Fairfax County General :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
"Sexting"
Posted by:
funny shit
()
Date: March 11, 2009 05:25PM
So apparently "sexting" has really become an epidemic where we live. I remember last year there was a picture of some 15 year old girl topless sent all over West Springfield HS.
In case you're wondering what "sexting" is, go here
What are your thoughts on the actual act and the penalties that are starting to incur from participating?
In case you're wondering what "sexting" is, go here
What are your thoughts on the actual act and the penalties that are starting to incur from participating?
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
MrMephisto
()
Date: March 11, 2009 05:30PM
The act of sending someone a nude picture represents a bond of trust that, in exchange for seeing your hoo-hoo, they will not share it with the rest of the world.
Unfortunately, these girls are not old enough to have learned that men are not to be trusted. They deserve all the ridicule they get.
As far as penalties, they're trying to stick people with possession of child pornography charges.
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Unfortunately, these girls are not old enough to have learned that men are not to be trusted. They deserve all the ridicule they get.
As far as penalties, they're trying to stick people with possession of child pornography charges.
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
uh huh
()
Date: March 11, 2009 05:32PM
Well, we know that, but they were asking your opinion of the penalties, not what they are. Anyone who watches the news or reads the paper knows that they're trying to stick 14 year olds with child pornography charges.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
No One (not even the rain)
()
Date: March 11, 2009 05:33PM
They should have their phones removed from them as well as internet connections. They should be forced into a room and made to listen to the Jonas brothers non-stop for a week. Thats what I think of that.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
MrMephisto
()
Date: March 11, 2009 05:34PM
Oh.
In that case, those penalties suck.
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
In that case, those penalties suck.
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
tony
()
Date: March 11, 2009 05:42PM
i think that it is the stupidest thing ever that they are charging kids with possession and distribution of child pornography. I mean for gods sake the people they are charging are children themselves. I also think it is stupid that they are putting the on the sex offenders list.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
()
()
Date: March 11, 2009 05:49PM
I wanna see the pictures
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
TomMadison
()
Date: March 11, 2009 06:03PM
Being tagged as a sex offender follows you for a long time, but I think that this behavior is totally inappropriate for minors and if the only way to kill this trend before it gets out of hand is prosecution then I am all for it. If a college coed wants to send a topless picture to her boyfriend, fine, but it is different if the girl is 15 and stupid.
Anyone remember Amanda Wenk? I don't think that she had any idea what was going to happen to those pictures she posted, but they are still out there.
Anyone remember Amanda Wenk? I don't think that she had any idea what was going to happen to those pictures she posted, but they are still out there.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
AMANDA
()
Date: March 11, 2009 06:22PM
I love those pictures of me, don't you?
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
Annon Imous
()
Date: March 11, 2009 06:44PM
Why was Amanda Wenk such a big deal anyway? She was a teen girl who posted pictures of herself in bikinis and stuff. You can find a million pictures like that on Webshots and whatnot. What was special about her?
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
TITTIESx2
()
Date: March 11, 2009 07:00PM
This thread is useless without pictures.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
TheMeeper
()
Date: March 11, 2009 07:59PM
TomMadison Wrote:
>>>>> Anyone remember Amanda Wenk?
She was the subject of a giant thread on here years ago. And some creepy stalker guy from Mexico used to come on here and try to find out her address. Run a search for her name and you'll find some weird/funny shit.
>>>>> Anyone remember Amanda Wenk?
She was the subject of a giant thread on here years ago. And some creepy stalker guy from Mexico used to come on here and try to find out her address. Run a search for her name and you'll find some weird/funny shit.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
TomMadison
()
Date: March 11, 2009 08:21PM
Annon Imous Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why was Amanda Wenk such a big deal anyway? She
> was a teen girl who posted pictures of herself in
> bikinis and stuff. You can find a million pictures
> like that on Webshots and whatnot. What was
> special about her?
If you saw the pictures you know that it was more than "bikinis and stuff". She had a couple of topless and nearly full frontal shots along with some softcore girl-girl action.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why was Amanda Wenk such a big deal anyway? She
> was a teen girl who posted pictures of herself in
> bikinis and stuff. You can find a million pictures
> like that on Webshots and whatnot. What was
> special about her?
If you saw the pictures you know that it was more than "bikinis and stuff". She had a couple of topless and nearly full frontal shots along with some softcore girl-girl action.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
Gravis
()
Date: March 12, 2009 01:12PM
this is unacceptable, they must all be arrested for possession/distribution of child pornography and put on the sex offender list.
