Child ****

I'm sure Canadan Law is similar to UK & German Law on this one, in that the offence lies in Publically brodcasting it on the internet, or where ever Public. If the boy was say 19, and she 15 I suspect if he'd really had the book thrown at him, he could be serving porridge too ?

Fritz Von Hardly a Subject for this Forum I feel though (Yes Fritz did just say that) and I trust Canadia deals wqith it sensibly, innit

N.B. I thought the age of consent was 16 ?

& kids under supervision (On Private Land) can drive - Shoot _ and whatever bloody well else their parents so desire, without the law beoing involved at all at all, as far as I know, innit, which ain't much.

quote:

Originally posted by Berlin Fritz:
Fritz Von Hardly a Subject for this Forum I feel though (Yes Fritz did just say that) and I trust Canadia deals wqith it sensibly, innit

Hmm.

JonR von Fritz for moderator?

Yea, that's about what I thought....

You can vote at 18, die for your country at 18 while commanding other people or being in charge of millions of $ of equipment, but your are not old or responsible enough to drink a beer.

SNAFU

Hey Fritzie, have another pull and chill....this question is no more nor less relevant than most on here. Just a question...struck me as odd and wanted to know if anybody had any views....

regards,

michael

Another view: The later resentment of a girl that her naked image was published widely.

How many actresses wished they hadn't tried to make a few quid/dollars nude modelling before they were "discovered"? Rather than simply working in a bar.

Though that's another subject altogether.

Who thinks women with good brains deserve to do well. But women with good bodies and pretty faces shouldn't use their own genetic advantages to make a living?

Nime

Anyone remember the cover to the Blind Faith album? Don't know if it's still used or the current CD has had a cover change, but it was a bit dodgy. It isn't porn, but it illustrates that we know that it isn't quite right. I suppose that taking photos of someone you are having a relationship with is one thing, but posting them on the web is another. Is posting them on the web a child porn offense? Probably. Whether the guy was 16 and in a relationship with the girl is likely to be irrelevant. What if the photos had been taken and posted by the girls father? - what would we think then? Thankfully, I am no longer able to make rational judgements.

Publishing without consent is reasonable grounds for a civil case. How child porn kicks in isn't so clear, although I guess it's an under 18 catch all. He was a bloody fool to go there in the first place IMO.

I agree, but then again, how many of us can say that we did not do something foolish at that age?
Thats a big part of that age, learning by screwing up. But with hindsight and age, we can see alot of ramifications, but being young, horny and with camera, sounds almost normal. IMHO the line was crossed by the posting of the pics. That would be the part you would think would make him pause, once up on the web, there is NO way of getting them back off.

regards,

michael

The "child pornography" charge is a bit harsh though and not just considering the age of the offender.

By the same token, if you urinate in a doorway or against a tree, are you guilty of "indecent exposure" - a sex offence, or just "urinating in a public place?"

As dirty as it may seem, folks who take a leak in public in the absence of any public conveniences when they've had a few beers may well deserve some kind of fixed penalty.

They certainly don't deserve to be placed on any sex offenders' register though.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Toy:
The "child pornography" charge is a bit harsh though and not just considering the age of the offender.

By the same token, if you urinate in a doorway or against a tree, are you guilty of "indecent exposure" - a sex offence, or just "urinating in a public place?"

As dirty as it may seem, folks who take a leak in public in the absence of any public conveniences when they've had a few beers may well deserve some kind of fixed penalty.

They certainly don't deserve to be placed on any sex offenders' register though.

No they have him a nighthood. Despite being a tax exile to boot. Funny old world, innit?

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Toy:

As dirty as it may seem, folks who take a leak in public in the absence of any public conveniences when they've had a few beers may well deserve some kind of fixed penalty.

They certainly don't deserve to be placed on any sex offenders' register though.

I guess it depends on who they're leaking against.

quote:

Publishing without consent is reasonable grounds for a civil case. How child porn kicks in isn't so clear, although I guess it's an under 18 catch all.

There certainly isn't an under 18 catch all in the UK. Page 3 girls regularly used to be under 18. And in fact mens magazines (not harcore)regularly featured 16 and 17 year olds. So publishing naked pictures of 16 and 17 years olds is not an offence in the UK.

Just what constitutes 'pornography'? Is it an image, or could an article in a magazine be construed as solicitation? My granddaughter (12 yrs old) reads magazines, aimed squarely at the 10-16 year-old market, in which letters are submitted, and answers given, on subjects such as 'how can I give my boyfriend a good blow-job?'. I'm sorry if that is rather graphic, but it is a fact. Either society recognises (the reality that) young people are sexually active at a much younger age than was deemed acceptable a generation ago, and suitably amends the law (against which proposition I would vote, though I accept that my opinion might be viewed as somewhat out-of-date), or it places a blanket ban on the propagation of the 'sex-as-a-hobby' stance of the magazines whose only aim is to sell as much copy as possible, which will, no doubt, attract the ire of the libertarians.
I am only grateful that my granddaughter is of sufficient intelligence , and her parents of equal openness and sensitivity adequately to address the issues raised. What bothers me is the thousands of adolescents/parents who have no such rapport.

quote:

I guess it depends on who they're leaking against.

And from what height.

Reggie me old Cocker,
I think you're confusing perfectly normal and acceptable sex education with pornography. The latter being in my opinion
the filmimg or image taking of extremely explicit shots & scenes (covering all age groups). Yarying degrees have been nmeasured by law, I personally don't find Mayfair, or Hustler pornographic, though earlier years proved otherwise. Pornography is seemingly the
most lucrative element on the internet, next to gambling, and I suppose any protection that can possibly be given to kids from all over the world from being abused in this way is a good thing, though like most reasonable laws, almost impossible to impliment, but maybe with technology as it stands today, tracing internet and website visitors may not be so very hard, innit.

Fritz Von Just a boy, givin it all away

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Toy:

quote:

I guess it depends on who they're leaking against.

And from what height.

Well. Quite.