Skip to main content

How to be the perpetrator and victim according to North Carolina law

I just read about an extremely strange legal case in North Carolina. Apparently, a 17-year-old was charged with multiple counts of sexual exploitation for taking and possessing nude photos of a minor. Who is this minor? Himself, as he sent nude photos of himself to his 16-year-old girlfriend (and vice versa). That's right, according to North Carolina law, this kid was both the perpetrator and victim of this crime. Not only does that sound strange in and of itself, if this 17-year-old were to engage in sexual intercourse with his 16-year-old girlfriend, that would be perfectly legal under the state's laws. But to take a nude photo of himself and send it to his girlfriend? That's going to cost him... Fortunately, he was able to reach a plea deal where he won't have to register as a sex offender or spend any time in prison. He will be placed on probation for a year, however.

This is a very strange, backwards, and ancient law, in my opinion. Just imagine if this kid had to register as a sex offender for sending nude photos of himself (the minor in question) to his girlfriend, whom he'd legally be allowed to have sex with. He'd be forced to knock on neighbors' doors and tell them, "Yeah, I'm a sex offender. I looked at myself naked one time when I was 17-years-old, took a picture, sent it to my girlfriend, and so, like yeah." What will North Carolina think of next? "Teenage boy touches himself, gets arrested for touching a minor."

I'm not the only one who animatedly shook my head when reading about this case. University of Texas Medical Branch psychologist Dr. Jeff Temple agreed, saying, "[If every state went after nude photos in the way that North Carolina recently has] you're talking about millions of kids being charged with child pornography."

Author of the book Cybertraps for Educators, Fred Lane, added:

"There are about 10 or 12 mostly conservative states where they will prosecute kids for this, and it's kind of a moral values thing - they are trying to make an example of them because it's believed to be inappropriate behavior. There is a streak of moralizing that runs through this country that is disturbing sometimes."

I don't think anybody would disagree that child pornography is perverse and should be outlawed. However, a teenage boyfriend and girlfriend taking and sending suggestive photos of themselves to one another isn't child pornography, and they shouldn't be treated as such under the law. While the 17-year-old who was charged, his girlfriend, and others like them should probably be more careful about such things in the future, they shouldn't have to fear spending time in prison or having to register as sex offenders for these common and harmless acts.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/09/21/3703648/north-carolina-sexting/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"