

Common sense dies when adults catch teenagers "sexting" each other - jseliger
http://www.reason.com/news/show/133863.html

======
mustpax
OK let's take a step back and examine the core issue here: are minors capable
enough of making sound decisions to be held legally liable for the outcomes?

If they are, then they should also be allowed to "sext" similar peers. If not
they are not capable of making such decisions, then they should not be
arrested for receiving such messages.

To say that teenagers are both culpable and incapable of sound reasoning is
not a consistent position. But then, are we really trying to be sensible?

~~~
bestes
Minors are _not_ capable of making sound decisions, which is why they should
be treated differently (and usually are). But, I _disagree_ that this is the
core issue. I believe that this is _not a crime_. At all. Not even a little
bit. The idea that it is _illegal_ for those under 18 to do anything sexual is
wrong. It moves to preposterous when you start calling them sex offenders.
Why? Because it is a natural and normal part of growing up. The body secrets
huge amounts of testosterone/estrogen during puberty. Humans are
designed/programmed/whatever to start thinking about sex at this point.
Finally, because kids are actually people too. They do get to make decisions.
Small ones at first, but bigger ones later. A 17-year-old that is going out
with an 18-year-old should not have to break up with their significant other
simply because of the magical 18th birthday.

~~~
ErrantX
great post!

I think the kid puts it best (and ironically in an extremely mature way) when
he talks about how a split second decision screwed it all up. We talk about
underage and minors because we are a lot older - but forget that to them that
age divide is non-existant. At home with the guys, testosterone going, recieve
a text from a girl that sounds a bit sexy - hey we've all done it. Difference
is where it's "allowed" for us - for them it, apprently, isnt. Leaving the
images on screen or w/e is, obviously, very thick but I struggle to see a
serious crime. The boy's parents approach seemed the best of the lot......

Yes, nail whoever actually posted them publicly online (and perhaps lightly
reprimand the guy for leaving his inbox open). That is the _real_ crime -
regardless of the age of the victim.

(ps sorry about spamming this topic: strong opinions here :D shout if it's too
much)

~~~
dougp
Apparently him leaving the inbox open wasn't what spread them she sent those
same pictures to other guys.

------
benmathes
I only read half the article, but from what I can tell:

\- 14 year-old girl sends topless pics to multiple teenage peers.

\- One of the recipients leaves his inbox open and his friend posts the images
online.

\- That same recipient gets arrested.

It seems like of those three people (the girl, the recipient, and the poster),
the most-innocent one was the one that got arrested. That's bass-ackwards.

~~~
spoiledtechie
you should have read the entire thing...

------
quoderat
Anyone who aids and abets this sort of thing -- criminalizing the quite
natural urges of those growing into adulthood -- should go to prison
themselves.

The perils of living in a puritanical country....

------
tptacek
It's not a minor thing if naked pictures of your daughter are permanently
circulating around Internet porn sites.

I have no other comment to make about the underlying issue here, and I am
specifically _not_ making a stand. I'm just saying, it's not a minor issue.

~~~
bestes
As a father with a daughter, I can imagine I would be very distraught. But, in
this specific situation, if my daughter took pictures of herself, of her own
volition and sent them out, it's really her decision. She might also get a
tattoo or ride a motorcycle or even want to program in Java. My job is to
educate her, get her ready to make big decisions and teach her that her
decisions have real consequences.

~~~
batasrki
>"...if my daughter took pictures of herself, of her own volition and sent
them out, it's really her decision"

And that's the key here, isn't it? She wasn't coerced into these pictures. She
may have been peer-pressured, but the article doesn't cover whether this is
the norm in this school or not. I suspect not. She did it, she distributed the
picture. What did she think it was going to happen?

Her father's quote is laughable: "This country has laws in place to protect
children. Those laws need to be enforced, and parents need to pursue those
laws to the fullest extent to protect their children." What the hell does he
think happened here?

~~~
electromagnetic
Her father is blaming someone else's child as being the 'bad egg', just like
is frequently seen when a parent denies their child being a bully.

He's an incompetent parent who doesn't want to admit his daughter has turned
into an eSlut sending multiple pornographic images and videos to multiple
people at the same time. I'm sorry, but sending nude pics to your boyfriend is
acceptable, sending it to a non-boyfriend is trashy, but 4 guys at the same
time is just slutty.

