This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Debate: Lifetime "sex offender" brand for teenagers
A California 14 year old girl has been assigned to the life registery for sex offenders. She sent a photo of her exposed breast to another teen via her cell phone. Under California law she sent sexually explicit materials to a minor and that in a sex crime.
I am all for life time "brands" for sexual preditors, rapists, etc .... My question is ... does the bad judgement of a teenager qualify her to be listed among the bad of the bad for life. Are there degrees of conduct that could be considered or is the one size fits all the right way to go.














Steve C
Of course she shouldn't have such a label! What kind of person would think to convict her, or allow her to-be convicted?!
I leave you with this related quote: "Of all the galaxies above and flowers below, there is nothing more beautiful in this universe than a mother feeding her baby. Calling that obscene shows a sick mind and heart and a warped society that would if they could ban flowers because they are sex organs.
If you want to ban the obscene, ban Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield and all the TV preachers." ~Posted by: garethharris
David Hamilton 50+
Robert Winner 50+
Just my personal thought here ... Once that picture leaves your phone you have no control over it .... the 14 year old who shared something special with her boy friend will most likely also share it with many more people .... When you return to school many people will know, how will the person handle that situation that reaction could be from indifference to suicide ... These pictures are forever .. later in life someone will bring up every error you have made in your life for various reasons. Also I do not think that there is anyone at the age of 14 up does not understand the difference of right and wrong. They do things because they want to. The ones who learn and grow from their mistakes deserve to escape the "branding" but I still think that documentation should be a part of the process.
Michele Hames made a valid question ... what if it were a minor male sending the pictures to a minor female? I think she is right the reaction would have been much stronger and most likely upheld the branding. We all want to protect our little girls. Shows how much things have changed.
As always, thanks for the reply. Bob.
David Hamilton 50+
Michele's question is interesting... and that you support her point is also interesting. Personally, I would suggest that most men would think "boys will be boys", he was being a dumb punk... Maybe men and women would both swap sides nowadays though. Personally I think gender is irrelevant, and young attractive women are some of the most powerful and influential creatures on the planet, so I don't think they really need special protection... I'm probably a total outlier in thinking that nowadays though.
Robert Winner 50+
We all are a result of our upbringing and we also have the ability to change. To some degree I have changed but down really deep I am protective of my girls and women in general. Being a "Daddy" does make a difference.
Interesting that you say .. "used to be a parent issue". In my small town my transgressions made it to my parents ears before I made it home. I doubt if many people even know their neighbors name in todays world. If it was really bad the local police took me home and turned me in to my parents ... not a good thing. So maybe the family unit has become a part of this problem. Get a spanking at school .. you could bank on a second one at home. Go to church and everyone knew your business and you had a week or two that you were the target of the town humor. In a way we were raised by the town. Today we are a number. This teen is a stastic not a person to the system.
I bet that you open doors for women .... LOL. David .. only young and attractive women can be powerful and influential .. That is a pretty narrow window and I am somewhat surprised but probally does reflect the generation X thinking.
As to the issue we are in agreement.
Thanks for the reply. Bob.
Michele Hames
But to play devils advocate, would people react the same if the gender roles was reversed and it was a Male who was a minor sending these type images to female minor?
Robert Winner 50+
Your role reversal is a valid observation and and I used it in my reply to David. We all want to protect our little girls. This certainly demonstrates how much times have changed. At the age of seventy I would be much more harsh against the male offender. My old world culture/morals/ethics are showing.
One of my major concerns would be that the picture will sooner or later be shared .. when this occurs how will the young lady react .... this could be from indifference to suicide ... Then people like yourself in social work and a background in medical will have to try to piece the life back together.
Thanks for the reply and the observations. All the best. Bob.
P.S. Good luck in your studies.
Same AsIs
Firstly, I am not aware of this story, however my thoughts are, there should be considerations, sadly it certainly would not be the only example. Maturity is a natural cycle, no one should be held guilty of it!
Good point on the hiding remark.
peter lindsay 30+
edward long 100+
John Frum 30+
Some of is happen to like such transmissions! The issue was not pornography. The issue here was only that a minor received it.
What you suggest sounds like the Taliban solution ;-)
edward long 100+
Also, your restructuring of my words by combining "why not" with "make such transmissions impossible" looks a lot like contextomy which is a fallacy of logic.
John Frum 30+
John Frum 30+
Just for that, I'll disagree with everything everyone has written, including myself, from earlier.
There! That will teach her to expose herself to innocent children! Think of the adults who might have happened to see this picture too! If I had happened to have even glanced at this picture, *I* would have been persecuted for being a sex offender!
John Smith 30+
Only in America...
peter lindsay 30+
Peter Law 30+
This is a childhood prank, not a crime. A spank may be in order, but no doubt I will go on the child abuse register for suggesting such a thing. It's us that votes for these people, who else can we blame ?
:-(
John Frum 30+
But of course, I agree with the essence of your argument.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
more on the issue: http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_using_our_practical_wisdom.html
Ken brown 30+
pat gilbert 50+
Robert Winner 50+
Bob.
pat gilbert 50+
I would think that aggressive prosecutors and detectives push this to be able to get whatever brownie points they can get.
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
This is not what the law was intended for.
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/11/14-year-old-girl-is-a-sex-offender-2489502.html?awesm=awe.sm_e8BFA
pat gilbert 50+
How much of this problem is caused by prosecutors who push plea bargaining to bolster their record?
Robert Winner 50+
The little girl is more than likely a political casuality.
After the elections they may revisit these calls. It would be political poison to challenge the laws or make any waves at this time.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Robert Winner 50+
They also state, as did you, that this is a common occurance for teens to do this.
Ther are 4 states that have a life time sex offender list and California being one.
Thanks for the reply. I found it amazing also. Bob.