« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Child pornography vs. freedom of speech? There’s got to be a middle ground here somewhere

By: Finrod (Diary)  |  January 16th, 2010 at 11:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

When I first ran across this story, I couldn’t help but not want either side to win:

A federal court in Philadelphia may make it legal for teens to send naked pictures of each other using cellphones.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit will hear arguments today in Philadelphia from the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania that would ban a district attorney from prosecuting underage teens involved in “sexting.”

…

On March 30, 2009, U.S. District Judge James Munley granted a temporary restraining order blocking the district attorney, George Skumanick, from bringing the charges, finding that the photographs were not child pornography under Pennsylvania law and were protected under the First Amendment.

The Wyoming County district attorney allegedly said he would charge the three high school girls with child pornography if they didn’t agree to be placed on probation, participate in a five-week re-education program and be subject to random drug testing.

First as an aside, what do random drug tests have to do with pornography? That alone to my mind is an overreach on the prosecutor’s part. But that’s only a side issue.

The problem with charging teens under child pornography laws is that those laws were written before current technology was even dreamed of; they’re intended to protect children by keeping dirty old men from exploiting them in order to make pornography. But charging teens with child pornography isn’t protecting them, it’s punishing them.

At the same time, as much as I support free speech, I cannot get on board with that argument. Child pornography shouldn’t be allowed whether it’s adults using kids to make it or kids making it themselves.

There needs to be something in between these two radical extremes.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://andrightlyso.com/ civil_truth

    That’s the way around this conundrum. And civil law seems a far more appropriate venue than criminal law.

    Especially since we’re dealing with minors. For instance, how about a lack of valid consent – invasion of privacy.

    And I don’t see the First Amendment protecting sexting.

    It’s late and I’m not a lawyer. But we adults should be able to regain control without allowing maraunding DA’s to make sex offenders out of sexting teens.

  • aesthete

    They, by their very nature, have to be fairly broad, and take the authority from the parents and give it to government. Also, the enforceability and penalties assigned to both parties (the kid taking self-portraits and the kid getting sent said self-portraits) would be problematic. There could be an intelligent compromise out there, as you say, and I’d support it if it were out there, but the fact that “sexting” is such a broad term, and the enforcement problems involved, make me think that there probably isn’t a solution that resolves the issue without seriously compromising the privacy of citizens.

    (I can also see it devolving into a “he-said, she-said” law very easily, tying the system in knots.)

    Have you seen any clever resolutions to the problem elsewhere, by any chance?

  • Achance

    it is just a high-tech version of playing doctor. Somehow or another modern parents have developed the belief that adolescent sex is somthing new, but I’ll show you mine if you’ll show me yours has been going on for a VERY long time.

  • http://andrightlyso.com/ civil_truth

    I thought we were talking about sending to third parties in my comments above.

    If it’s just a person sending images of themselves to someone else (and both are underage, as Art stipulates), and the latter doesn’t distribute to others, I don’t see this being an issue at all for law enforcement. Stupdity (or aiding and abetting stupidity) is not a crime. But it’s still not a1st Amendment issue, either.

    Some people in authority and the ACLU need to get a grip.

  • JadedByPolitics

    the RE-EDUCATION portion. I don’t believe in this country WE ought to be saying as a punishment something called re-education. That type of language ought to be saved for the dictators in other countries don’t you think? with regards to the teenagers it is just 21st century “petting” without the actual touching and the laws ought to keep up with times instead of DESTROYING lives with pedophile charges that would be on their records where ever they move to in their future. This is indeed a mess.

  • Ausonius

    by an obsessed, hedonistic society using S E X everywhere to sell things, to make jokes on TV shows and movies, to sell things, to push a political agenda divorced from religious morality, and to sell things.

    A further question: do we want to give children full civil rights, e.g. complete coverage under the First Amendment?

  • mom2oneson

    For any type of punishment for teens to invovle counseling or education and drug testing.

    I hope all those involved with child porn rot in hell but Jaded it has been the right that has made more federal laws concerning obscenity and things related to porn in a well meaning attempt to stop child porn.

    I think aesthete has the right idea who would charged with this when you get to he said she said. If someone else took the picture the girl would be the victim etc.

  • dvdmsr

    by constitution stretching courts that want to apply the 1st amendment prohibitions to the states.