~~~
philwelch
This kind of attitude (some third party with absolutely no business butting in
deciding what is or isn't an "acceptable" way for another human being to
express their sexuality) is exactly what got these kids into this legal mess.

------
enneff
Reading this I couldn't help but think that standardised, easy-to-use, end-to-
end crypto could have prevented a lot of these cases. No way for the pictures
to be intercepted by the law, no way for a "friend" to steal them out of the
recipient's mailbox. Of course, trust only goes so far as a teenage boy's
trustworthiness, but it's something.

~~~
jcl
The reason the friend was able to steal the pictures was because the recipient
left his e-mail program open and unattended. End-to-end crypto is useless if
either of the ends are compromised.

~~~
enneff
That is true, but I would imagine crypto-centric email software would have a
timeout feature or similar to mitigate this.

------
telegraph
"That might have been the end of it, had the files not, as digital files will,
leaked onto the Internet."

This makes it sound like the tubes were leaky that day and because the files
were "digital," they just spread out over the Internet like an oil slick. Um,
no. Files do not spread simply by virtue of being on a computer.

------
nikblack
here is a case where we actually need DRM. the girl should have been able to
secure the content and allow access to only those people she wished to grant
it to - there is both nothing legally or morally wrong with that.

there is a tech angle to this story - and its about how we need solutions to
stop unauthorized propagation of private content. DRM systems as already built
into Windows and other systems would work perfect - it just needs to be
standardized and rolled out across mobile and web platforms (most of it is
based on open protocols)

It's a shame because we have the technology, it is just currently being
applied in the wrong places

~~~
spoiledtechie
wow, isn't that a good idea!!! Startup idea for anyone who wants it.

~~~
moe
No, it's a bad idea. It wouldn't work. Neither on a technical level (DRM on
images is trivially circumvented), nor on a social level (idiots will always
be idiots - no matter how many safeguards you build in, they always find a way
around them).

And that's without even getting into the slippery slope aspects of DRM
technology.

~~~
nikblack
no, it would work. it doesn't have to be DRM per se, just automated public key
encryption and signing using something unique such as the phones IMEI number.

it is very possible to implement encryption and signing without having the
user go through key generation etc. make it all transparent and give them a
lock to click on if they want to make the message and attachments secure. PGP
already has a similar product, and hushmail is pretty easy to use.

~~~
moe
And what does that gain you? Nothing.

The image needs to be _displayed_ on the receiving end. From that point the
cat is out the bag, no matter how many locks you put on the bag.

~~~
nikblack
we are talking about propagation here. its built so that the person who
receives the image is then unable to forward it to somebody else. or at least
they can, but that person won't be able to unencrypt.

its pretty standard, and working with e-commerce for a while now.

~~~
moe
_its pretty standard, and working with e-commerce for a while now._

In what area of "e-commerce" is that standard and working? I don't know of any
but I know at least one where DRM was tried and failed miserably (music
distribution).

Moreover I can only repeat that DRM is technically infeasible for images
because the images need to be _displayed_ on the clients screen. When your
eyes can see it then the lens of your digicam can also see it. Get it?

~~~
nikblack
wow, your on a completely different page - and im going to leave it at that.

------
babo
From my point of view this is a kind of overreaction from the society to an
existing problem where we mixing real criminals with kids. Based on that
strict rules long generation could be criminalized... The magical figures of
legal age are based on traditions but puberty comes way earlier nowadays with
all the bad consequences. We are sending police officers after kids but there
are no words against the girly image from the media which is far from innocent
and a good inspiration for all the illegal behaviour. As a father of three I
just hope the best that my kids will survive these years without an incident
like that.

------
electromagnetic
This is just a clear illustration of the fallacy of our legal systems. I had a
2MP camera phone at ~13 years old, even at that time it was fully integrated
to the cellular network and internet. Any picture I took could be sent to
another phone or emailed on. I had a webcam on my own computer and vast
knowledge of computers; I started on DOS at like 3 and was online long before
the mass adoption of IM.

------
wlievens
So basically, everyone who took private pictures of their high school
sweetheart back in the day and never bothered to delete them after turning
eighteen is in possession of child pornography?

~~~
pyr3
Even _BEFORE_ you turn 18. There are cases of <18 yo kids being tried as
adults for 'possessing', 'producing' or 'distributing' child pornography. Even
the girl who takes the pictures of herself is not safe from this sort of legal
system madness.

