Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 4/15/2006 7:38:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2006 7:38:32 AM EDT by Specop_007]
Ok, so having nude pictures of minors is illegal.

What if you and your girlfriend are 17 and take nude pictures and keep them. Are you both suddenly felons when you turn 18?
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:39:22 AM EDT
I vote felon as soon as pics are taken.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:40:49 AM EDT
Hopefully the jury will listen to your intent pleas.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:41:08 AM EDT
Hell, they'll charge you even for taking a picture of yourself.

www.postgazette.com/breaking/20040329pornp6.asp
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:41:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2006 7:44:15 AM EDT by Interceptor_Knight]

Originally Posted By Specop_007:
Ok, so having nude pictures of minors is illegal.

What if you and your girlfriend are 17 and take nude pictures and keep them. Are you both suddenly felons when you turn 18?




You have to be caught to be charged.  Unless you or your girlfriend actually take the pictures in th the authorities and sign a statement that you were 17 when they were taken, there is no proof.  
If it makes it funner in bed for you to have a sense of danger that you are secretly a felon, then go on and keep thinking it.   I agree with everyone else in the regard that you are already felons even if you are only 17.  Just like sex with a minor.  Even the other minor is a Felon depending on age.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:42:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:
I vote STUPID felons as soon as pics are taken.



Slight tweak.

Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:43:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheSneak:
Hell, they'll charge you even for taking a picture of yourself.

www.postgazette.com/breaking/20040329pornp6.asp



Now that's just... damn.  
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:44:21 AM EDT
Back in a couple of law classes I took, we were told that nude pictures of a minor were not illegal (think naturalists at the beach).  However, nude pictures with a sexual component were.  I can appreciate the fine line here, and would get rid of them altogether if I were you.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:44:33 AM EDT
I guess my parents are felons then, for having pictures of me as a nekkid baby.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:47:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Matthew_Q:

Originally Posted By TheSneak:
Hell, they'll charge you even for taking a picture of yourself.

www.postgazette.com/breaking/20040329pornp6.asp


Now that's just... damn.  


No, it's damn straight!

If they are willing to prosecute YOU for having those pics, they should at least prosecute HER for making them available.

When the soon-to-be-everybody's-girlfriend sent them out on the Internet, she was simply like any other child pornographer.

Life's tough, and being stupid doesn't make it any easier.

Eric The(CommonScold)Hun
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:50:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2006 7:54:10 AM EDT by U_Down_Wit_OPP]
This has been adjudicated before. IIRC, it stemmed from a case where a woman had a nude picture of her 3 year old daughter posing (in a totally non “sexual” manner), and was prosecuted for kiddie porn.

There is a fine, fine line of what's legal and what isn't and frankly, it's all test case territory where it will take a judge and a $50,000 worth of lawyers to decide.

If it's a hardcore shot of your 17 year old girlfriend, then yes, that's illegal porn. If it's a nude shot of her lying on the bed with her legs spread, that's probably a no-no. If it's a shot of her swimming on a nude beach, that might be OK... But who the hell knows...

Hell, it's very much illegal to posess about 99% of the nude pics of Traci Lords that are floating around out there. Go to google images, type in "Traci Lords", click on any one of the hardcore shots and you're a felon.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 7:52:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By slash-5:
Back in a couple of law classes I took, we were told that nude pictures of a minor were not illegal (think naturalists at the beach).  However, nude pictures with a sexual component were.  I can appreciate the fine line here, and would get rid of them altogether if I were you.



I dont have any so no worries.

Well, let me be more specific.

I dont have any of us underage. We played around with the new camera when we first got it, but hell we were both damn near 25 at that time.

I stumbled across some of the pictures today and just got to thinking, what if those had been taken when we were younger.

Hence my question.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 8:00:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
I guess my parents are felons then, for having pictures of me as a nekkid baby.



Now you're being silly. Naked babies are NOT erotic.


Personally, after seeing naked photos of people being used as weapons (here included) I plain think it's pretty damn STUPID to let your S/O photograph you naked or erotically posed.

Link Posted: 4/15/2006 8:03:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
I guess my parents are felons then, for having pictures of me as a nekkid baby.




