BLADES!

Why do you listen to Glenn Beck? Why? WHY?

We're talking about a media pundit. I don't care if he's conservative, liberal, an athetist, a theologian, the head of Al Qaida, the leader of the Latter Day Saints, a PETA mouthpiece, etc. He's just a Media Pundit. Not a Journalist, a Pundit.

He's a personality who spouts commentary in order to get ratings, to make money. That is what he is. That is all he is. He's a performing monkey, and Fox is turning the crank on his Hurdy-Gurdy. How could you possibly mistake that for real journalism?
thank you! I was trying to compose a rational argument and my brain was against me the whole way >_>, glad you came through for me.

[max payne]

I find it both disturbing and hilarious that Waltsoph is apparently over a decade older than I am.

I only hate it when razor blades are so hard to find, my beard grows too fast for this GIVE ME MY RAZOR BLADES!

What the christ? :lol:

[Takumi Fujiwara]

^ the razor blade refferance is to 1984, one of the things the main character is having trouble finding is razor blades, since the government makes random things difficult to find to keep a constant stress on the general populous. :P

[JoeStrummer]

Actually some people do get thrown in jail for it. I'm mostly talking about the people that are involved in the video. Still i don't condone this kind of stunt either. Its nothing more then a cry for attention.
Youtube seriously needs to crackdown on them.

Ok after reading what majotity of you are saying about this story...

ROFLOL! OMG. Seriously i can not belive some of you guys. You don't condone the acts of a older guy looking at what might appear to be anime/manga of child porn now being put on trail because he broke the law.

Yet when it comes to a teen ..keyword "teen". Posting underage nude pics of a "ex"GF at a school..again i might add public school. Then is charged with child porn for breaking the law..you guys are going..oh they gone too far!
Bull crap. I'm sorry thats just bull crap.

I'm now gonna take a page out of Desslock's book and call like it is.
He had in his possession of illegal underage nude photos. Its the law! He broke the law! He must pay the penalty.

Its common sense!

Funny how realty works. huh.

Serisouly i don't understand you guys..are you sarcastic? Or for real? If your serious please tell me why? Please.

What makes this teen no different from any other person that breaks the law with child porn in there possession? This isn't ment as a flame here guys i'm really curious.



Your just pissed off because you never got naked pictures of girls you knew in high school.

[goddessofanime]

Ok after reading what majotity of you are saying about this story...

ROFLOL! OMG. Seriously i can not belive some of you guys. You don't condone the acts of a older guy looking at what might appear to be anime/manga of child porn now being put on trail because he broke the law.

Yet when it comes to a teen ..keyword "teen". Posting underage nude pics of a "ex"GF at a school..again i might add public school. Then is charged with child porn for breaking the law..you guys are going..oh they gone too far!
Bull crap. I'm sorry thats just bull crap.


BEcause there's a world of difference between a picture of your girl/guy meant for your eyes only and owning loliporn

Serisouly i don't understand you guys..are you sarcastic? Or for real? If your serious please tell me why? Please.

What makes this teen no different from any other person that breaks the law with child porn in there possession? This isn't ment as a flame here guys i'm really curious.

I think it's more the fact that it's being done by people under 18 that has everyone on edge.

Let parents parent their kids intead of the government deciding to do it for them. I mean seriously....you can't tell me none of you all fooled around as teenagers?

[waltsoph3]

Let parents parent their kids intead of the government deciding to do it for them. I mean seriously....you can't tell me none of you all fooled around as teenagers?

I think thats the best advice for people to know. Thats the way it should be. Nicely said. :) :thumbsup:

Your just pissed off because you never got naked pictures of girls you knew in high school.

My personal life is none of you'lls buissness. But i'm defently not mad to know i don't have or ever own underage nude photos of teens.

Seriously here you guys go on shrieking and dare i say.."flame" me yet all i'm doing is just trying to point out some questions and facts . Come on now i don't make this stuff up. :( As the saying goes the truth hurts.


Now about Glenn Beck. I love his style ok if you don't thats cool. Yes he even admits he has been dubbed by many that he is a fear monger.(like some people do when entitling an opinion of another person) Also he admits with humilty that he is 100% not a journalist. He is a radio DJ and self educated man that just speaks his mind. Theres times the things he talks about and belive may possabbly happen hopes he is wrong . How many say that?

Btw.....might i politly add something else here. Even though he isn't always right majority of the things he says on his show..sure enough do indeed come to reality. Things you would only think to be in the fiction world only. And you know what..now thats frighting.

