posted January 20, 2009 02:57 PM         

If incarcerated, they face much greater risks of being sexually abused.

I'm glad the prosecutor at least has sense enough to know WHY the law exists in the first place (ie, smarter than people in charge of educating kids).

What is it about schools that seem to draw such idiots, many of them harmful to the kids in their care, to work there?

posted January 20, 2009 04:08 PM         

They are usually the parents that 'talk' about getting the police involved in the first place.

Schools are expected to be safe for all children. That includes safe from others that would expose them to stuff not allowed in a school, ie, drugs, alcohol, sexual graphics.

Believe me, schools don't like having to deal with serious issues like this that take place on school grounds.

Also, new technology laws are pouring in these days that put teacher's and student's heads on the chopping block if they use technology in an inappropriate way within the school environment.

EDIT: Late last year, I had to sign an agreement saying it was okay to send me to prison for up to 10 years if I didn't use the student report writing on-line system in the appropriate way!!

Even children have to sign an agreement that they will use school technologies in the appropriate way - and this includes 5 year olds!!!!!!

It would be great if parents could deal more with their children's issues!!

posted January 20, 2009 04:28 PM         

The school could suspend or even expel without involving the cops. If the other parents want to call in the police, let them, and they can take the blame for doing so as well.

posted January 20, 2009 04:34 PM         

Now that technology is so prevalent, laws are coming in to cover how those technologies can be used in schools. Sad, but true!

posted January 20, 2009 04:38 PM         

quote:

---

The female students at Greensburg Salem High School in Greensburg, Pa., all 14- or 15-years-old, face charges of manufacturing, disseminating or possessing child pornography while the boys, who are 16 and 17, face charges of possession,

---

quote:

---

Which makes me ask, do we live in a real democracy?

---

posted January 21, 2009 12:15 AM         

Yes, these are girls taking pix of themselves (now if it were girls taking pix of other girls in the locker room, that would be very different, especially if the other girls were not willing to have their pic taken). The boys in particular may not even be aware of the images until they look, so may be truly innocent of any wrongdoing, even as a naughty child. Even if they kept the image after discovering it, or had asked for it (as opposed to bullying or otherwise pressuring to get it), they're still curious and trying to get a grasp on their hormones. I don't expect them to be saints, and I see no value in turning them over to the law for things like this (save the courts & police for actual violence, theft, vandalism, etc).

And what was the point of this law? To create an American Sharia (ie, morality on things like proper conduct & clothing, backed by the force of law, similar to what goes on in the Middle East, just a little more permissive in the USA)? Or to discourage ADULTS from preying upon kids that they can easily manipulate through a variety of ways in order to sexually exploit them (including in porn using minors)?

And what's the point of the sexual offender d-base (that these kids will likely be put on if convicted) but to warn the public of PREDATORS? If the d-base has simply become a "scarlet letter" denoting uninhibited behavior that strikes some as scandalous, then I say do away with it completely. I see the d-base being important for public safety, but it appears that it's more for puritanism, and that just turns the actual predators into needles in a haystack of stupid stuff like this.

I'm not meaning to condone what these kids did, just that throwing the book at them is way over the top and at least as irresponsible (perhaps even more so given that this WILL negatively impact their future whereas their immaturity MIGHT cause them harm). They're friggin kids, let them be kids--discipline them, but don't put them on the d-base as sex offenders (when all they offended was certain people's puritan morals) or involve the courts & police (who should have far more important things to do anyway). Suspension is perfectly reasonable, IMO (with parents also disciplining them). Expulsion too strong, IMO, but ok. But the lengths this school has gone to, like many others, are just burning the village to save it (at least if they're honest in their reasoning about why they're harming these kids in the name of protecting them from sexual predators), and just inexcusable, IMO.

posted January 21, 2009 12:42 AM         

quote:

---

Police told the station that the photos were discovered in October, after school officials seized a cell phone from a male student who was using it in violation of school rules and found a nude photo of a classmate on it. Police were called in and their investigation led them to other phones containing more photos, it said.

---

Okay - so let me get this right. The girls took pics of themselves. They txt them to male classmates. One of the boys has his phone confiscated. Someone in authority then proceeds to look at the contents of this boy's phone. Why? And then this person starts the next chain of events. Umm, who was looking at child porn here?

posted January 21, 2009 01:03 AM         

PA....

quote:

---

If I take a photo of my children in the bath and show them to my mother-in-law, does that now constitute child pornography?

---

posted January 21, 2009 01:22 AM         

quote:

---

In the U.S.A., people have been charged for doing that...if someone tells the police about it. Weird laws.

---

posted January 21, 2009 01:22 AM         

Hugging a girl who on Valentine's day told him she had a crush on him - he was 15.

He was humiliated in front of his class, his parents who had been summoned, his teachers who admired him .

To this day it has affected him, he hasnt forgievn his paernts too for the way they grounded him for ebing suspended.

Waaayyy to Misandric i say..in the days of Britney when parenst take their 10 yr olds to watch her soft-porn concerts this is just outright hypocritical.

not to mention the fear and sense of shame and confusion it instills in young boys when incontrast they are gievn a sexual overdose in the media.