Only if you were posed inappropriately.  
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 8:03:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:

Originally Posted By Matthew_Q:

Originally Posted By TheSneak:
Hell, they'll charge you even for taking a picture of yourself.

www.postgazette.com/breaking/20040329pornp6.asp


Now that's just... damn.  


No, it's damn straight!

If they are willing to prosecute YOU for having those pics, they should at least prosecute HER for making them available.

When the soon-to-be-everybody's-girlfriend sent them out on the Internet, she was simply like any other child pornographer.

Life's tough, and being stupid doesn't make it any easier.

Eric The(CommonScold)Hun



The thing is, the reason for it being illegal is that by creating it you're hurting someone.  This is why the Supreme Court ruled that "virtual" kiddie porn (created from scratch or by altering existing legal images) was not illegal.  So the argument for charging the girl is that she's harming herself then?  The harming yourself argument is a dangerous one because it leads to helmet laws and other such nonsense.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 8:16:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2006 8:17:59 AM EDT by EricTheHun]
Originally Posted By TheSneak:

So the argument for charging the girl is that she's harming herself then?  The harming yourself argument is a dangerous one because it leads to helmet laws and other such nonsense.

Uh, I can live with that.

Slippery slope?

Nope.

Some slopes are slipperier than others.

Call it a slathery slope.

Eric The(Salacious)Hun
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 8:17:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2006 8:18:15 AM EDT by U_Down_Wit_OPP]

Originally Posted By TheSneak:
So the argument for charging the girl is that she's harming herself then?



Actually, yes.

The history of American jurisprudence is fairly solid when it comes to acknowledging that people under a certain age aren't entirely in possession of a cogent decision making process, thus their being prohibited from drinking, smoking, buying guns and taking nude pictures of themselves for the sexual gratification of adults.

I don’t think she should have been "prosecuted" (seeing as a 15 year old girl who is taking naked pics of herself for grown-ups is more in need of therapy, not jail time), but there would probably be enough statutory room for a conviction if the judge was a hard-ass.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 8:21:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheSneak:
Hell, they'll charge you even for taking a picture of yourself.

www.postgazette.com/breaking/20040329pornp6.asp



Now that, is seriously retarded.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 9:37:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Burley:

Originally Posted By TheSneak:
Hell, they'll charge you even for taking a picture of yourself.

www.postgazette.com/breaking/20040329pornp6.asp


Now that, is seriously retarded.


Almost as retarded as posting nekked pics of yourself on the Internet.

Almost.

Eric The(Wisened)Hun
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 10:00:01 AM EDT
...
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 10:07:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheSneak:
Hell, they'll charge you even for taking a picture of yourself.

www.postgazette.com/breaking/20040329pornp6.asp



Wow, thats retarded.

I'd say if the dates arent on the pictures the police cant prove she was underage at the time. Just dont tell anyone or show anyone the photos. Hell, nobody will ever see the photos if ya keep them hidden, if anyone does you took those pictures on her 18th birthday.

Remember, you cant get arrested if you dont get caught. Its your buisness, if I where you I'd delete your post and forget about it.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 10:10:01 AM EDT
Just wait a year and you wont have to worry about it all together.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 2:26:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
I guess my parents are felons then, for having pictures of me as a nekkid baby.



Now you're being silly. Naked babies are NOT erotic.


Personally, after seeing naked photos of people being used as weapons (here included) I plain think it's pretty damn STUPID to let your S/O photograph you naked or erotically posed.


To you ,me, and 99% of the worlds population sure .
BUT some where out there is a sick mother fucker spanking one out just at the thought .
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 2:30:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kodiak-AK:

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
I guess my parents are felons then, for having pictures of me as a nekkid baby.



Now you're being silly. Naked babies are NOT erotic.


Personally, after seeing naked photos of people being used as weapons (here included) I plain think it's pretty damn STUPID to let your S/O photograph you naked or erotically posed.


To you ,me, and 99% of the worlds population sure .
BUT some where out there is a sick mother fucker spanking one out just at the thought .