Ok i want clear something else up because you guys defently took what i'm talking about the entire wrong way. I belive in the US constution, 1st amendment, bill of rights and all of those things. I wasn't going after them when i was talking about the 1st amendment may not even matter.

My fear is the possability that we may soon use international laws instead of our own americian rights and americian laws to settle court desputes.

Key word.."International". Do you understand my main concern now? As in views and laws that don't apply to the US way of life or US culture. Now does that make more sense and at least clear up my concerns to all of you of why i say the 1st amendment may not even matter? Because in international law they don't follow it.

I'm not saying its gonna happen. Ok. I don't want that to happen. Even if there may be times i question US laws..I want to keep the laws where they belong. Through the US justice system and not through international hands deciding our US court desputes.

I don't think it will happen . But i did want you guys to know about it. And if it does happen wouldn't you at least ask yourself this..How would they prosocute and sentence situations like this one in international law ?


Again i want say with this case in general..its the fair and right call. Age has nothing to do with it. It has to do with maturity and common sense.

Alright now can we please get back on the real topic here. About this topic itself instead of bashing me please? Thank you.

[Leader Desslock]

i'm doing is just trying to point out some questions and facts
If you stuck to logical inference/deduction from facts, you wouldn't catch any flak at all on AN. Seriously, that's not what you're doing, no matter how you may perceive yourself.

...he admits with humilty that he is 100% not a journalist. He is a radio DJ and self educated man that just speaks his mind. Theres times the things he talks about and belive may possabbly happen hopes he is wrong . How many say that?
That's just a part of his act. He's an entertainer. I can't take his humility any more seriously than I can take the silly stuff he's shoving in peoples' faces, trying to scare them.

now thats frighting.
The frightening thing, to me, is that there are people who believe it. And some of those people are old enough to vote.

That terrifies me.

I belive in the US constution, 1st amendment, bill of rights and all of those things.
It's hard to know how much you can believe in the documents when you appear singularly unfamiliar with their contents or their practical application in simple, real-world scenarios.

My fear is the possability that we may soon use international laws instead of our own americian rights and americian laws to settle court desputes.
Can't happen without rescinding the existing Amendments and Constitution. Which would require ratification by the states, as well as significant margins in both houses of Congress.

You think that's gonna pass? Really? Regardless of whether Barack Obama personally vows, on his family's lives, to rescind the Constitution of the United States in favor of International Law, do you really think that the US public is going to ratify that Amendment?

If so, you are a bloody looney. It ain't gonna happen.

Key word.."International". Do you understand my main concern now?
Key word: "Unconstitutional". And if you understood the practical application of that word, then you'd know why none of us can understand your concern.

why i say the 1st amendment may not even matter? Because in international law they don't follow it.
Until it's formally rescinded by another Constitutional Amendment (See: Prohibition) it is the law of this land, overriding all others. International Law is irrelevant until then on US soil.

I'm not saying its gonna happen.
Oh, no - you're just expressing your concern that it will.

Same difference. You're trying to make a point and disavow the responsibility for making that point. But clearly, you've chosen a side, there.

[Takumi Fujiwara]

aye my poor sweet thread what hast happend to thee.

[JoeStrummer]

My personal life is none of yau'lls buissness. But i'm defently not mad to know i don't have or ever own underage nude photos of teens.



Dude, you srssly missed out as a teenager. I got naked pictures from my girlfriend when I was 16, I'm not a pedo.

[Bernard_Monsha]

Dude, you srssly missed out as a teenager. I got naked pictures from my girlfriend when I was 16, I'm not a pedo.

Then she was not nearly as smart as those Asians in Vancouver.

[waltsoph3]

@ desslock
Yes your right man i do take a stand on what i say. Thats why i say it.

Ever heard of character. Character defines what makes a person who they are right?
You belive glenn is a fake..np i'm not mad. I don't hold it against ya. Thats your opinion.
I personaly find him to be genuine. Yet at the same time i don't always agree with some of his issues.Thats my opinion.

Seriously sometimes I feel like im the defendent on trail in these forums. Being persucuted for being to some people unintellegant and not agreeing to the charges. lol


Problem is people today..don't care unless it happens to them. Espically on the internet as some people always use as the scapegoat pitch.

So belive what you guys want. I'm done. I said my peace on this topic.

[goddessofanime]

@ desslock

Seriously sometimes I feel like im the defendent on trail in these forums. Being persucuted for being to some people unintellegant and not agreeing to the charges. lol




walt, man..you know that I'm probaly one of the few on this board who does like you, even if I don't always agree with what you say...but I think the reason for AN dumping on you all the time is the fact that you think the sky is constantly falling.