"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
496
()
Date: March 12, 2009 01:56PM
TomMadison=Amanda Wenks father. So proud of baby.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
dono
()
Date: March 12, 2009 03:40PM
Looks like this law has all the elegance of removing a hangnail with a hacksaw. I mean the scum that traffic kiddie porn for Adult use - there is a special place in hell for them and we should do everything in our power to make sure they are put away for a long time.
I dont see how ruining teenagers lives does that...
I dont see how ruining teenagers lives does that...
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
pgens
()
Date: March 12, 2009 06:21PM
It really is dumb. But kids will just learn to hide the pics. As if none of this ever happened with Polaroids lol.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
Alberto
()
Date: March 15, 2009 12:32AM
TomMadison Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Being tagged as a sex offender follows you for a
> long time, but I think that this behavior is
> totally inappropriate for minors and if the only
> way to kill this trend before it gets out of hand
> is prosecution then I am all for it. If a college
> coed wants to send a topless picture to her
> boyfriend, fine, but it is different if the girl
> is 15 and stupid.
>
> Anyone remember Amanda Wenk? I don't think that
> she had any idea what was going to happen to those
> pictures she posted, but they are still out there.
That's just silly.
First of all, some 15 year old boy gets an MMS text pic of a 15 year old "stupid girl" naked (or just topless, or in a suggestive pose) and you think that prosecutions are in order to stop this trend?? Willing participant versus inactive receiver, and you think the boy is responsible and should face jail, sex offender lists, and a scarlet letter for many years of his life?!?!
I'm sorry, but this just stinks of the same idiotic trend where parents no longer have any responsibility for their children, and the government needs to step in at any sign of not obeying the rules or norms. First off, these girls obviously need a father figure, a valid, responsible father figure in their lives. Without one, they're going to end up hanging from a pole, gyrating to the beat of a rap song in their g-string or less by the time they're 20 anyway. The boys probably need a father figure as well, but all they did was own a phone that received a multimedia text message with a photo of a scantily clad young girl, whether they asked for it or not.
There are real predators and criminals out there who prey on young women and exploit them for money or for perverted self-satisfaction. Those are the people all these laws are purportedly meant to go after. If all they can do is go after a kid for getting a picture sent to him, maybe they've overblown the epidemic of kiddie porn purveyors and child predators. Maybe it's not as bad as they've been hyping it up to be??
Besides, how come I'm not getting any of these photos? The thing I like about high school girls is that even though I keep getting older, they always stay the same age. (tongue in cheek, wasn't it actually Vince Vaughn who said that in some movie??)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/2009 12:40AM by Alberto.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Being tagged as a sex offender follows you for a
> long time, but I think that this behavior is
> totally inappropriate for minors and if the only
> way to kill this trend before it gets out of hand
> is prosecution then I am all for it. If a college
> coed wants to send a topless picture to her
> boyfriend, fine, but it is different if the girl
> is 15 and stupid.
>
> Anyone remember Amanda Wenk? I don't think that
> she had any idea what was going to happen to those
> pictures she posted, but they are still out there.
That's just silly.
First of all, some 15 year old boy gets an MMS text pic of a 15 year old "stupid girl" naked (or just topless, or in a suggestive pose) and you think that prosecutions are in order to stop this trend?? Willing participant versus inactive receiver, and you think the boy is responsible and should face jail, sex offender lists, and a scarlet letter for many years of his life?!?!
I'm sorry, but this just stinks of the same idiotic trend where parents no longer have any responsibility for their children, and the government needs to step in at any sign of not obeying the rules or norms. First off, these girls obviously need a father figure, a valid, responsible father figure in their lives. Without one, they're going to end up hanging from a pole, gyrating to the beat of a rap song in their g-string or less by the time they're 20 anyway. The boys probably need a father figure as well, but all they did was own a phone that received a multimedia text message with a photo of a scantily clad young girl, whether they asked for it or not.
There are real predators and criminals out there who prey on young women and exploit them for money or for perverted self-satisfaction. Those are the people all these laws are purportedly meant to go after. If all they can do is go after a kid for getting a picture sent to him, maybe they've overblown the epidemic of kiddie porn purveyors and child predators. Maybe it's not as bad as they've been hyping it up to be??
Besides, how come I'm not getting any of these photos? The thing I like about high school girls is that even though I keep getting older, they always stay the same age. (tongue in cheek, wasn't it actually Vince Vaughn who said that in some movie??)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/2009 12:40AM by Alberto.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
lawtf
()
Date: March 15, 2009 01:46AM
A naked picture of a child does not constitute child porn according to 18 U.S.C. 2256
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
Alberto
()
Date: March 15, 2009 02:20AM
lawtf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A naked picture of a child does not constitute
> child porn according to 18 U.S.C. 2256
You must frequent one of those "nudist" sites.