My sis was living in a wonderful Redmond neighbourhood for 10 years. A group of 40 parents in her block got together and decided - no T.V. , No magazines, No pop Music - absoultely no pop culture exposure for their children.It was easier for the children because they had other friends from the same group with the same values and theu there was no peer pressure. Plus they could date other kids with pressure to have early sex.

posted January 21, 2009 01:43 AM         

quote:

---

A group of 40 parents in her block got together and decided - no T.V. , No magazines, No pop Music - absoultely no pop culture exposure for their children.It was easier for the children because they had other friends from the same group with the same values and theu there was no peer pressure.

---

posted January 21, 2009 01:55 AM         

quote:

---

ah.. but this was not religious, many of these parents were not church types, they were mostly infotech professionals who worked in microsoft, the kids went to regular school.

---

posted January 21, 2009 05:24 AM         

quote:

---

A four-year-old hugged his teachers aide and was put into in-school suspension, according to the father. But La Vega school administrators have a different story.

Damarcus Blackwell's four-year-old son was lining-up to get on the bus after school last month, when he was accused of rubbing his face in the chest of a female employee.

The prinicipal of La Vega Primary School sent a letter to the Blackwells that said the pre-kindergartener demonstrated "inappropriate physical behavior interpreted as sexual contact and/or sexual harassment"

---

This teacher is in the wrong line of work (and is probably a perv projecting, if she thought a 4-year-old hugging her was a sexual come on, though possibly just suffering hysteria).

And as for the school faculty that had the gall to discipline the child instead of advising the teacher to find a new line of work...I'm just baffled by how people like this keep getting a pass at educating children!

posted January 21, 2009 05:30 AM         

quote:

---

And as for the school...I'm just baffled by how people like this keep getting a pass at educating children!

---

Right on. And she is definitely n the wrong line of work if she has that mentality. A four year old accused of sexual harrassment, basically. Ridiculous.

posted January 21, 2009 08:53 AM         

quote:

---

A four year old accused of sexual harrassment, basically. Ridiculous.

---

you should know then that an 8 yr old can be charged with a rape charge and be sent to jail without a trial - on the mere word of any woman no matter how old.

Seriously, these are the kinds of laws feminists have lobbied for - successfully.

posted January 21, 2009 04:50 PM         

In this world a woman can't walk down a freaking street without being leered at and sexualized, I don't know why you worry so much about POOR POOR MEN and demonize the women who fought for the right to vote, enter the workplace, and take control of their own bodies. It really bothers me.

Don't blame feminism and feminists for over reaching and ridiculous laws.

I'll worry about misandry once the patriarchy is gone.

posted January 21, 2009 05:00 PM         

One day a man walked up to me in a short skirt and said: look, I don't like this, it encourages paedophiles.

I said: hardly at the age of 35. wearing woolly tights and trainers

posted January 21, 2009 07:01 PM         

A few months later I went into the grocery store with a friend after ballet class. We were wearing leotards and pants. A bunch of guys started catcalling, as if we were wearing "sexy" outfits for them! HOW DARE I, A 12 YEAR OLD, WALK INTO A STORE AFTER EXCERSIZING!

posted January 22, 2009 03:05 AM         

Thinking about it I was opposite a High School at the time. I'm smaller than some of the girls in there, so maybe from a distance.... but you would have to be a little bit weak on eyesight and normal mental faculties to think I am 20 years younger than the case. Which is probably what happened here, I don't think he was the full ticket.

posted January 22, 2009 05:02 AM         

He saw a child at the edge of the park lake - close to falling in. He looked around to see if the mother was there, but no one seemed to know the girl.He tried to see if any park personnel could be reached, unfortunately the only people were 2 old men on walking stickes.

The girl fell in and the man did not dive in to save her, whereas the older men started raising a hue and cry and eventually some people from the inner corners came and jumped in.

But the girl was beyong saving.all they retrieved was her body.When the crowd demanded to know why the stranger had not gone and picked her up in the first place his answer shut everyone up.

He was new to the town the last thing he neede was a child molestation charge against him.No one there would have been able to testify in his defence - that the child was in danger.

Its a bizarre world we live in.

The men who treat us like free-dolls to be leered at

And then there are those in the thousands who pay to keep us safe - by being falsely accused of rape - as studies after small - independent studies are revealing.No one dares offend the multi - billion dollar tax payer giant that is the N.O.W. by actually going deep and conducting a real study on a national level.

I shudder to think if my dear brother or father have to pay with their live and freedom - because a girl fails to recogniswe the scum who raped her - or out of pure spite.

It happens to approx 80000 men every year. About time the men i care for join the cause - to keep ME safe.

Its one thing to make laws that keep me safe - totally other that ASSUME I am a VICTIM with no strength oif my own.

NO I AM NOT THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I know to keep myself safe, i know what kind of men to avoid and ignore.

The last thing i need is a Socialist in the garb of a Feminist assuming i am a victim and making draconian Misandric laws.