[Leader Desslock]

Yes your right man i do take a stand on what i say. Thats why i say it.
That's actually not what I was saying, but...

You belive glenn is a fake..
No, I said he's not a journalist. I believe he'd be classified as an entertainer of some sort.

I like entertainers. There's nothing wrong with entertaining people for a living. But no matter how compelling I found Lee Marvin's performance in Cat Ballou, at no point do I mistake that film for an accurate representation of life in the Old West.

I personaly find him to be genuine.
By what possible definition of the word?

That's a rhetorical question, but it's one that I have to hope you consider answering yourself seriously at some point. If you actually take his shtick seriously enough to classify him as "genuine", then... I seriously have to wonder how you would be able to tell the difference between a reliable news source, mere propaganda, parody, etc..

There's more than enough data out there to shoot this guy down in flames, if you know what he's talking about and apply a modicum of critical thought.

When you read The Onion, do you even realize it's a joke newspaper? That it's basically Mad Magazine meets The New York Times? When you read The Weekly World News, are you aware that most everything printed on the page is a boldface lie? Do you know how to tell the difference?

You do? Great! Now - when you read The New York Times, The Nation, or any other mainstream newspaper (of the few that are left), do you have the basic skills to analyze the articles to determine which parts are fact and which parts are biased? Or do you just believe the whole thing because it's printed, so it must be true?

Again, that's rhetorical, but if your answer is the latter, then it scares me that you vote, sir. Because you're going to be one of the sheeple that lets himself be led straight to the slaughterhouse, with the rest of the country in tow.

Can anyone remind me again why they don't teach basic critical thinking skills as a required course in US schools? *sigh*

This all does apply to the thread topic, too. I mean, either the suspect possessed/distributed material that's classified as illegal pornography, or he did not. If he did, he deserves the sentence associated with the crime. If he did not, then he should be acquitted of the charge. Either way, this is not an issue that has anything to do with how one feels about age or pornography or one's experiences as a teenager. This is solely about what the law says about the material.

As I recall, distributing any form of porn requires that the distributor post something to demonstrate compliance with ... what is it, article 2257 of some law or somesuch? The one that says that all models were 18 or over at the time the material was created, and that records to that effect are on file at an officially established location.

Did the defendant do that? Was the model over 18 at the time of filming? Did the defendant (intentionally or not) cause the material to be distributed? Did he even obtain a release to distribute the material from the model?

No?

Then if the material is considered pornographic, he's guilty. Black and white. Pay the fine. Plead guilty and throw yourself on the mercy of the court. If the Judge feels lenient and you can convince him how very, very sorry you are, perhaps he'll go light on the sentence. Community service and all that. The gavel falls, case closed, turn the page.

Apply simple critical thinking to a simple case like this, and it practically resolves itself. Why the need for drama?

Seriously sometimes I feel like im the defendent on trail in these forums.
As a Physics instructor of mine used to tell me, "Then use your head, boy!"

Being persucuted for being to some people unintellegant
Irony. Just... irony.

Problem is people today..don't care unless it happens to them.
Can you tell me one reason why I should care that some kid's being brought up on pornography charges for putting compromising photos of a minor on a public computer? Name one reason why I should care about that. Just one. Even if he's innocent of Child Pornography charges, he's sure as hell guilty of Profound Stupidity. If he's thrown in jail, that's one less stupid person on the loose, as far as I'm concerned.

[KatayokuのTenshi]

Have you ever heard of.."International Law"? I sure didn't consider it untill i learned about it on Glenn Beck yesterday. ( i meen sure there those treaties and other political things we agree and sign on)

Wait, what? "International laws" are laws that bind states (not states as in Florida and New York, but states as in The United States of America, France, Russia, etc) in their dealings with other states. They are made by treaty and establish things like the state's Exclusive Economic Zone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_Economic_Zone) (UNCLOS 3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_ the_Sea)) or tariffs as between members of a trading bloc (NAFTA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement) for example).

America hasn't signed up to any treaties (as far as I know) that will subject it’s citizens to some sort of international criminal code (there isn't one... unless you are in the habit of committing war crimes, but I don't think that's the case) and you can't be bound in international law unless the state makes a treaty on the issue. (Well excepting competition law… but I don’t think I need to go into that sort of thing).

Of course that's all an oversimplification but…

Can't happen without rescinding the existing Amendments and Constitution. Which would require ratification by the states, as well as significant margins in both houses of Congress.

For reference Walt that's 3/4 of the States' legislatures and 2/3 of both houses, or visa-versa. And that's why Amendments aren't made all that often to the US Constitution.