------
TheAmazingIdiot
It makes a really nice system of governance if people break laws early in
their life, and "government" can tag them and monitor them for the rest of
their life... if you represent the government.

And "child porn" brings in a lot of emotional baggage. We all think of Mr 40
year old kiddie diddling with a 9 or 10 year old. That's just gross. So
politicians made laws to handle that. Of course, the young boy looking at porn
was completely ignored. However, the other fact that was ignored completely is
simple biology. We all know about 'adolescents' and their 'hormones', yet the
laws ignored any idea of following biology. Instead these politicians follow
the most puritanical belief set they can find.

And tell me: What politician wants to give up that much power, or "Let Those
Evil Men Have Sex With Your Young Child" ?

Yes, Im cynical, only because I've seen this 'game' in many other areas of
government. Alcohol, seat belts, Smoking, university funding, Roads... you
name it.

------
jdbeast00
"Then there were the things they could not control, such as the confiscation
by police of the computer belonging to the dean of students at Alex’s school.
The dean had requested the images in an effort to sort things out" ---
haha...sure dean, sure. "sort things out"

~~~
noonespecial
I know its a joke here, but if that attitude really prevails, there will be no
way at all to deal with this in a rational way at the level where it will do
the most good.

We've already got a serious problem with over-escalation here. All this will
do is make the people most able to deal with the problem too afraid even to
acknowledge it.

Don't look, don't think, just call the Miniluv.

~~~
ErrantX
True enough: but that is not something the dean is equipped to cope with on
his own. They are pictures of minors and no matter his intentions requesting
them (where from?) off his own back sounds like a bad move!

Get in with the police force (in all liklihood they would welcome his
connection to the pupils) and provide suppor through that medium; that seems a
more logical approach (what he did sounds like a half cocked investigation of
his own - which is a bad idea full stop anyway :D).

As it is he will almost certainly be let off with a caution (provided nothing
else is found) - but siezing it is all but mandatory. If nothing else to
ensure the images are correctly destroyed.

~~~
noonespecial
In the current environment, the dean's best course of action (provided he
cares about the students and their futures) is to keep the images as far from
the police as possible and try to handle it as quickly and quietly as he can.

Such is the sad but true we now find ourselves in.

~~~
Zak
It didn't happen at school, and it didn't involve school resources as far as I
can tell from the article. The best course of action for the dean is to avoid
dealing with the situation entirely.

There seems to be a common attitude among school administrators that anything
involving students is their business. It is not.

~~~
jdbeast00
can someone explain why Zak is +14 while i'm -7 and we basically said the same
thing. it was a joke guys.

~~~
philwelch
Because Zak just said it (clearly and understandably), and you tried to convey
it through a vague and not-especially-funny witticism.

You also complained about getting downmodded, which is why you're at 0 here.

------
jasonlbaptiste
Maybe she shouldn't be such a slut. Just my two cents.

On top of it, the distribution wasn't intentional by the boyfriend. Why not go
after those that did distribute it ie- his friends? May be hard to prove the
computer was left open and "person x" did it.

Yes, it's horrible this happened, and I'd be pissed if I was a dad. I'd also
try to be rational. Like Chris Rock said "Youve done a good job if you keep
your daughter off the pole". Seems like this Dad is about to fail.

~~~
natrius
When I have a daughter, I want her to be able to do whatever she wants without
worrying that society will judge her for actions that have harmed no one.
Comments like yours make that less likely. Please stop.

~~~
jasonlbaptiste
I agree with you. I'm not for over protective parenting and kids should be
able to have fun/express themselves without lots of judging.

Honestly though, there's probably a fine line somewhere. I think you can say
that it might not be the best idea for your daughter at 14 to be sending
around naked photos and stripteasing.

This could easily become a long argument and no one is wrong or right. Maybe
it's more of a case of would rather and would rather not. Most people would
probably agree that they would rather not have their 14 year old daughter
sending around some naked photos and videos.

~~~
natrius
I definitely wouldn't want my daughter to send around naked pictures of
herself. However, if she did, that wouldn't make her a bad person, as "slut"
connotes.

~~~
randallsquared
I don't think it connotes that to everyone. At least, to me, it only suggests
high promiscuity, which isn't a bad thing in and of itself. Nor is it
necessarily true in this case, but to those who formed our worldviews before
omnipresent recording, sex-themed pictures of someone intuitively imply
promiscuity. We'll just have to get over it; the world has changed.