No, it doesn't violate common sense. However, it does violate the laws, at least in their minds, of people whose jobs it is to prosecute "pedophiles".
It turns out that pedophiles are actually such a rare breed that these poor guys who have been hired to go after them are left with the only option of grasping at straws and over-reaching in order to justify their salaries.
Now, we aren't talking about murderers and kidnappers, just "pedophiles". It seems like they have more people chasing after these assholes than there are these assholes to chase after.
Though I still hope they catch all these assholes. No doubt. It's for the children. We have to protect the children.
-------------------------------------------------------
> A naked picture of a child does not constitute
> child porn according to 18 U.S.C. 2256
You must frequent one of those "nudist" sites.
No, it doesn't violate common sense. However, it does violate the laws, at least in their minds, of people whose jobs it is to prosecute "pedophiles".
It turns out that pedophiles are actually such a rare breed that these poor guys who have been hired to go after them are left with the only option of grasping at straws and over-reaching in order to justify their salaries.
Now, we aren't talking about murderers and kidnappers, just "pedophiles". It seems like they have more people chasing after these assholes than there are these assholes to chase after.
Though I still hope they catch all these assholes. No doubt. It's for the children. We have to protect the children.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
ticklebug
()
Date: March 18, 2009 06:00PM
sexting makes me lawl my ass off
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
strates
()
Date: March 19, 2009 12:21AM
Slightly off topic, but "laws" and "prosecution" don't stop anybody from doing anything. This is a cultural issue stemming from bad upbringing and morals. The legal system is a result of a common cultural ethos, not vice versa. Just because something is "wrong" doesn't mean it should be "illegal"
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
Skooly D
()
Date: March 23, 2009 02:18PM
more laws? jeez it never ends in this stupid county. Some folks want to pretend that Nothern VA is Mayberry, but its just not. If more laws helped then no kids would ever drink, smoke pot have underage sex because of what regulations are on the books and this would be a perfect society.
Live in reality. These kids will do what they do with or without your permission. If a parent can't control their stupid teenager that is their problem not ours. Don't go around writing up pointless legislation that eats up tax payer time and money about "sexting' of all things.
Get a hold of yourselves and be a parent instead of dumping your 15 year old problems on the courts and the state congress.
Live in reality. These kids will do what they do with or without your permission. If a parent can't control their stupid teenager that is their problem not ours. Don't go around writing up pointless legislation that eats up tax payer time and money about "sexting' of all things.
Get a hold of yourselves and be a parent instead of dumping your 15 year old problems on the courts and the state congress.
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
dc bullets
()
Date: March 23, 2009 05:26PM
Alberto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The thing I like about high school girls
> is that even though I keep getting older, they
> always stay the same age. (tongue in cheek,
> wasn't it actually Vince Vaughn who said that in
> some movie??)
it was actually matthew mcconaughey in dazed and confused
-------------------------------------------------------
The thing I like about high school girls
> is that even though I keep getting older, they
> always stay the same age. (tongue in cheek,
> wasn't it actually Vince Vaughn who said that in
> some movie??)
it was actually matthew mcconaughey in dazed and confused
Re: "Sexting"
Posted by:
HIJACKER
()
Date: March 23, 2009 08:40PM
First of all, no one is over the age of 18 - so to punish to 15 years olds "sexting" each other with a crime such as child porn I feel is the wrong way to handle it.
Simply put, I think it should be the parents responsibility. How can you control this is a parent? Simple - You provide them a phone that doesn't have a camera built in. There are still phones on the market that don't have cameras and if demand increases, so will supply. THe government has restrictions on camera phones in secured facilities, I deal with it everyday which is why my company issue blackberry doesn't have one.
There are ways around it and resolve the issue, but tagging KIDS who are sending photos of their PEERS with child porn, I feel is wrong. Now, if one of the parties were voer the age of 18, then its a different story.
Also, the receiver should not be guilty, only the sender. If if the receiver ASKS for the images, it's the sender who makes the decision to SEND.
Simply put, I think it should be the parents responsibility. How can you control this is a parent? Simple - You provide them a phone that doesn't have a camera built in. There are still phones on the market that don't have cameras and if demand increases, so will supply. THe government has restrictions on camera phones in secured facilities, I deal with it everyday which is why my company issue blackberry doesn't have one.
There are ways around it and resolve the issue, but tagging KIDS who are sending photos of their PEERS with child porn, I feel is wrong. Now, if one of the parties were voer the age of 18, then its a different story.
Also, the receiver should not be guilty, only the sender. If if the receiver ASKS for the images, it's the sender who makes the decision to SEND.