[sumwhatkrazy]

i only read page one but this whole issue is only gonna get worse with the way the times have changed, ppl growing up so much quicker/earlyer/younger, the whole whats on t.v, the music industry, commercials are soft porn these days let alone music vids, the lack of disipline, the drung an drinking thing, drug screwed ppl, fashion, etc etc etc etc.
Also all the shyte thats in the food and water.
Girls always have and do act older than they are, want to been seen as older than they are, and are more developed physically than guys their same age, are more mature than guys their own age, want to be all about image an be with dudes that have cars an money and etc.
Its just weird how they develop an grow up faster than males, and they definately dress an act too old for thyere own good.
Iam 28, i have a 20 year old sister and 18 year old brother so i know what iam talking about.
I have to agree that it is just ridiculious that someone not much older, being with a girl who is sexually active already and willing was involved in the photos and not exactly a "little girl" herself is causeing a guys lfe to be ruined.
Hey, when i was 17 i went out with a 15 year old, how is that any differant than a 18 year old and a 16 year old, its just stupid.
Its a problem that wont go away, its only gonna get worse as each generation seems to grow up and develop sooner.
Ey people, it will be martial law soon, belive me, out after 9pm and you will be shot. ^-^

[Spadesy]

^ Growing up quickly is something that has always been glorified in society. The only difference today is the standard of "growing up."

Having money, smoking, drinking, chasing the opposite sex (and being successful at it) while talking down on others to give the perception that you are "more experienced" are all part of the package. Basic things you learned as a child like honesty, modesty and gratitude all get thrown out the window in your teens and don't come back until you realize how important those characteristics are.

[The Million Dollar Prons]

Dude, you srssly missed out as a teenager. I got naked pictures from my girlfriend when I was 16, I'm not a pedo.

Glad I'm not the only one who did this. >>

[Shiroiyuki]

Let parents parent their kids intead of the government deciding to do it for them. I mean seriously....you can't tell me none of you all fooled around as teenagers?

The only problem is that the parents you so eagerly wish to grant full power to are the unwashed byproduct of those little tramps that fooled around as teenagers last generation, are teenagers themselves still, and clearly cannot raise children decently -- as the little heathens I see running around the street have more in common with hyenas than with polite society.

If you just let parents parent their children without any rules, the inbred little demons of this new generation will be foaming at the mouth before they are ten, be knocked up by twelve, and will become a drain on our economy (through EBT, financial aid, etc.) by the time they reach the hillbilly equivalent of high school.

How can one teach good manners and morals when they were never taught themselves? Bad idea, very bad idea.

[goddessofanime]

The only problem is that the parents you so eagerly wish to grant full power to are the unwashed byproduct of those little tramps that fooled around as teenagers last generation, are teenagers themselves still, and clearly cannot raise children decently -- as the little heathens I see running around the street have more in common with hyenas than with polite society.

If you just let parents parent their children without any rules, the inbred little demons of this new generation will be foaming at the mouth before they are ten, be knocked up by twelve, and will become a drain on our economy (through EBT, financial aid, etc.) by the time they reach the hillbilly equivalent of high school.

How can one teach good manners and morals when they were never taught themselves? Bad idea, very bad idea.

That's true. It is up to the parents to teach brats not to be like that in public.

But it's not up to the government to punish them for it either.

[JoeStrummer]

Then she was not nearly as smart as those Asians in Vancouver.

Good point.

[SlackerDude]

So the dude ends up paying $10000 fine to the state for being a douchey idiot who publicly humiliated his girl friend ... Great, now what does the girl get for compensation?

[Caster13]

This ain't **** compared to what was going down here in Phoenix a couple months ago. Two 13 year old girls got caught running a prostitution ring on the streets with their classmates.

I was gonna post that story here, but I never got around to it.




Besides that, apparently some of you people didn't know crap about anything in your high schools. This is not new by any means, naked pictures and pictures of people giving head or having sex get passed around ALL THE TIME.

[waltsoph3]

This ain't **** compared to what was going down here in Phoenix a couple months ago. Two 13 year old girls got caught running a prostitution ring on the streets with their classmates.

I was gonna post that story here, but I never got around to it.




Besides that, apparently some of you people didn't know crap about anything in your high schools. This is not new by any means, naked pictures and pictures of people giving head or having sex get passed around ALL THE TIME.

Oh yeah i think i heard a brief story about that. To be honest that doesn't surprise me.

I think whats going on latly is with all the media attention happening more adults are just now catching on to what might be going on at their public schools.

When i was growing up at my schools i defently had my fair share of hearing from other people what so and so did. Just crazy and whacky stuff. :(