Michael Jackson
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 4:18:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Noname:
www.amrc.org.hk/OSH%20miners%20Page%2017%20low%20res.jpg...



I just knew someone would do it(nips)  Ban  him!!!!!

Bob [roflmas]  
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 4:21:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
I guess my parents are felons then, for having pictures of me as a nekkid baby.



Now you're being silly. Naked babies are NOT erotic.





NOT erotic to YOU!!!!
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 4:21:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By slash-5:
Back in a couple of law classes I took, we were told that nude pictures of a minor were not illegal (think naturalists at the beach).  However, nude pictures with a sexual component were.  I can appreciate the fine line here, and would get rid of them altogether if I were you.



This is correct.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 4:27:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
I guess my parents are felons then, for having pictures of me as a nekkid baby.



Now you're being silly. Naked babies are NOT erotic.


Personally, after seeing naked photos of people being used as weapons (here included) I plain think it's pretty damn STUPID to let your S/O photograph you naked or erotically posed.




My half-brother's grandfather was questioned by the police after he showed up at the photomat to pick up pictures for my stepmother.  The pictures in question were of my brother (he was about 1 year old at the time) in a bathtub.  It was only a couple of pictures out of about 50.

The police decided not to push the issue after talking to him, but still that's fucked up.  I would have beat the shit out of the clerk at the photomat if that happened to me.
Link Posted: 4/15/2006 4:29:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:
Personally, after seeing naked photos of people being used as weapons (here included) I plain think it's pretty damn STUPID to let your S/O photograph you naked or erotically posed.


What she said.  It seems that someone will always find them.
Link Posted: 4/16/2006 10:35:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Specop_007:
Ok, so having nude pictures of minors is illegal.

What if you and your girlfriend are 17 and take nude pictures and keep them. Are you both suddenly felons when you turn 18?



Nude pictures of minors are not by themselves illegal. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002256----000-.html

Although you will be surprised how many prosecutors in this country DONT know this.


For the purposes of this chapter, the term—
(1) “minor” means any person under the age of eighteen years;
(2)
(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), “sexually explicit conduct” means actual or simulated—
(i) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(ii) bestiality;
(iii) masturbation;
(iv) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(v) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;
(B) For purposes of subsection 8(B) [1] of this section, “sexually explicit conduct” means—
(i) graphic sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex, or lascivious simulated sexual intercourse where the genitals, breast, or pubic area of any person is exhibited;
(ii) graphic or lascivious simulated;
(I) bestiality;
(II) masturbation; or
(III) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(iii) graphic or simulated lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;
(3) “producing” means producing, directing, manufacturing, issuing, publishing, or advertising;
(4) “organization” means a person other than an individual;
(5) “visual depiction” includes undeveloped film and videotape, and data stored on computer disk or by electronic means which is capable of conversion into a visual image;
(6) “computer” has the meaning given that term in section 1030 of this title;
(7) “custody or control” includes temporary supervision over or responsibility for a minor whether legally or illegally obtained;
(8) “child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where—
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
(9) “identifiable minor”—
(A) means a person—
(i)
(I) who was a minor at the time the visual depiction was created, adapted, or modified; or
(II) whose image as a minor was used in creating, adapting, or modifying the visual depiction; and
(ii) who is recognizable as an actual person by the person’s face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic, such as a unique birthmark or other recognizable feature; and
(B) shall not be construed to require proof of the actual identity of the identifiable minor.
(10) “graphic”, when used with respect to a depiction of sexually explicit conduct, means that a viewer can observe any part of the genitals or pubic area of any depicted person or animal during any part of the time that the sexually explicit conduct is being depicted; and
(11) the term “indistinguishable” used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] So in original. Probably should be “(8)(B)”.



Link Posted: 4/16/2006 10:39:16 AM EDT
The federal law is so fucked up in this country that I can have consentual sex with as many 17 year old girls in this state as I want.  If I want a new one every hour on the hour for the next two weeks and she says yes, it's perfectly legal....

But if anyone takes a picture of us, they're a felon.
Link Posted: 4/16/2006 10:43:06 AM EDT
Top Top