First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
16 year old kid almost got 90 years in prison for watching porn
3828 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Augusta GA
Offline
Posted 7/10/08 , edited 7/10/08
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/LegalCenter/story?id=2785054

wait .......wut?

they found like 9 PICTURES(NOT VIDEOS) of child porn and stormed his house with guns and threatening 90 years in prison wtf??

i know its bad but god damn its not THAT BAD.

edit: the kid is 16 not to mention minor is anywhere below 18. so it could have just been like 14-17 in which case i dont blame him
Posted 7/10/08
idiot uploaded porno onto yahoo?
Posted 7/10/08
he's a child himself!
276 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28
Offline
Posted 7/10/08
wow ouch.. what a way for life to end.
16313 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / ♪ ♫ ☼ england
Offline
Posted 7/10/08 , edited 7/10/08
and was he masturbaiting?
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 7/10/08 , edited 7/10/08

Raikuga wrote:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/LegalCenter/story?id=2785054

wait .......wut?

they found like 9 PICTURES(NOT VIDEOS) of child porn and stormed his house with guns and threatening 90 years in prison wtf??

i know its bad but god damn its not THAT BAD.

edit: the kid is 16 not to mention minor is anywhere below 18. so it could have just been like 14-17 in which case i dont blame him


Well, that sucks. He said he didn’t know how they got onto his computer. I don’t really buy that part, but a lot of kids get curious. The boy sounds a lot like me: a goodie-goodie looser who probably doesn’t fit in and is really awkward in a social environment.

He never tried drugs, alcohol, or anything illegal. He was even 16 before he started viewing internet pornography. My bet is that he wanted to know what an underage girl was like but couldn’t get one-so, he turned to the internet thinking: “Well, I’m a kid to so it’ll be alright.”

The problem is that the law doesn’t and shouldn’t work that way. (Shouldn’t because then a parent can just get his kid to say, “No, it wasn’t my dad, it was me.”)

Rather or not they were pictures or videos is irrelevant to me. What matters more is the content. Did the pictures show the girls in the midst of intercourse? No, the article says, “suggestive poses.” That doesn’t even necessarily mean nudity, though we’re assuming it was.

This being said I don’t think the boy’s some kind of sick pervert. None the less, when it comes to the law your character isn’t what’s in question. It’s your actions: did he look at child pornography?

Well, the article didn’t have all the evidence so I wont say yes or no. I will say that if you make a choice you better be -certain- you know the consequences. I will say that if he did download 9 pictures of child porn then 90 years in prison should suit him well.

My point is that I think that there should be lighter sentences for lighter pornography. I mean, a man whose got a video of an 8 year old being raped and chained shouldn’t get off as easily as a boy with a picture of his girlfriends nipple ring. At least, not as I see it. Still, the law is the law-and flawed or not, we should and are held to it. We can only work to fix the errors within it, but until then we’re subject to the flaws in our own system.



Maybe I’m biased, but the criminals I dislike the most are those who target children.
1498 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Why do you wanna...
Offline
Posted 7/10/08
wow...........
3828 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Augusta GA
Offline
Posted 7/10/08

SeraphAlford wrote:


Raikuga wrote:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/LegalCenter/story?id=2785054

wait .......wut?

they found like 9 PICTURES(NOT VIDEOS) of child porn and stormed his house with guns and threatening 90 years in prison wtf??

i know its bad but god damn its not THAT BAD.

edit: the kid is 16 not to mention minor is anywhere below 18. so it could have just been like 14-17 in which case i dont blame him


Well, that sucks. He said he didn’t know how they got onto his computer. I don’t really buy that part, but a lot of kids get curious. The boy sounds a lot like me: a goodie-goodie looser who probably doesn’t fit in and is really awkward in a social environment.

He never tried drugs, alcohol, or anything illegal. He was even 16 before he started viewing internet pornography. My bet is that he wanted to know what an underage girl was like but couldn’t get one-so, he turned to the internet thinking: “Well, I’m a kid to so it’ll be alright.”

The problem is that the law doesn’t and shouldn’t work that way. (Shouldn’t because then a parent can just get his kid to say, “No, it wasn’t my dad, it was me.”)

Rather or not they were pictures or videos is irrelevant to me. What matters more is the content. Did the pictures show the girls in the midst of intercourse? No, the article says, “suggestive poses.” That doesn’t even necessarily mean nudity, though we’re assuming it was.

This being said I don’t think the boy’s some kind of sick pervert. None the less, when it comes to the law your character isn’t what’s in question. It’s your actions: did he look at child pornography?

Well, the article didn’t have all the evidence so I wont say yes or no. I will say that if you make a choice you better be -certain- you know the consequences. I will say that if he did download 9 pictures of child porn then 90 years in prison should suit him well.

My point is that I think that there should be lighter sentences for lighter pornography. I mean, a man whose got a video of an 8 year old being raped and chained shouldn’t get off as easily as a boy with a picture of his girlfriends nipple ring. At least, not as I see it. Still, the law is the law-and flawed or not, we should and are held to it. We can only work to fix the errors within it, but until then we’re subject to the flaws in our own system.



Maybe I’m biased, but the criminals I dislike the most are those who target children.


even if he did download 9 pics of child porn i cant agree that 90 years is what he would of deserved. he didnt hurt anyone. murderers get less time than that. not to mention hes 16. not like hes 40. not that that justifies it because it certainly doesnt.
maybe internet probation for a while but not 90 years lol.
812 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/10/08
OMG seriously??? But dude its just porn??? I mean duh its nasty and its not the best thing to watch but yo it just porn?? What the fuck? I don't get that...
5137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAA...
Offline
Posted 7/10/08
poor bastard well curiousity killed the cat
3828 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Augusta GA
Offline
Posted 7/10/08
"I have to stay away from children," said Matthew. "I cannot be around any area where there might be minors, including the mall, or the movies, or restaurants or even church. To go to church I have to have written consent from our priest, I have to sit in a different pew, one that doesn't have a child sitting in it."

thats fucked up
1912 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / Vancouver
Offline
Posted 7/10/08
Wait so he gets more time than those sex offenders and pedos?

Whattttttttt
3828 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Augusta GA
Offline
Posted 7/10/08 , edited 7/10/08
they let him off the hook. they ORIGINALLY were going to give him 90 years
Posted 7/10/08
Deserved it?
Posted 7/10/08
ha ha stupid kid......lol and child porn...hmmm kinda creepy and gross
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.